The burden of proof is on their accusers, but the change in Clemens's body mass over the years is similar to that of Bonds.

Roger on his high horse. What a bunch of b.s.

The burden of proof is on their accusers, but the change in Clemens's body mass over the years is similar to that of Bonds.

Bonds looks like he's wearing an inflatable muscle suit. Clemens just looks fat.

Yeah, b/c the evidence against clemens is really on the same level as that against Bonds. good call Kevin.

Yeah, just like Bonds' lawyers took over after "Game of Shadows" was published.

Apples and syringes. Clemens is talking about specific financial damages, which is a fair complaint if he's innocent and a clever tactic if he's not.

Which national sponsorships did "Game of Shadows" cost the ever-popular Barry Bonds? The EZ-Slice marriage certificate shredder from Ronco? The combination hula hoop/headband? The fresh baby's blood pulper and juicer ("It's pure evil in a sippie cup!")?

There's also the small difference between an accusation against a subject, and a subject's own sworn testimony. I'm no lawyer, but I'll bet there's something to that.

What I'm saying is that all Clemens needs is a "In light of recent events, we have chosen not to continue our association with Roger Clemens" statement to prove his case. Grimsley would need quite a bit more to prove his.

Has taken the "high and mighty" road ever worked out for a player accused of steroid use?

Has taken the "high and mighty" road ever worked out for a player accused of steroid use?

Has anything really worked out for a player accused of steriod use?

Giambi's half-apology is probably the closest thing to working out that's we've seen for a major player.

Apples and syringes. Clemens is talking about specific financial damages, which is a fair complaint if he's innocent and a clever tactic if he's not.

True, but I'm skeptical that Clemens really wants to submit to the fishing expedition that pre-trial discovery would authorize.

If Clemens didn't see the report, how on earth does he know if he's been maliciously slandered or libeled? How does he know the first thing about "the people involved" if he hasn't read it? How does he know that his lawyers need to be involved?

Wait a minute. I think we're missing the real story. Somebody denied steroids use.

I like to picture Grimsley being questioned by a pair of guys who are actually pretty dorky baseball fans who just sit there and throw out names. And Grimsley's like the dumb, oafish high school guy who goes along with it & brags about things he's never done and just makes things up as he goes along.

Interrogator #1: "What about Tejada? Was he using?"

Grimsley: "Oh yeah. He had steroids for breakfast."

Interrogator #2: "Don't tell me Brian Roberts used!"

Grimsley: "Yeah, he used. I also heard he killed a man with a pitchfork."

I# 1: "So... did....Roger Clemens use steroids?"

Grimsley: "Oh, yeah...totally. He did, like.... 25 one time."

Interrogators: "Woah."

Grimsley: "Yeah...and sometimes? He'd try to get me to do like, crack and stuff."

Interrogator #2: "What about Tony Phillips?"

Grimsley: "Well, I don't know if he ever did steroids. But I went to Disneyland with him after a day game in Anaheim once. He filled up a Dumbo elephant with coke and snorted until it was empty."

Interrogators: "Wait a minute... that sounds kinda outlandish..."

Grimsley: "Seriously? That's the only true story I've said so far."

yall see BBTN?

brantley says grimsley sez he never said NOTHING like that and that he said no way did clemens and pettitte use

"I haven't done anything," Pettitte said. "I guess reports are saying I've used performance-enhancing drugs. I've never used any drugs to enhance my performance on a baseball field before. I don't know what else to say except it's embarrassing that my name would be out there with this."

Perhaps I'm being too picky, but Pettitte's denial seems too carefully worded to me. As opposed to saying "I didn't use PEDs" he talks very specifically about not using drugs to enhance performance on the field. My very non-medical understanding of steroids and the like is that they could justifiably be claimed to help in the recovery of muscles to keep players in peak condition and that a user could convince themselves that their on field "performance" was based purely on talent and ability. Given Pettitte strong religious beliefs perhaps he isn't comfortable flat out lying about what he has done, but will wordsmith a quote that is, in his mind, still true.

Ugh, I hate the steroid scandal. Makes me question everything coming out of everybody's mouth. Now Grimsley is backpedaling. What a mess.

How does he know that his lawyers need to be involved?

He didn't say that his lawyers need to be involved. He said that his lawyers would get involved if and when an accusation cost him money.