Come Back, Barry!

I have to say, to anyone who is half as big a baseball fan as me, this is going to sound really weird: I want Barry Bonds to play this year. I know, you think I am crazy, but quite frankly, I just don't hate Barry Bonds the way everyone else in the world seems to.

Don't get me wrong - I DO think Barry Bonds was a juicer and I DO believe that he is probably a first class asshole. That doesn't change the fact that he is, by leaps and bounds, the greatest baseball player that I have ever seen. I can honestly say that I believe he is the best baseball player to have ever lived.

Now, at this point, I think it's pretty obvious to everyone that Bonds was using steroids. But my real question is: why shouldn't he have been using them? We can all get on our moral high horse and talk about the "sanctity of the game" and all of that garbage. But for all our blustering about that, we don't really seem to care that there were literally hundreds of other ballplayers using the juice. When Mark McGwire and Sammy Sosa were bringing baseball back by chasing down Roger Marris' record, we all knew they were juiced - but nobody really seemed to care. In fact, I remember many people acknowledging that they were juicers with a smile on their face. Now, all of the sudden, Barry Bonds comes along and breaks the record and we're all outraged by his steroid use? It doesn't add up.

I don't believe it's a race issue, because people adored Sammy Sosa and he was not only a non-white, he was from another country and could barely speak English. I think the main reason is that people have a personal problem with Bonds. But that isn't the point. The comparison of baseball players should be done independently of whether or not you like them. We can act like we're all made of such strong moral fiber with how we condemn him for steroid use, but isn't that quite hypocritical of us when we consider all the other users we have let off the hook? Morality isn't meant to be applied selectively.

Many people will argue that it matters because he has broken records. They're wrong. That makes him no better or worse than any other player who used steroids. In a league that was filled to bursting with cheaters, we have placed all of our focus on that one guy.

Oh, sure, there were the guys in the Mitchell report who had to take some flak for their behavior, but it was nothing compared to what Bonds was subjected to. Perhaps the exception to that is Roger Clemens, but really, who can say that he didn't bring that all upon himself. Take a look at Andy Pettitte - he admitted to using steroids and not only is his pitching for the Yankees today, it is extraordinarily rare for him to even be brought up in a steroids conversation. Jason Giambi offered a clumsy fumbling apology for using without explicitly acknowledging what it was that he was actually apologizing for. Where is he now? Playing first base for the Yankees in a stadium full of people wearing fake mustaches in his honor. Even Eric Gagne, who set an incredible mark of converting 84 straight save opportunities (besting the 2nd longest streak by THIRTY saves), was outed as a user. Now, the man couldn't strike out a tee-baller, and nobody seems to care. Obviously, consecutive saves is not the same as the homerun record, but it's still an incredible record achieved through the wrong means, so why are we not outraged about it?

Now, I am not trying to condone steroid use. I wish the steroid era never would have happened. I'm sick to death of hearing about it. But I just don't see how we can lay the blame on one man, just because he happened to be the best player of the era. Quite frankly, I think Major League Baseball should point the finger squarely in the mirror when it comes to placing blame. The steroid movement began to gain momentum back in the 1980s. And it was widely recognized by people at every level of MLB. But, it isn't until more than 20 years later that they really decided to crack down on it. I think if you knowingly let the situation develop for decades, it is at least a large part your own fault when it blows up. But instead, we let MLB play the victim.

I like to think that in that situation, I would not have used, but the fact is, I would have. And 99% of the people in the world would have. People say he was good enough that he didn't need them, and that's true - he was a Hall of Fame caliber player long before he was a juicer. But why should he sit idly by while everyone around him gains an unfair competitive advantage? Why would he sit around and watch as pitchers bring it at 101 mph because they're juiced like crazy? Would you sit around watching as everyone around you closed the gap using illicit means? I like to think I would, but I know that in the long run, I probably wouldn't.

He may be a jerk, but he is still the most dominant hitter that I (or anyone else on the planet for that matter) have ever seen at the Major League level. That's why I want to see him come back. And aren't people at least a little bit curious to see what he can do now that he has no chance to juice?