Come On, You’re Better Than That!!!

Last Saturday I was tuning into 1050 ESPN radio, hosted by Warner Wolf. The main topic was the Mitchell Report. After discussing the individual players who were mentioned in the report, Wolf went on to discuss how some of these players may have significantly altered the outcomes of games.

The specific event he was talking about was the 2000 World Series between the Yankees and the Mets. He went on to say how the New York Yankees may have never won if it weren’t for Andy Pettitte and Roger Clemens using HGH. I found that comment completely off-base and his arguments had no backing whatsoever. He reminded me of the radio version of Skip Bayless. Mr. Wolf went on and on, saying how if neither pitcher was using HGH, that they wouldn’t have been able to have 2 very good performances each in a six game series. While I know it is the media’s job to stir the pot and cause controversy, they also have the responsibility to tell the facts as they are. If you are not a professional sportsman, having HGH therapy in Los Angeles is perfectly fine if you are just looking to build muscle for cosmetic appeal and there are many services located around the country that are able to help you! Alternatively, you could consider Sermorelin therapy, often referred to as an “hGH simulator”, as an excellent substitute; it also costs significantly less.

About 20 minutes into his rant, a caller completely blasted Warner for not even looking at the Mitchell Report and coming up with his own conclusion to the facts. If Wolf did know what he was talking about, he would have known that Pettitte was accused of using HGH in 2002, not 2000, thus having no effect on the World Series. Now I know the argument can be made that the report was wrong and he used HGH in 2000 as well, but if you are going to believe Pettitte’s former trainer Brian McNamee when he says that Pettitte did indeed use HGH, why not believe him regarding the time period in which Pettitte used it? It is clearly stated in the report that usage was in 2002 and not 2000.

There comes a point when it is completely unprofessional to throw out the facts and just assume the most controversial theory fore the sole purpose of making a story.

Since this article is all about bold comments, here is one worth taking to the bank: I guarantee that the contributors of SportsAgentBlog.com would smash most radio hosts in a sports debate. (And that is on a bad day.) http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,316966,00.html