# 1  

2007-12-13 19:25:23

This is a list of names on the Mitchell Report. What name surprises you the most ?
Manny Alexander, Chad Allen, Rick Ankiel, Mike Bell, David Bell, Marvin Benard, Gary Bennett Jr.
Larry Bigbie, Barry Bonds, Ricky Bones, Kevin Brown, Paul Byrd, Ken Caminiti,
Mark Carreon, Jose Canseco, Jason Christiansen, Howie Clark, Roger Clemens,
Paxton Crawford, Jack Cust, Brendan Donnelly, Chris Donnels, Lenny Dykstra
Bobby Estalella, Matt Franco, Ryan Franklin, Eric Gagne, Jason, Giambi, Jeremy Giambi, Jay Gibbons,
Troy Glaus, Juan Gonzalez, Jason Grimsley, Jose Guillen, Jerry Hairston Jr., Matt Herges,
Phil Hiatt, Glenallen Hill, Darren Holmes, Todd Hundley, Ryan Jorgenson, Wally Joyner,
Mike Judd, David Justice, Chuck Knoblauch, Tim Laker, Mike Lansing, Paul Lo Duca, Exavier Logan,
Josias Manzanillo, Gary Matthews Jr., Mark McGwire, Cody McKay, Kent Mercker, Bart Miadich,
Hal Morris, Daniel Naulty, Denny Neagle, Rafael Palmeiro, Jim Parque, Andy Pettitte, Adam Piatt,
Todd Pratt, Stephen Randolph, Adam Riggs, Armando Rios, Brian Roberts, John Rocker, F.P. Santangelo,
Benito Santiago, Scott Schoeneweis, David Segui, Gary Sheffield, Mike Stanton, Ricky Stone, Miguel Tejada,
Derrick TurnbowI, Ismael Valdez, Mo Vaughn, Randy Velarde, Ron Villone, Fernando Vina, Rondell White,
Todd Williams, Jeff Williams, Matt Williams, Steve Woodard, Kevin Young, Gregg Zaun.

  # 2  

2007-12-15 04:42:46

The name that surprises me most is one that is NOT on there.... where's A Rod?

  # 3  

2007-12-15 07:13:15

That's was a good question Gilligan. I was kind of surprised not to see Sammy Sosa either. Maybe the corked bat was enough for him though. Okay, no angry Sammy fans please, it was just a joke.
Let's throw Gilligan's idea in here too. Who are you surprised NOT to see?
And how about, "Who were you most disappointed to see" too.
JSG

  # 4  

2007-12-23 01:23:12

  # 5  

2007-12-27 04:32:51

Thanks Ralph,
But the first post in this thread WAS the list. It was actually posted online the same day the report came out. I just don't think the topic was interesting to enough people to get many hits.
JSG

  # 6  

2007-12-27 05:48:12

This is a list of names given by criminals and has no veracity. It is a list of unconfirmed claims. There is little or no proof about these people. It is a disgrace to publish the lsit.

  # 7  

2007-12-27 06:39:30

We all know these guys aren't model citizens, but you just can't say the list is all bad. Andy Pettitte though the report was accurate enough to start damage control.
I'm not saying everyone on it is a user. I hope to God that's not the case because there's quite a few "heroes" on that list, but you can't say ALL the allegations are untrue either. Do I believe that these guys embellished a little to save their own skins? ABSOLUTELY !!! I also think the whole idea of this list being considered "Gospel" isn't the right either, but you can't deny the report had a least one "big name guy" singing like a canary. I guess only time will tell who else comes clean and who else fights it to the death.

  # 8  

2007-12-27 17:23:30

In the USA one is considered innocent until PROVEN guilty. These players don't have to ( and shouldn't) say or do anything- they must be proven guilty. No proof?No guilt. Mitchell was correct, forget the past and make future testing very strict.
In pro tennis, I believe , you can be tested up to 20 times a year and whether or not you are at a match. One South American player tested positive and was banned for six YEARS.( not games or weeks but years.)

  # 9  

2007-12-28 05:41:13

I agree 100% with what you said about the rats, and letting this be a lesson for future testing and punishments. I just don't know how easy it will be to forget the past if the records that have been set are unachievable without cheating. I know Barry Bonds was probably a Hall of Famer even before he allegedly started using, (and this is purely speculation), but if he was using PED's, the stopping of such activity sure showed in how hobbled he looked this past year. You have to wonder if he didn't have more years than he should have. Hence, more homers than he should have.

  # 10  

2007-12-28 07:54:31

Remember that entrance into the Hall of Fame is by a vote. If he does not get in on the first year's ballot perhaps that is just punishment. I think American sports fans pay too much attention to records.