Friday, May 18, 2007


Can a major sport publicly suspend a major superstar for transgressions discovered within (aka, not publicly exposed by a muckraker)?

There were always rumors of David Stern suspending Michael Jordan for the years when he tried playing baseball. Barry Bonds' 2005 season was filled with somewhat murky injuries and setbacks - he only played in 14 games - and that just so happened to coincide with the outbreak of the steroid use controversy.

What about Roger Clemens?

The rumors of his use are out there. There's circumstantial evidence that says he's used.

Could it be possible that Roger Clemens failed a drug test, perhaps multiple tests? If so, and only MLB knew about it, would they make it public? Or would they tell him to retire or face a 50 game suspension?

Here's why I ask: I've seen stories out there right now that say, if all goes well, Clemens' first start for the Yankees this year would be May 28th or 29th against Toronto. Note that date. The 29th is the Yankees' 50th game of the season. Exactly the number of games a player gets suspended for a first positive test for steroids. So if there are any setbacks, or if the rotation doesn't work right or something, they might push his first start back a game. No big deal, right? The timing seems very odd to me.

Naturally, it's hard to keep secrets like this. There's no reason why MLB would cover solely for Clemens (he's a star, but is he "beloved" any more than Bonds?). New York is probably the worst city to keep a secret from journalists. So, yeah, this is all drivel.

But if he starts game #51 for the Yankees, May 30th, tell me you wouldn't think that's a little interesting?

Of course, if he starts game #52 for the Yanks, he'll make his debut, which will already be hyped ridiculously, IN FENWAY PARK. In that case, ESPN will make sure all of us think that game is interesting, even though it really isn't.