Should Mac fess up?

Posted By on January 15, 2009 10:22 am

Gwen Knapp suggests today in the Chronicle that Mark McGwire ought to just finally admit he used steroids and let the nation forgive him. While there is no doubt that he should do that, because honesty is always the best policy (or so I’m told), I wonder how much it would really help him.

Would teams be willing to hire him as a hitting coach? Would he start making rounds on the speaking circuit? (“Come hear Mark McGwire tell how you can be successful at your job with nothing but hard work … and the occasional needle in the ass.”)

And the big question: Would he get into the Hall of Fame?

I think it would depend on just how he went about his confession. If it was a Pete Rose type thing, where the confession was sprinkled with excuses and justifications for his actions, then it probably wouldn’t help much. (Ol’ Pete is still going to have to settle for selling autographed coffee mugs on the streets of Cooperstown.)

If McGwire really takes responsibility and admits that he made mistakes, he’s got a chance to rehab his image and crawl back into the public’s good graces.

The Hall of Fame is another issue, though. I think most of the writers who aren’t voting for him now are doing so because they think he used steroids, not because he lied about it. There are a lot of liars in the Hall of Fame, I’m sure. To those voters, telling the truth would make him more honorable, but he’d still be a cheater.

(As you know from reading my blog, I am in the minority on McGwire. I vote for him already. I don’t care if he cheated, because I think they all cheated and major league baseball practically encouraged them to do it.)


3 Responses to “Should Mac fess up?”

  1. Mark says:

    There are currently two articles up at;s MLB page about Barry Bonds#39; upcoming trial.

    The first one by Jonathan Littman indicates that any use of the “clear” (THG – Balco’s so called designer steroid) by Barry Bonds (or anyone else) prior to 2005 was neither illegal nor was the use of the drug defined legally as using a steroid. Therefore any denial by Barry Bonds that he used steroids in his 2003 Grand Jury Testimony can not be shown to be false by proving that Barry used the “clear”;prov=yhooamp;type=lgns

    The second one by Josh Peter indicates that there are serious legal concerns about the chain of custody of Barry Bonds’; so called failed steroids test from between the 2000 and 2001 seasons. The implication is that there is a chance these test results will not be admissable in court. Further,even if they are admissable in court there is an even better chance that the defense will be able to convince the jury that they can not be relied upon because of all the chain of custody issues.;_ylt=AgLGO6jpn0SK3_Uk18cMI08RvLYF?slug=jo-chain011409amp;prov=yhooamp;type=lgns

    I hope you can follow the two links I provided. I would be very interested in you looking o this and writing an article on your thoughts and findings.

  2. Jeff Fletcher says:

    I’m not a lawyer, nor do I ever want to be one so the legal wranglings involving Mr. Bonds don’t interest me. I think it’s pretty clear, no pun intended, what he did. Whether he could be punished for it is a separate, and far less interesting, issue.

  3. Motorbreath2000 says:

    That brings up an interesting point, even if McGwire DID use steroids, it wasn’t against MLB rules when he used them. Do you think that Barry Bonds will be declined entry into the HOF? Probably not, and they have far more believable testimony that Bonds used steroids, and that he used them during the height of his career.

Leave a Reply