Thread: Barry Bonds passes Hank Aaron with 756

http://www.bustedtees.com/shirt/756/male

I think the biggest factor is that Bonds is an arrogant ******* to everyone. Fans, media, whoever. He's just a shameless, spoiled, self-centered, arrogant athlete. He makes it hard for anyone to root for him.

Michael Jordan was black--he won every title, every scoring title, got every call, nobody ever disliked him because he was black. Nobody ever disliked Tony Gwynn, not even Dodger fans, he was black. I don't buy that. It's 2007. You have some of it in some corners, but Bonds brought his unlikability on himself and he's been working on it for 20 years.

Originally Posted by Cup B4 I Die

Thanks for the feedback regarding my post...

I was really just trying to present an alternative to the 'I hate Barry' posts. Seems a little mindless to hate someone because he took steroids. Hate someone if they insult your mom or wife, but it seems like people are hating him, just because they're supposed to.

I think it's easy to hate any public figure that continues to insult our intelligence over and over again with bald faced lies.

Originally Posted by Italian Seafood

Michael Jordan was black--he won every title, every scoring title, got every call, nobody ever disliked him because he was black. Nobody ever disliked Tony Gwynn, not even Dodger fans, he was black. I don't buy that. It's 2007. You have some of it in some corners, but Bonds brought his unlikability on himself and he's been working on it for 20 years.

Again, I'm not saying that him being black is the defining characteristic. It's not. Let me make this clear once and for all: the steroids cloud and the douche factor are much, much bigger factors. However, like you mentioned, prejudices do exist "in some corners" and it is still relevant.

The media very much shapes our perception of public figures, obviously, and outspoken blacks have very rarely gotten favorable treatment whereas outspoken whites very rarely get unfavorable treatment. I'm not talking about Jordan or Gwynn because they weren't outspoken. I also have very little doubt that the incredible level of hatred leveled at him by fans and media would be lessened if all other factors were the same except he was white.

Bonds dealt with death threats daily as he approached records. He's also been railroaded by media scrutiny like no other figure in baseball in the steroids investigation. People commonly drop the "shoe size", the "head size" argument, and pictures 10 years apart when talking about Bonds. Why hasn't Clemens been investigated at all when there are tons of rumors going around about him and he fits all those criteria? The Bonds steroid witch hunt started way before any BALCO investigation evidence came out.

Most dislike this label because they have a personal disinclination to even indirectly being called racist, but if you don't think most people--if even only subconsciously--have some level of bias, then you're incredibly naive and/or haven't really looked into the issue.

Originally Posted by KINGS17

I think it's easy to hate any public figure that continues to insult our intelligence over and over again with bald faced lies.

Oh, the irony. But that's for another forum.

I was just telling jb about this, but I'm gonna say it here now too. Wrong forum, I don't care.

A lot of the times, the same people getting pissed at Leiweke for "lying" were the same ones defending George Bush and his lies. And we're not talking about lying about getting head from some chick. We're talking about lying about going to war.

That always bothered me and it seems to be coming up again in this context.

It's SO funny and just SO ironic...it's just delicious.

The steroid thing doesn't bother me much...most of the big time MLB guys have been on steroids over the last 20 years. Not much you can do about that now.

It's the A-HOLE thing that bothers me. Bonds is an f-ing a-hole and that's why I dislike him and rooted against him.

Under todays rules, there's research that suggests Babe Ruth would've had at least 50 more home runs. Before 1931, a home run hit near a foul pole that left fair but landed foul was called a foul. Those were Ruth's most productive years.

In his time, they played a 154 game schedule (except 1919 which was shortened because of WWI). He played full-time in 19 of these full seasons. Those added games add 152, almost another full season.

He also spent the first 5 or 6 years as a pitcher getting limited at bats.

Some food for thought about Ruth. And in a few years, A-Rod will break Barry's record.

Originally Posted by arizonabay

Under todays rules, there's research that suggests Babe Ruth would've had at least 50 more home runs. Before 1931, a home run hit near a foul pole that left fair but landed foul was called a foul. Those were Ruth's most productive years.

He also played against inferior competition that didn't include blacks and Latinos, not to mention the advances in physical fitness (not including steroids).

Originally Posted by arizonabay

And in a few years, A-Rod will break Barry's record.

Now here, I agree with you.

Originally Posted by jbruin152

He also played against inferior competition that didn't include blacks and Latinos, not to mention the advances in physical fitness (not including steroids).

I don't think you can necessarily say that the competition was inferior because there were no blacks or Latinos. There were also far fewer teams so the talent was much less spread around, 8 teams in both the A.L. and N.L.