Advice to A-Rod that, if taken, will make people’s heads explode

54 Comments

I doubt A-Rod would take this advice. He’s gone in with a full denial and likely will keep that up until he either skates clear or gets suspended by Major League Baseball. But if A-Rod really and truly wanted to try something novel and fun he’d ignore all those people who are suggesting he try to commit insurance fraud and simply own up to taking PEDs. Not out of a sense of responsibility, but out of a sense of pure unadulterated mischief.

He should walk into Bud Selig’s office tomorrow morning, put his good leg up on the desk and say “Bud, gotta tell ya. I took PEDs last year. I was rotten with the stuff. I’ll sign an affidavit to that effect right now and agree to waive any appeal of discipline. Give me my 50 game suspension, please.”

His suspension would then begin on Opening Day and last until Monday, May 27. All the while A-Rod was on the disabled list rehabbing from his hip surgery.  He’d be out money, but he’d not miss a single game that he’d otherwise play in. The Joint Drug Agreement allows it.  Edinson Volquez and Freddy Galvis each served their own PED suspensions while on the DL.  There’s no way around it.

And when it happened, the media’s collective heads would explode. The outrage would be so great it would create shortages. The government would only allow you to have outrage, like, every other day depending on whether your license plate ends in an odd or even number. We’d be on an outrage war footing, really.

He won’t do it. But man, if he did, it’d be glorious.

Donald Trump wants Curt Schilling in the Hall of Fame

Getty Images
31 Comments

We’ve talked a lot about Curt Schilling’s Hall of Fame candidacy over the years.

Bill has argued that, if voters are going to use the character clause to keep certain players out, they should keep Curt Schilling out. I’ve differed on that, not because I think Schilling is a good person — he’s loathsome, actually — but because I find the character clause to be illegitimate and would never, if I had a vote, use it to impact my vote. So, yes, I’d put Schilling on my ballot if I had one.

I’m not alone in this, of course. At the moment Schilling has support on about 72% of ballots which have been made public. My guess is that he’ll fall a tad short when results are announced tomorrow — non-public ballots tend to include fewer players on them — but we’ll see.

I am not the only non-BBWAA member who would vote for Schilling. He’s got some top level support too. From the President of the United States:

Ballots had to be submitted by December 31, so it’s not like this is gonna have any impact on the vote totals. If it came earlier, though, one wonders if it would. And one wonders if that’d help Schilling or hurt him.