Nothing will be done nor should it. There are different eras now in baseball history.
First was the Dead Ball Era when pitching dominated with a baseball with a softer core. It was harder to drive over the fences.
Then came the Golden Era with Babe Ruth leading the way hitting home runs in record numbers. In 1920 a new type of core to the ball was introduced that was harder and allowed the ball to fly further when hit in the air.
Then came the post World War II time that first brought in African-American players. Opening up the major leagues to a larger number of baseball players made it tougher to earn a roster spot---you had to be a better athlete of any race to make the team.
Then came the Expansion Era. Teams played more games per season (up 8 games a year to the current 162 game schedule).
This of course gave a better chance to break seasonal records, but it also gave modern players a better chance to achieve career milestones. If a player plays 20 years, that extra 8 games a year equals a full season of play that was not available before 1961.
All of these eras had their positives and negatives. In the pre-expansion times travel between cities was less; the travel now is the hardest thing for the players to do as jet lag sets in with the constant time zone changes. In the pre-expansion era there were fewer players to play against so you were more able to learn their strengths and weaknesses.
Many people have said that expansion has "diluted" major league baseball. That idea is garbage. In 1960 there were fewer than 180 million people in the Unites States. Now there are over 300 million. That means that the population went up nearly 70%, not including the players from another dozen nations. The major league roster spots only went up There are more people competing for the roster spots now; it is harder to make the teams.
No, we should leave the record books alone, just the way they are.
2007-02-04 01:59:07
·
answer #1
·
answered by jpbofohio 6
·
0⤊
1⤋
They did it to Maris when he hit 61 but later dropped it because it just became silly. Like stated above there really is nothing you can do. As unfortunate as it is although steroids were illegal without a scrip there were no such rules in baseball so it would be ridiculous to be revisionist. How can you be sure who did what if anything? The game has changed not necessarily for the better in my opinion but that's just the way it is. The hall of fame voters will show their displeasure to even those suspected of abuse and eventually some of the players may take it into consideration when deciding whether or not to use them. Just look at Bonds- he was a hall of famer before he turned into a caricature and now he'll be hard pressed to make the hall even if he hit 1,000 home runs. One way or another the users are punished by that, perhaps medical problems, inability finding teams willing to risk taking them on, or whatever. No asterisk is really needed or practical.
2007-02-03 02:07:01
·
answer #2
·
answered by bi_tgrl 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
This is a tough one. I really don't think the asterisk is the answer. If these guys are found to be guilty of steriod use while on their record setting runs, even if they aren't found guilty, it has already been set in the fans minds and the "guilty" parties will have this hanging like a dark cloud over their head. Bonds is a perfect example of this. If you look at everything that has happened up to now, the book, his reaction to the book, etc, etc. If someone wrote about me the way they wrote about him and it was not true, I would be filing suit against everyone involved relentlessly. He dropped his lawsuit shortly after filing it. To me, that alone has guilt written all over it. I think he knows this and it will remain with him unless by some miracle, he can prove his "cleanliness".
2007-02-06 18:38:54
·
answer #3
·
answered by Aloha Head Removal, LLC 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
Nothing.....it would be almost impossible to distinguish between who used and who didn't. They don't have asterisks for anyone who played pre-integration, or for those who hit tons of homers with a juiced ball in 1987, for those who have hit homers in tiny parks, or for those who had to contend with higher pitching mounds in the past. As with all records, it will be up to the beholder to make what they want of them.
2007-02-02 18:49:45
·
answer #4
·
answered by Craig S 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
nothing will be done about that, the only thing I see happening is what happened with McGwire, that is the "juiced" home run hitters ever getting in the hall of fame.
2007-02-03 00:04:36
·
answer #5
·
answered by 7 Words You Can't Say On T.V 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
Nothing, stop crying!!!!
2007-02-03 17:55:51
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋