Talk About Tennis 2.0

Of course this is who the Mets just hired as their new GM. So, so on brand to get themselves into this kind of situation. Swear they can barely go 2 weeks without having a problem.

I'll post a link to the Tweet, that also leads to the ESPN story on it. The Tweet has a word that might be against site rules. But the gist is captured in the headline alert I got on my phone - NY Mets GM acknowledges sending unsolicited, explicit images while working for Cubs


https://twitter.com/JeffPassan/status/1 ... 3797967872

Full ESPN article - absolutely worth the read. It's worse than the initial blurb. - https://www.espn.com/mlb/story/_/id/307 ... icago-cubs

As a man that has lived almost all his life in a male chauvinist society, high with misogyny and all the other ills of that kind:
What makes a man believe that sending a woman a picture of our weirdest looking body part will cause any effect other than revulsion? Guys, it looks like a fungal infection, even if you don't have a fungal infection!!!
I mean, don't fire him for the offensive nature of the act. Fire him for being stupid. Period.

ponchi101 wrote: ↑Tue Jan 19, 2021 2:40 pm As a man that has lived almost all his life in a male chauvinist society, high with misogyny and all the other ills of that kind:
What makes a man believe that sending a woman a picture of our weirdest looking body part will cause any effect other than revulsion? Guys, it looks like a fungal infection, even if you don't have a fungal infection!!!
I mean, don't fire him for the offensive nature of the act. Fire him for being stupid. Period.

If a woman isn't interested in you why would you think showing her your genitals would make her stop what she's doing and call you so you can hook up? I've never understood sending that kind of pic to someone you don't know. Sharing pics between consenting adults can backfire too. Maybe he should've sent her his MAGA cosplay pics...

He was fired this morning. The team president was at the presser and said they received glowing character references during the interview process about him. A female reporter asked him "did you consult any women?" and shouldn't be surprised that the answer was no. Whew! Do better Mets, it's 2021.

He'll likely re-surface as the public relations director of the Astros.

I'm sick of the Barry Bonds not being in there. He was a HOFer long before the steroid use and everyone agrees that is the case, so the punishment for the steroid use that you're not sure who else used is tiresome. Did you not already let in Mika Piazza? Mike was great, but let's not pretend he was more impressive than Bonds. When some of these other guys go in 10 years from now who have super suspicious histories but because of their team, don't get talked about much, it will be even more annoying that he's not in.

Wonder when the vote was taken though. Curt was out here defending the seditionist mob, so I'm thinking this is the closest he'll ever get.

I am on the other side. It was the reason I stopped following MLB. Bonds, McGuire, Sosa, Clemens, Palmeiro and in a few years, A-Rod... I would feel so weird letting them in when we knew they are using all those things.
Agree with you about Piazza.

But there's a lot of people who were using that didn't get the spotlight like those athletes, that's the issue. Piazza isn't even a secret and he's still in, which is outrageous and makes zero sense.

And I wasn't even thinking about A-Rod. He's gotten his public Scarlet A. But like Big Papi? Barely a word when everyone knows he was using. But he gets revered and will sail into the HOF as if we didn't know. He's in the exact same boat as A-Rod, a positive PED test that went public. But he's likable and you know, Boston. So who cares?

The unequal treatment makes MLB even more of a joke to many. They want to be all holier than thou about steroid use. But only sometimes. In some cases, they're willing to look the other way.

I agree about Bonds. If Piazza is in he should be in.

ponchi101 wrote: ↑Wed Jan 27, 2021 12:43 am I am on the other side. It was the reason I stopped following MLB. Bonds, McGuire, Sosa, Clemens, Palmeiro and in a few years, A-Rod... I would feel so weird letting them in when we knew they are using all those things.

^ I agree.
I believe all of the above players either admitted to steroid use, or there was irrefutable evidence of their use. For the others (Piazza, Ortiz, etc.), there may or may not have been suspicion, but, as far as I know, there was no admission from the players or irrefutable evidence of their use.

Any player who significantly cheats (and using steroids is significant cheating) should never enter the Hall of Fame - no matter what their career was like before they became cheaters.

You're wrong about that. Positive PED test and admitted use.

JazzNU wrote: ↑Wed Jan 27, 2021 7:21 pm You're wrong about that. Positive PED test and admitted use.

I've just checked - Piazza did admit to using 'Andro' while it was still legal to use it in MLB. Ok - based on that, he DOES NOT get a pass from me. If using a substance helps you perform your tasks better, then it's cheating, whether it is legal to do so at the time or not. The fact that 'Andro' was later banned by MLB highlights the fact that it was always cheating material.
So... Piazza in the Hall of Fame? No.

I've also done some checking on Ortiz. From what I see, he has admitted only to 'shopping at GNC' before he was told not to. He does not admit to any PED use. He says he is afraid of putting any chemicals in his body.
There is a matter of his name coming up as having tested positive for PEDs in 2003 - but that it very murky, as in unclear. He denies he ever tested positive. So the jury is still out on him.

All that said, I maintain that anyone who ever used PEDs should not be in the Hall of Fame of any sport. They should consider themselves very fortunate to have had the careers that they had without being thrown out of their respective sports.

He was the NL Cy Young winner in 2020.

How are they paying these salaries with the future still so cloudy because of the pandemic? I mean, the parks will not be full this season, and the economy will continue to be difficult for the millions that can buy the products endorsed by athletes.
I just don't understand it.