AOL News has a new home! The Huffington Post.

Click here to visit the new home of AOL News!

Hot on HuffPost:

See More Stories

How Should Baseball Respond to the Report?

Dec 13, 2007 – 5:05 PM
Text Size
Josh Alper

Josh Alper %BloggerTitle%

There's so much in today's Mitchell Report that it's hard to figure out where to turn first in discussions of it. One thing that I found interesting is that George Mitchell was comfortable naming names of players based on nothing other than the allegations of teammates, like Brian Roberts. I understand why he named the names, it was integral to getting the public to believe this was a full investigation, but it seemed punitive to use names based on such flimsy evidence. It felt like a witch hunt to find as many names as possible and open the door to future attempts at discipline.

I was more impressed by his proposal that the Commissioner's office not discipline anyone for past violations "except in those cases where he determines that the conduct is so serious that discipline is necessary to maintain the integrity of the game." He also called for baseball to look forward and not to the past as a response to this report.

Just now, in his own news conference, however, Commisioner Bud Selig said that he is going to investigate the findings in Mitchell's report and determine discipline for the players involved. That seems like it will be hard to do without a tooth and nail battle from the Players Association. It sounds like Selig is spoiling for a fight which is about the stupidest response to have to the Mitchell Report. It also seems like it wouldn't be the most judicious use of baseball's time and resources.

How can you rest on just the players named in this report?


The names come from BALCO and Orlando/online pharmacy cases, long known to baseball and, in the latter case, already given a free pass by the league. They also come from the testimony of two men, both located in New York. If the problem is as widespread as Mitchell's report indicates, why wouldn't you start looking for those guys in the other 28 major league cities. If you're going to discipline the players named today, I think you have to then keep digging for those who weren't named in today's report. That's a process that could go on for an eternity and baseball would never be able to start living in a post-steroid age.

That's the biggest thing that the Mitchell Report offered baseball today. By portraying it as an instant historical document, Mitchell made it possible for baseball to use the report as a springboard to the future. If Selig chooses to consume himself with chasing down enough evidence to suspend and discipline all the players in this report, he can't stop there and truly say that baseball has dealt with the problems of the past. If he implements the procedures Mitchell suggested, though, he can sell it as baseball learning from what's happened and moving the game forward to a different and, hopefully, better place.

Read FanHouse's full coverage of the Mitchell Report.
Filed under: Sports

ON FACEBOOK