Okay, so here's my take on the whole Alex Rodriguez, steroid thing.
Obviously, I think it was smart of A-Rod to take the Andy Pettitte route and come clean (even though he only came clean after he was exposed). From a PR standpoint, it was the best thing he could do, you know, other than to have never taken performance enhancers.
The real question though: do we believe A-Rod only took steroids from 2001-2003. He told Peter Gammons that that period was pretty much correct. Why not just say, yeah, only those years?
How can A-Rod say he felt immense pressure in Texas, a market that isn't in the spotlight of the press that much, and do steroids then, but he doesn't feel the same pressure, if not more now that he's playing in New York? That reasoning just doesn't sound legitimate to me.
Now the great debate begins: does A-Rod still make it to Cooperstown when his career is over? He sure hopes he can. But how can we take any stats from many of these players over the last 15 years that seriously? Should baseball acknowledge these records that players are putting up now, or should they all be asterisked and we honor the players from the 80's and before as the real record holders?
Only time will tell.
2 years ago