Soulstation1 Posted August 8, 2007 Report Share Posted August 8, 2007 (edited) 1986 Topps Traded Set Barry's true rookie card i have 1 unopened 1986 TT Set Edited August 8, 2007 by Soulstation1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
catesta Posted August 8, 2007 Report Share Posted August 8, 2007 How much just for the gum? nyuk nyuk nyuk Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jazzmoose Posted August 8, 2007 Report Share Posted August 8, 2007 Let the true countdown begin. The blessed day when he does his perp walk. Maybe he can star in a remake of The Longest Yard but with baseball... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RDK Posted August 8, 2007 Report Share Posted August 8, 2007 Let the true countdown begin. The blessed day when he does his perp walk. Maybe he can star in a remake of The Longest Yard but with baseball... Barry News Bears? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soulstation1 Posted August 8, 2007 Report Share Posted August 8, 2007 did bobby bonds ever win a ring? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Gould Posted August 8, 2007 Report Share Posted August 8, 2007 did bobby bonds ever win a ring? No. Closest he came was the '71 NLCS when he hit .250 in 8 ABs. His Giants lost in four games to the eventual champion Pirates. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BERIGAN Posted August 8, 2007 Report Share Posted August 8, 2007 Good; it's over. Now we can forget it. Precisely. Our long, national nightmare is almost over, and we should be thankful. No more minute-by-minute updates. No more Giants games on TV. No more sell out crowds, no more press conferences, and no more attention given to an AARP roster floundering in last place with no hope for the future. Let the true countdown begin. The blessed day when he does his perp walk. Amen to that! Well, most of that. I am tickled that after today(Or more likely this week-end) we shouldn't see much more of starting off every show with Bonds, or segments showing his top homers.... 2 things though. You wouldn't want to see what we'd have to put up with beforehand to get to his perp walk. You think the coverage of Bonds has been heavy now! Gee, perhaps the stars could align in such a way to have a Bonds trial at the same time as a Michael Vick trial! And the Giants have some hope for the future IF Tim Lincecum and Matt Cain stay healthy. They could have the best 1-2 punch in the majors in a few years. Plus, they got rid of Matt Morris' contract and someday soon will be rid of Bonds. Will they keep him for next year??? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aggie87 Posted August 8, 2007 Report Share Posted August 8, 2007 (edited) Current poll on espn.com 1) Did you want Barry Bonds to break the record? 58.8% No 41.2% Yes 2) What is your general opinion of Bonds? 47.0% Dislike him 26.8% Like him 26.2% Neither 3) Who was the greater player? 57.8% Hank Aaron 42.2% Barry Bonds 4) What would you have done if you caught the ball? 73.5% Sold it 8.6% Given it to Bonds 7.6% Kept it as a memento 6.0% Destroyed it 4.2% Thrown it back 5) How would you have reacted were you in the stadium when Bonds hit #756? 51.6% Cheered 28.5% Booed 19.9% No reaction 6) Who do you consider the all-time home run king? 50.2% Hank Aaron 40.8% Barry Bonds 6.5% Sadaharu Oh 2.5% Josh Gibson 7) Do you believe Barry Bonds used steroids during his career? 88.0% Yes 12.0% No 8) Which player is most likely to break Bonds' record? 73.8% Alex Rodriguez 12.2% None of the above 5.1% Albert Pujols 3.7% Manny Ramirez 3.7% Ryan Howard 0.6% David Ortiz 0.3% Miguel Cabrera 0.3% Andruw Jones 0.2% Adam Dunn Total Votes: 38,772 Edited August 8, 2007 by Aggie87 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Gould Posted August 8, 2007 Report Share Posted August 8, 2007 Unfortunately it can't be regarded as a scientific poll because of the self-selection bias. But that cuts both ways because it could be argued that Bonds supporters are the ones who are lapping up the media coverage and voting in the poll while Bonds detractors may be so sick of it that they don't even visit sites like ESPN. I know I haven't gone there today just as I stopped watching Sportscenter when it turned into a Bonds lovefest. Either way, with such a huge group of voters, its probably a fair snapshot of what your average sports fan believes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aggie87 Posted August 8, 2007 Report Share Posted August 8, 2007 Unfortunately it can't be regarded as a scientific poll because of the self-selection bias. But that cuts both ways because it could be argued that Bonds supporters are the ones who are lapping up the media coverage and voting in the poll while Bonds detractors may be so sick of it that they don't even visit sites like ESPN. I know I haven't gone there today just as I stopped watching Sportscenter when it turned into a Bonds lovefest. Either way, with such a huge group of voters, its probably a fair snapshot of what your average sports fan believes. 2000+ more votes have occurred since I posted that, 20 minutes ago. Basically the same results though. I agree it's not scientific, and some people are probably voting more than once. But I also think it's probably pretty representative, as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jazzmoose Posted August 8, 2007 Report Share Posted August 8, 2007 I'm shocked that anyone would even consider giving the ball to Bonds if they caught it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Gould Posted August 8, 2007 Report Share Posted August 8, 2007 Unfortunately it can't be regarded as a scientific poll because of the self-selection bias. But that cuts both ways because it could be argued that Bonds supporters are the ones who are lapping up the media coverage and voting in the poll while Bonds detractors may be so sick of it that they don't even visit sites like ESPN. I know I haven't gone there today just as I stopped watching Sportscenter when it turned into a Bonds lovefest. Either way, with such a huge group of voters, its probably a fair snapshot of what your average sports fan believes. 2000+ more votes have occurred since I posted that, 20 minutes ago. Basically the same results though. I agree it's not scientific, and some people are probably voting more than once. But I also think it's probably pretty representative, as well. Oh, who are we kidding Erik? We know its just a creation of the lying scoundrels in the media. No one is actually voting in that poll, its just a media creation, so-called "support" for their "Big Lie". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matthew Posted August 8, 2007 Report Share Posted August 8, 2007 Adam Dunn?????!!!!!????? I can now use this smiley... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim McG Posted August 9, 2007 Report Share Posted August 9, 2007 * ...nice! to the cheater! m Your proof? Why is this concept so hard to grasp for you guys, anyway? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aggie87 Posted August 9, 2007 Report Share Posted August 9, 2007 * ...nice! to the cheater! m Your proof? Why is this concept so hard to grasp for you guys, anyway? How about the leaked grand jury testimony? Whether it was illegally leaked or not, it's damning. That's pretty solid evidence. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim McG Posted August 9, 2007 Report Share Posted August 9, 2007 (edited) * ...nice! to the cheater! m Your proof? Why is this concept so hard to grasp for you guys, anyway? How about the leaked grand jury testimony? Whether it was illegally leaked or not, it's damning. That's pretty solid evidence. So....you're OK with cheating the legal system, but you have a problem with ballplayers cheating with steriods? Hm. Am I the only one here who sees something wrong with that? Edited August 9, 2007 by GoodSpeak Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Gould Posted August 9, 2007 Report Share Posted August 9, 2007 (edited) * ...nice! to the cheater! m Your proof? Why is this concept so hard to grasp for you guys, anyway? How about the leaked grand jury testimony? Whether it was illegally leaked or not, it's damning. That's pretty solid evidence. You don't get it, Aggie - proof, in goody's world, only exists if someone testifies that they witnessed Bonds use steroids, or if Bonds 'fesses up himself. Nothing else constitutes proof. Edited August 9, 2007 by Dan Gould Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BERIGAN Posted August 9, 2007 Report Share Posted August 9, 2007 2) What is your general opinion of Bonds? 47.0% Dislike him 26.8% Like him 26.2% Neither This is his biggest problem.Bonds just isn't likable. I tried to like him, defended him even, since he didn't miss games like McGuire and others(Canseco for one) seemed to on the stuff. Then he did start to get hurt, same area as others, the knee. And of course all the stories came out. What if he and Sammy's numbers were switched? Sosa may have had some issues with his teammates, or management, but...fans have loved him for the most part. Sammy is likable, McGuire was likable...both most likely juiced up, bet folks would still those two more than Bonds. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JSngry Posted August 9, 2007 Report Share Posted August 9, 2007 Any truth to the rumor that Bob Kuban and the In-Men have been booked for the celebration ball? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Gould Posted August 9, 2007 Report Share Posted August 9, 2007 * ...nice! to the cheater! m Your proof? Why is this concept so hard to grasp for you guys, anyway? How about the leaked grand jury testimony? Whether it was illegally leaked or not, it's damning. That's pretty solid evidence. So....you're OK with cheating the legal system, but you have a problem with ballplayers cheating with steriods? Hm. Am I the only one here who sees something wrong with that? ONE HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE OTHER. The fact that this does not penetrate your skull is only one reason why you remain a laughingstock among anyone who reads this thread. A laughingstock without the slightest trace of credibility in your defense of the man you love so deeply. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim McG Posted August 9, 2007 Report Share Posted August 9, 2007 (edited) * ...nice! to the cheater! m Your proof? Why is this concept so hard to grasp for you guys, anyway? How about the leaked grand jury testimony? Whether it was illegally leaked or not, it's damning. That's pretty solid evidence. So....you're OK with cheating the legal system, but you have a problem with ballplayers cheating with steriods? Hm. Am I the only one here who sees something wrong with that? ONE HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE OTHER. The fact that this does not penetrate your skull is only one reason why you remain a laughingstock among anyone who reads this thread. A laughingstock without the slightest trace of credibility in your defense of the man you love so deeply. Why...because you say so? Have we heard ALL of the Grand Jury testimony? Do we know ALL of the evidence presented? Have we heard ALL of the defense's position on the leak or their refutation of this testimony? Geez, like you would accept a bill for dinner at the most expensive restaurant in town if they only served you a glass of milk? It is but a drop of water in the comprehensive OCEAN of testimony, credibility and evidential discovery. Dan, buddy...you are the laughingstock on this BBS. One little incongruence and you go off like a cheap firecracker. Give us all a break here once, huh? See the BIG picture...understand how our legal system works. Just once, open your eyes and take those blinders off. Thick-headedness is not a family value. OK? Watergate this ain't. It is a game. Edited August 9, 2007 by GoodSpeak Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim McG Posted August 9, 2007 Report Share Posted August 9, 2007 Tell me Dan...what is "proof" in your world. eh? Ironclad inuendo? Kiss-and-tell journalism? In a court of law, the fact you have a crime does not equal having a witness to that crime OR a criminal to pin it on. I seriously hope you aren't a judge, now...are you? More like a CPA with nothing else to go on but what people tell him and what he sees in the media. Time to turn off that Sean Hannity and put down that Ann Coulter book....the media LIES, Dan. [duh] [*GASP*] Oh, the horror. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matthew Posted August 9, 2007 Report Share Posted August 9, 2007 I just have one question: If Bonds is so innocent and pure, what's Greg Anderson doing rotting in jail? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim McG Posted August 9, 2007 Report Share Posted August 9, 2007 I just have one question: If Bonds is so innocent and pure, what's Greg Anderson doing rotting in jail? He broke the law, Matthew. What does that have to do with Barry Bonds? And who the hell said he was "innocent" or "pure." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matthew Posted August 9, 2007 Report Share Posted August 9, 2007 I just have one question: If Bonds is so innocent and pure, what's Greg Anderson doing rotting in jail? He broke the law, Matthew. What does that have to do with Barry Bonds? And who the hell said he was "innocent" or "pure." I'm serious about this question. Anderson is in jail because of a contempt of court citation for his refusal to answer questions about Bonds, and what he know about steroid use by Bonds. He was Bonds personal trainer for goodness sakes. Why won't he answer the questions? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
_forumlogo.png.a607ef20a6e0c299ab2aa6443aa1f32e.png)
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.