CyβerHog®

CyβerHog® Section

 Other Pig Pen Articles

When I have a bias on a particular subject that I'm trying to present objectively, I disclose it immediately. In other articles, it's obvious where my bias is, but here I want no confusion: I am no fan of Roger Clemens.

His recent "team hopping" and going to the highest bidder/team with the best chance to pump up his stats/get him into another postseason really took the shine off his illustrious career for me. He became a mercenary, a hired gun. Certainly not a "team player", although we all know that Baseball really isn't a "team sport" per se. However, even before that, I sensed a smugness and arrogance about him that I found unappealing. He tries to come off as this regular, All American, husband/father, regular guy but there's something about him; maybe it's his defiant face, I don't know. The guy just seems like an arrogant, smug jerk to me. Anyway, that's how I feel about Roger Clemens. Doubtful that he or anyone else will lose sleep over my opinion about him, but I thought it'd be the right thing to do by disclosing my feelings about the man.

When the Mitchell Report came out, I was not shocked that Clemens' name appeared on the list. I have my doubts about an athlete that is built like him in the first place. Also, his amazing performance after the age of 40, winning a Cy Young and striking out more than a batter an inning in 2004 seemed a bit spectacular. He finished 3rd in the Cy Young the following year despite having an ERA BELOW 2.00, something he hadn't done since he was a 27 year old "in his prime" pitcher. In fact, his 2005 ERA of 1.87 was the lowest of his CAREER. Guys putting up career numbers at the age of 41? Hmmm. Contrast that to a guy I'd be shocked used steroids: Randy Johnson. While the Big Unit is still a relatively productive pitcher, he isn't putting up career numbers in his 40's like the Rocket has. In fact, Johnson is struggling mightily just to stay on the mound. He made only 10 starts last season. Which is another reason to suspect Clemens. How does he escape injury? By shortening the season like he has the previous three?

Yesterday on WSCR radio in Chicago, Mike Murphy the mid-day host had a gentleman on by the name of John LeSage an expert on public relations and image consulting. I forget what company he works for or represents, but he offered some interesting insight into the fallout of the Mitchell Report and how athletes on the list are handling the situation. The most in depth analysis surrounds Mr. Clemens.

There are a number of things an athlete can do to minimize "damage control" when the excrement hits the fan per se. One is to do what Andy Pettitte did: admit to using steroids, albeit only briefly. In this case, it doesn't matter that Pettitte used it twice or two hundred times, he used the illegal substance and he admitted it. Sure, he may face some sort of retribution by MLB, but it gets the media attention to dim down a bit when it comes to Mr. Pettite.

The other thing that can be done is to say absolutely nothing. That was the tack Mr. Clemens invoked initially after categorically denying using steroids in an indignant fashion. According to Mr. LeSage, this is a winning strategy only if the situation will blow over. Obviously Mr. Clemens and his advisors thought they could weather the storm and let it blow over. Once the furor died down, the issue would go away. In this case, it hasn't. In fact, a recent poll indicates that over 60% of the respondents felt that Mr. Clemens used one of the substances listed on the Mitchell Report. Seeing his Hall of Fame reputation get dragged through the mud by staying silent, Mr. Clemens has now decided to talk.

Mr. Clemens has decided to engage the issue without admitting to using illegal substances the way Mr. Pettitte has. When doing this Mr. LeSage cautions there are three options for the athlete. Two of them are strictly controlled engagements of the media. The third, is completely uncontrolled which is to have a press conference. In this environment Mr. Clemens would be asked all sorts of deep, penetrating, almost "off limits" type of questions in very rapid succession. These are they types of situations that result in juicy sound bites or being taken out of context. Some of these reporters are ruthless and they just don't care who is up at the podium, they want those sound bites or the obvious contradictions that can be rehashed and analyzed ad-nauseum. This is certainly not what Mr. Clemens wants to do.

Instead he's chosen the other two methods of engaging the fans, both of which are strictly controlled and allows The Rocket to get his side of the story out without being contested by pesky reporters. The first of which is to write an article, either in an editorial section or in the case of Mr. Clemens, on a Blog. I guess that's the fashionable "hip" thing to do nowadays. On Mr. Clemens' Blog he uses every cliché and trick in the book to get the fans to sympathize with him. One of the ugliest and most arrogant in my opinion is to do drag his family into this mess. He mentions the trauma and the turmoil have been worse on his wife and children than it is on him. In other words we should lighten up because we are harming innocent women and children here.

The other controlled environment is an environment that many of us thought would not be a controlled environment: Sixty (60) Minutes. I always thought of Mike Wallace and Morley Safer and Ed Bradley and whomever else to be hard nosed, tough and relentless questioners. However, Mr. LeSage thinks otherwise. He instructs us to watch the Wallace/Clemens interview carefully. According to Mr. LeSage, Mr. Wallace is a tenacious interviewer, but he will have his hands tied during this exchange. He will not be able to probe too deep and to make Mr. Clemens say things that would harm his image or even worse make him say something libelous. Mr. LeSage says he'd bet his bottom dollar that Mr. Wallace won't ask him a question like: "Are you calling the trainer who outed you in the Mitchell Report, Brian McNamee, a liar?" In fact, Mr. McNamee's lawyers are just waiting for Rocket to accuse McNamee of lying. They will slap a lawsuit so fast on him that Mr. Clemens' attorneys probably have told Mr. Wallace that Mr. Clemens will not be asked about Mr. McNamee directly. The other thing to watch for is how quickly Mr. Clemens answers the "tough" questions Mr. Wallace fires at him. A skillful interviewee like Bill Clinton would slow down, take time to reflect and answer the question. Someone as anxious as Mr. Clemens will blurt out the answer to the well rehearsed and expected "tough" questions that will lobbed at him by Mr. Wallace.

I rarely watch 60 Minutes, but I will this week to watch for the tell tale signs of a controlled interview.

Congrats Rocket! I hope you make it to your precious Hall of Fame, a Hall of Fame that will no doubt be lessened in my mind when you enter. All I can remember is Ryne Sandberg's terrific speech when he mentioned Andre Dawson and how he admired him and that he'd hoped that one day the Hawk would make it into the Hall, because "he did it the RIGHT way, the NATURAL way".

Any questions as to what Ryno was referring to?

In the meantime, I just keep wondering to myself how a person can look himself in the mirror everyday knowing full well that they are living a lie. Then again, if you have Mr. Clemens' arrogant, defiant, smug face you'd just be repulsed to begin with and keep on living the lie.

TOP OF THIS PAGE