As the saying goes, “Be careful what you wish for.”

It appears Red Sox Nation has had enough of Manny being Manny. For the past week, Boston sports talk-radio airwaves have been inundated with callers who appear to have had enough of the savant slugger, who recently pulled himself out of the Sox lineup twice. Manny stated it was due to a cranky knee, but MRIs came up negative on both knees.

It was one thing for Ramirez to pull himself out of the lineup against the lowly Seattle Mariners, but when he sat again in the first game of the most recent Yankees series at Fenway Park, all hell broke loose in New England. More important than fans and radio talk-show hosts, it also appears the Red Sox brass has had enough of Manny’s quirkiness. What appeared to be a no-brainer two weeks ago – that the Sox would pick up the team’s $20M 2009 option for Ramirez – now seems as likely as John McCain winning Massachusetts in November.

Manny quitting on loyal Sox fans and, more importantly, his teammates is deplorable. Letting teammates down is the mortal sin of an athlete. However, let’s not kid ourselves. Pro sports are all about winning. As a reminder, until 2004, Sox fans had not seen a World Championship since 1918. They’ve now witnessed two since 2004. Would they have done so without Ramirez? Probably not. Had they not won those two championships, would fans and Sox brass still want Manny to walk? My guess is no.

Manny Ramirez is a first-ballot Hall of Famer. Does that forgive him for his recent actions? Not in real life, but this is not real life. It’s Major League Baseball. Lest we forget the indiscretions of Babe Ruth, Ted Williams, Juan Marichal, Mickey Mantle, Barry Bonds, et al.

David Ortiz and Manny Ramirez are the best 3-4 hitters the game has seen since Ruth and Gehrig. So, be careful what you wish for Sox fans … and enjoy it while you can. Those days may be gone soon. And with it, championships.

The Texas Con Man was a name given to Roger Clemens during his tenure with the Boston Red Sox by the late, great Boston Globe sportswriter William “Will” McDonough. Will took much grief from Sox fans and some media colleagues for what many thought a harsh title for one of the Red Sox all-time greats. Little did we know the true wisdom of Will.

Unfortunately, McDonough passed away on January 9, 2003 at the tender age of 67. However, I’m sure those who knew him – or was occasionally in his company at sporting events, as was I – know that Will has a huge grin on his face today. How right he was.

I was a huge Clemens fan. I remember the skinny kid’s debut with the Red Sox in May of 1984. I watched him pitch many times at Fenway Park and saw every one of his 20-strikeouts in the historical game versus the Seattle Mariners in April 1986. It was a masterpiece – and, to this day, probably one of the great pitching performances of all-time. I also recall numerous arguments with a New Jersey friend – a Mets’ fan, regarding who was better; Clemens or Dwight Gooden. That argument faded after the 1986 season when Clemens posted a 24-4 record and won both the CY Young and MVP awards.

For many Sox fans, McDonough’s The Texas Con Man name began gaining popularity in the late 1990s and early 2000s, as Clemens’ words became more confounding and nonsensical. But, little did we know how much real truth there was to Will’s insightful nickname.

Has any sports hero fallen from grace as quickly as Roger Clemens? In 2006, a poll of 32 ESPN analysts voted Clemens the greatest living pitcher – and many considered him the greatest pitcher of all-time, or at least of the modern game. However, in a matter of a few months, Clemens has been accused of possible steroid use, potential infidelity, a questionable relationship with an under-age girl, and only God (and the New York Daily News) knows what’s next.

Clemens has gone from Cooperstown to OJ-town … the town of non-desirables.

My apology to Will McDonough. You were accurate from the beginning.

---

Would you vote Roger Clemens into the Baseball Hall of Fame? Cast your vote on The Hall Of Fame Network poll: www.HOFN.com.

---

While opinions regarding whether of not Roger Clemens used performance enhancing drugs may not have been altered by the recent Congressional hearings…you must admit, it was great theatre. And even better politics.

Make no mistake about it, good ‘ole boy politics’ was at work. The Clemens – McNamee Congressional hearings had nothing to do with gaining the truth or protecting America’s youth from drugs. It was Democrats versus Republicans. It was time to call-in political favors. Clemens’ Texas roots were prevalent. How else can one explain this becoming a battle of political parties? Do you think it was a coincidence that most Republicans came to Clemens’ defense? Do you think it was coincidence that leading Republican Tom Davis rushed to Clemens side immediately after the hearing?

American politics is often behind-closed-door deals. Unfortunately, we saw it at its worst during this hearing. And politicians wonder why Americans question the integrity of its leaders? When lobbying is allowed during depositions and prior to Congressional hearings regarding the use of illegal drugs, it has gone too far.

My opinion as to whether Clemens used steroids or HGH is irrelevant. However, I find it difficult to believe that McNamee was telling the truth about Pettitte, Knoblauch, and Debbie Clemens, yet lying about Roger. Why? I also find it difficult to believe Debbie Clemens would get a shot of HGH from McNamee without her husband’s knowledge. Plus, if Roger wasn’t getting shot-up by McNamee – nor did he ever discuss drugs with him (as he claims), how did Debbie know to go to McNamee for the injection?

In every poll I’ve seen, most American’s believed McNamee. So what did the Republicans hear that the rest of us didn’t, which led them to support Clemens? Maybe they heard a Republican “voice” who was the former General Managing Partner of the Texas Rangers.

By the way, that former Managing Partner currently lives at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.

A three-ring circus has nothing over Major League Baseball. Whatever happened to arguments about who’s better – Mantle or Mays, Williams or DiMaggio, Koufax or Gibson? What about a good old-fashioned debate regarding the designated hitter? Or how about this one: Who hit the greatest home run ever – Bill Mazeroski, Bobby Thompson, Babe Ruth, Hank Aaron, Joe Carter, Calton Fisk or Roger Maris?

Nope…none of that talk anymore. This good ole baseball bar-room banter is now replaced with talks of steroids, cheating, congressional hearings, and phone-tap conversations. Thank you Roger Clemens, Barry Bonds, MLB, et al.

To make matters worse, we now have a potential cheater even downplaying the importance of his election into the Baseball Hall of Fame. If he made nothing else clear in his recent press conference charade, Roger Clemens made it perfectly clear that he doesn’t give a “rat’s ass” about getting inducted in baseball’s most treasured shrine in Cooperstown. I wonder how that plays with some of the legendary players of the game who cherish their place in the Hall – or, even more so, with those still waiting for the honor like Rice, Blyleven, Dawson, or Lee Smith?

Whether innocent or guilty, I hope writers remember how important the Hall of Fame is to Clemens. A one-time first-ballot lock, I guess he now has more to worry about than Cooperstown.

As I listen to admissions and denials of players named in the Mitchell Report regarding steroid use in Major League Baseball, I am neither surprised nor disappointed. Since the McGwire-Sosa run at immortality in 1998, it has been apparent that Major League Baseball players had joined the ranks of Olympians and other professional athletes using performance-enhancing drugs. But for those thinking drugs in baseball began in the 90s, keep sticking your head in the sand – as most did during that fraudulent year the Maris family politely watch Roger’s record demolished by the two Hulk-like characters.

Denial is a trait most often used when it relates to oneself or a loved one. To be in denial regarding a baseball player’s use of steroids is bewildering. No one questioned the use of testosterone by the Soviet Union’s Olympic team in 1954. And lest we forget Dr. John Ziegler who aided the CIBA Pharmaceutical Company in the development of the drug Dianabol (methandrostenolone) in the mid-50s to help western Olympians compete with the Soviet Union. So, to think performance-enhancing drugs were only available to modern-day baseball players is naive.

How will all this steroid-use influence baseball writers who are entrusted with the privilege of voting for a player’s induction into the Baseball Hall of Fame? They negated McGwire in his first year of eligibility. What about Bonds, Sosa – and now Clemens? Is it a vote for all, or a vote for none? Are we to believe only Olympic athletes used performance-enhancing drugs during the Dianabol years?

So many questions, so many decisions for Baseball Hall of Fame voters.

The heist is over. Finally. At least the feat is. Now, we await the fallout.

Barry Bonds stole the most hallowed milestone in sports. He fraudulently gained the title of all-time MLB home run king. Step aside Hank Aaron, your 33-year-old title now belongs to one of the most despicable athletes in sports history.

We all know the story. We all know the names of many steroid-generation baseball characters who have made Aaron, Ruth, Mays, Robinson, McCovey and Williams more revered than ever. Bonds and his BALCO-buddies have made us even more respectful of the accomplishments of these great players.

If Barry Bonds has done nothing, he has at least brought me back to many fond memories. Aaron’s historic #715. Maris’ dramatic #61. Ted Williams’ #521 in his last at-bat. The home run ball I caught from the bat of Harmon Killebrew, while on his way to the then-magic 500 home run plateau. Unfortunately, it’s a high price to pay to bring back memorable times-past.

So, what now Mr. Selig? Since it was you and the MLB players’ union that greedily turned your collective backs on the early days of steroid use to “save baseball” and drive up player salaries, what will you now do to “save face” for baseball? And, lest we forget, it was Selig, et al, who knowingly allowed millions of baseball fans to get caught-up in the hysteria of 1998 when those other two frauds, McGwire and Sosa, put on their “Roid Show” while the Maris family politely looked on. MLB knew then…like it knows now.

Mr. Selig - baseball fans everywhere await some type of comment or decision. Better yet, baseball’s legitimate 500-plus home run club waits.

Curt Schilling and Barry Bonds. Two names that evoke a myriad of emotions. Whether you like or dislike either, the media should love them both, as sports enthusiasts eat up the fodder they provide.

In the case of Schilling, his recent remarks on WEEI, a Boston sports talk-radio station, about Bonds being a “confessed cheater” has all in the media running to their outlets to feed their sheep. I am no different. But what makes this newsworthy? We all know, or at least assume, Bonds is guilty of cheating the game. He even admitted to taking the “cream” or “clear” albeit saying it was “unknowingly.” Maybe it was Curt adding the remarks about Bonds “cheating on his taxes” or “cheating on his wife” that has our attention.

However, I’m confused, is the story Bonds or Schilling? It should be Bonds, as he approaches baseball’s most cherished record. A record-breaking event that has the baseball elite looking the other way. Aaron has stated he will not be in attendance, and MLB Commissioner, Bud Selig, is looking to hide. Unless you’ve been devoured by the UFC phenomenon, you know the Bonds story all-too-well, so it appears that Schilling is the soup-de-jour.

While I understand why fans may dislike Schilling, as he often speaks his mind for self-promoting reasons, I’m confused as to why some of my media colleagues disdain him. On one hand, we hate it when athletes give scripted, canned, boring answers to our redundant questions – then we (or some) bury the athletes who provide their honest opinion and give us interesting material to write. To challenge their opinion is fine, but to attack them personally for providing it…is hypocritical.

In the case of Schilling on Bonds, I think it’s refreshing to hear a prominent player finally give an honest opinion. However, my challenge to Curt is – where were you in the Congressional Hearings? Did MLB or the Player’s Association put a muzzle on you? If so, fess-up.

Now that would be a story.