I'm not going to spend too much time dwelling on all this nonsense, but Joe Posnanski puts forth an interesting quandary. If things were reversed and Roger Clemens had been the first big name associated with steroids, would he have been villified as much as Bonds has?
To me, it seems there are just as many out there who've disliked Roger as have liked him. Were his name swirling around in this cauldron of PED-sludge from the onset, I can't imagine he'd have gotten better treatment. Hell, I think he's had many more incidents in his past to set up a media pouncing were the conditions changed.
I am glad that the initial reports that Pujols was named in the Mitchell Report were erroneous. I know if I were Pujols, I'd be livid, which it sounds like he is.
None of the players on my keeper squad were listed, so that feels nice, I guess.