Yesterday on the Colin Cowherd show on ESPN Radio, Curt Schilling said the following regarding the Red Sox and how they suggested he use PEDs to help recover from a shoudler injury he was dealing with in 2008:
“At the end of my career, in 2008 when I had gotten hurt, there was a conversation that I was involved in in which it was brought to my attention that this is a potential path I might want to pursue.” Asked for more details, Schilling said the conversation occurred in the clubhouse and involved “former members of the organization — they’re no longer there. It was an incredibly uncomfortable conversation. Because it came up in the midst of a group of people. The other people weren’t in the conversation but they could clearly hear the conversation. And it was suggested to me that at my age and in my situation, why not? What did I have to lose? Because if I wasn’t going to get healthy, it didn’t matter. And if I did get healthy, great.”
There are several things to discuss in regards to this.
First, for those who have been reading my articles for several years you already know how I feel about Curt Schilling. For those who don’t, here you go – I can’t stand Curt Schilling at all. I believe he’s a blowhard who loves to hear himself speak and after the debacle with the gaming company he ran (into the ground), I find it hard to believe anything Schilling says. Schilling has always been “against players using PEDs” and spoke at length in regards to it to the media throughout the years, however, when called to testify to Congress or the Mitchell Report, he pretty much clammed up – he didn’t dare say anything under oath that he couldn’t back up (or worse, outright lie about that he could potentially get in trouble for later) so he kept his mouth shut (or at least did not rail against it as hard as he did to the media). It’s one thing to rail against PED use but you need to do it in front of the people who could make changes or be under oath while doing so (like what Frank Thomas has tried to do over the last decade).
Second, until Schilling names names, it’s hard to verify his story. MLB has been trying to get the New Times in Miami to release their source(s) of the information that are in the press recently regarding MLB players and their ties to an “anti-aging” clinic in Miami, however, the New Times are journalists so they should protect their sources. Schilling doesn’t have the same rights or expectation to privacy, especially if as he says, the conversation was in public, so I wonder if MLB will try to get him to name names. If he doesn’t, this story may just get chalked up to “Schilling running his mouth again” and it will simply go away.
Finally, we all know MLB turned a blind eye to PED use in baseball throughout the 1990s (and earlier), so it doesn’t shock me at all that this may have happened (and may still be happening around the league).
I do believe MLB needs to investigate this, at least see if Schilling will say who said it (especially if those people are still in MLB in whatever capacity). However, part of me also thinks it’s just another case of Schilling saying whatever he wants because he thinks people actually care what he thinks so it all could just be a waste of time. MLB needs to figure out the truth though – especially if they want to keep pushing the idea that they are the “strongest US professional sports league in the fight against PED use.”
UPDATE: Schilling will not name names (I’m not surprised). He says it would not do anything. If that’s the case, why did he bring it up in the first place. I’m beginning to think this is just another case of Schilling being Schilling and not having the “balls” (sorry for my language) to come forward and actually do something to affect change regarding MLB and PEDs. Baseball still needs to investigate this situation just to be sure teams or employees of teams aren’t suggesting players use PEDs.
UDATE 2: Per Craig Calcaterra of Hardball Talk, MLB will investigatee Schilling’s allegations.
What do you think? Please comment and vote in the poll below.
Is there something to Schilling's story or is it just BS?
- Yes - there's something there and MLB needs to investigate (67%, 2 Votes)
- Not sure - need more facts (names from Schilling etc) (33%, 1 Votes)
- No - it's just Schilling being Schilling (0%, 0 Votes)
Total Voters: 3