Braun, Biogenesis and the Whole Crazy Thing

[burnzy24]

I wonder if ESPN will emphasize this at all. Nah. They won't.

 

http://espn.go.com/espn/otl/story/_/id/9225734/biogenesis-director-tony-bosch-denies-knowledge-steroid-distribution-says-ped-reports-inaccurate

 

 

Handwritten document vaguely references Braun = headline.

 

Biogensis director corroborates Braun's claim = buried at the bottom of the story.

 

Don't worry I'm sure ESPN's many "anonymous sources" will soon come back out of the woodwork and make additional claims to refute this new info.

[brewmann04]

To hell with ESPN and their reporting

[trwi7]

Tim Tebow just got released and the Lakers just got swept. ESPN has plenty of headlines for the next month.

[craigharmann]

Tim Tebow just got released and the Lakers just got swept. ESPN has plenty of headlines for the next month.

 

And the other NBA news of the day.

[Oxy]

It appears that everything that goes to press in this story is suspect.

 

http://espn.go.com/espn/otl/story/_/id/9165418/no-evidence-tying-alex-rodriguez-purchasing-biogenesis-records-sources-say

 

I wouldn't trust that guy any farther than I could throw him. Which wouldn't be far considering all of the layers of grease involved. Yuck.

[The stache]

Shocking that Ryan might have actually been telling the truth. Maybe, just maybe he's been truthful all along.

 

I'll have to see if there's anything on the JS online site discussing it.

[Ennder]

Just shows you how much of an agenda ESPN reports with. This basically says yes Braun was telling the truth. Now he obviously isn't going to be a trusted source in this but if he had come out and said yes I sold drugs to Braun it would be plastered all over ESPN but since it was pro Braun they bury it.

[Patrick425]

Why do you guys think this helps Braun or points to his innocence? Do you really believe anything that guy (Bosch) says? What a slime ball.

[Ennder]

Why do you guys think this helps Braun or points to his innocence? Do you really believe anything that guy (Bosch) says? What a slime ball.

 

That isn't the point. If he had come out and said yeah I sold stuff to Braun they would be reporting it as fact. ESPN has egg on their face after the way they handled his failed test and now they are reporting with a clear anti Braun slant. They are basically spitting in the face of journalistic integrity.

[Patrick425]

Why do you guys think this helps Braun or points to his innocence? Do you really believe anything that guy (Bosch) says? What a slime ball.

 

That isn't the point. If he had come out and said yeah I sold stuff to Braun they would be reporting it as fact. ESPN has egg on their face after the way they handled his failed test and now they are reporting with a clear anti Braun slant. They are basically spitting in the face of journalistic integrity.

 

Well...if he said I sold the stuff to Bruan (or Arod, or whoever), then he would be admitting his guilt and it would probably be much more believable. There would be no reason not to believe it..what would he have to gain by stating that? If OJ came out and said I killed Nicole, that would be pretty believable because he has nothing to gain by saying this, but most people don't believe his claims that he didn't commit murder.

 

It makes sense for people to possibly be skeptical of a "suspect" that does not admit to his or her guilt and to believe one who does.

 

By the way, just about fell out of my chair laughing when this guy said "I'm a nutritionist".

[brwrsfan]

He talked about just one player...Braun. And he went out of his way to say he talked to his legal team. Why did he do that? Who knows....bribed? Felt guilty that Braun did nothing wrong and got thrown under the bus? Who knows, and while he's certainly not trusted at this point, it is a small feather in the cap of Braun for the time being.

 

Too bad no networks will say anything about it.

[Patrick425]

Wow, I really feel like some of you are looking at this through blue and gold colored glasses. Other than this guy coming clean and admitting to selling and distributing PEDs to athletes, there is no reason for any network to cover or expound on anything this low life has to say. He has zero credibility. Any thing nice he has to say about Braun is not a "feather in Braun's cap". It's just another way of him not admitting to selling PEDs. He wasn't "bribed" and he "didn't feel guilty about Braun's innocence"...he's just not going to say "Yeah, I sold PEDs to Braun".

[fondybrewfan]

There is nothing in that story that should change anyone's mind. The guy seems like a raving lunatic to me. That doesn't mean that he is guilty and Braun bought PED's from him; but he isn't exactly oozing credibility. I have no idea why he even agreed to be interviewed; it was pointless.

[Fear The Chorizo]

Frankly, this story and more importantly the credibility of this "investigation" died about 2 months ago once the media starting running every direction looking for notebook pages with hand-written names on them. Problem is, nobody told the media. That "interview" was a complete joke and shouldn't have even had an article written about it (much like most of the articles about this story written recently).

[brwrsfan]

Wow, I really feel like some of you are looking at this through blue and gold colored glasses. Other than this guy coming clean and admitting to selling and distributing PEDs to athletes, there is no reason for any network to cover or expound on anything this low life has to say. He has zero credibility. Any thing nice he has to say about Braun is not a "feather in Braun's cap". It's just another way of him not admitting to selling PEDs. He wasn't "bribed" and he "didn't feel guilty about Braun's innocence"...he's just not going to say "Yeah, I sold PEDs to Braun".

 

So it's big news that A-Rod may or may not have bought documents, it's big news that Cano's wife may or may not have been a client of the clinic or something stupid like that, but it's not news at all when the guy comes out and makes a public statment? Really?

 

While the guy has no real credibility, to act like it's completely and utterly irrelevant is silly. They are supposed to report sports news, which is what this is, they've ran with way, way smaller related stories about this, and this is just buried. Is that because it's Braun? Who knows, but it IS a story and they more or less ignored it.

[JackNicholson1974]

I think Bosch's statement holds water because he first says"

 

Asked about players under his care, Bosch cut in and said, "Allegedly under my care. If you are going to ask me about baseball players, I have no comment on any baseball players or anybody else associated with baseball players."

 

If Braun were one of the players "allegedly under [his] care" then why would he single him out on the next breath? There are two groups of people, those under his care, and Braun, who was not under his care but whose legal team contacted him with questions.

 

Makes sense to me, and this is from someone who said on this site that I was sick of Braun when these new allegations broke.

[Patrick425]

So it's big news that A-Rod may or may not have bought documents, it's big news that Cano's wife may or may not have been a client of the clinic or something stupid like that, but it's not news at all when the guy comes out and makes a public statment? Really?

 

While the guy has no real credibility, to act like it's completely and utterly irrelevant is silly. They are supposed to report sports news, which is what this is, they've ran with way, way smaller related stories about this, and this is just buried. Is that because it's Braun? Who knows, but it IS a story and they more or less ignored it.

 

No, it's not news and yes, it is irrelevant. They might as well have been interviewing Kermit the Frog.

[Ennder]

Again it doesn't matter if it has credibility or not. If he had said something anti-player they would have been all over it, since it was pro-player they ignore it. THis is no different than reporting that Braun got off on a technicality and then ignoring the fact that the sample could have been tainted and the test should have never been run or released. They are not interested in the truth, they just want a story at the players expense.

 

Players didn't do steroids isn't a story to them, random source says player might have done steroids even if there is no real proof is front page.

[Patrick425]

Ennder, I feel like we are having a bit of a circular argument here. As I said before, he had nothing to gain and something to lose by saying anything that was "anti-player" so he didn't.

 

Understand that I am not stating that ESPN's original reporting of this story or them breaking the news about Braun's failed test was great journalism. There is just nothing about this current story that makes me feel any better or worse about Braun's innocence or guilt. It's a completely meaningless story. Even if ESPN put this story front and center and made a big deal out of it, I don't think it would do anything at all to change anyone's mind about Braun.

[brwrsfan]

So it's big news that A-Rod may or may not have bought documents, it's big news that Cano's wife may or may not have been a client of the clinic or something stupid like that, but it's not news at all when the guy comes out and makes a public statment? Really?

 

While the guy has no real credibility, to act like it's completely and utterly irrelevant is silly. They are supposed to report sports news, which is what this is, they've ran with way, way smaller related stories about this, and this is just buried. Is that because it's Braun? Who knows, but it IS a story and they more or less ignored it.

 

No, it's not news and yes, it is irrelevant. They might as well have been interviewing Kermit the Frog.

 

You're basically throwing out what he's stating because of who it is, but at the same time, you claim that if he admits that he sold PED's to players, we should take that to be the truth. So now he's not credible unelss he says he sold players PEDs? It shouldn't matter what he says, either it's a story or not. It's only news if he admits guilt, but nothing else he says is newsworthy at all? What most of are saying is that ESPN has blown up EVERYTHING related to this story, trivial or not, thats the precedent they set with this story long ago. But yet this is something that should have been made to light and on the front page of ESPN, just like everything else has been with relation to this story but for the most part, it hasn't.

 

Nobody is saying this guy is the end all be all and that Braun is 100% innocent and I agree he's not exactly a reliable source, but it shouldn't be just completely disregarded either.

[brwrsfan]

I tried to delete the above post but couldn't...Patrick, after reading your last post to Ender...I think we're on the same page.

 

It doesn't necessarily mean anything with regards to Braun being innocent or not, but it is a piece of the story and I think in fairness to Braun, it something that should have been reported with the same level of urgency, awareness, front pageness, etc that every other piece of the story has been.

 

And to people that already feel that Braun has been a target of ESPN/Yahoo/etc based on how everything has been reported, this just further illustrates that.

[Patrick425]

You're basically throwing out what he's stating because of who it is, but at the same time, you claim that if he admits that he sold PED's to players, we should take that to be the truth. So now he's not credible unelss he says he sold players PEDs? It shouldn't matter what he says, either it's a story or not. It's only news if he admits guilt, but nothing else he says is newsworthy at all?

 

Yes, this is exactly what I'm saying. Why is this concept so hard to understand? Did you read my original post? I guess I'll repeat it. If OJ Simpson came out today and said he killed Nicole Brown Simpson would you believe it? Would it be big news? Yes. Why? Because it's believable. He has nothing to gain by admitting his guilt. If he comes out today and restates his innocence, it's not news and it's not believable.

 

Do you have kids? If so, did you ever ask them to give you an answer about whether or not they did something that they shouldn't have done? Do you believe them every time they say the didn't? Probably not. If they admit their guilt do you believe them? Of course you do. Why wouldn't you.

 

Edit: Posted this after I saw your recent post brwrsfan. However, not sure we are on the same page. Not sure what some people are seeing in this latest story but I see nothing that I would consider being "in fairness to Braun".

[brwrsfan]

Yes, I do have kids. And yes, I understand the concept...I just disagree to some extent with regards to this particular instance. The main difference being that in your example, you KNOW your kids are guilty, at least with 99% certainty and in the Braun case, nobody can be 99% about anything. I understand what you're saying with regards to it obviously being a much, much bigger deal if he were to admit guilt. But there is SOME possible chance that he is telling the truth.

 

I think what people are upset about is the fact that guys like Jeff Passan took every single opportunity, with things almost as trivial as this, and turned it into long anti-Braun articles. If you're ESPN or whoever, and you take every small trivial thing you can find and use it to bash Braun, I think people want to know why nobody is even talking about this at all. If your job as a reporter is to give people the facts and let them decide, you can't just simply ignore this. Now, ESPN does have an article about it, but the Braun comment is basically an afterthought, which is what people are upset about I think.

[Patrick425]

But there is SOME possible chance that he is telling the truth.

 

Perhaps he was telling the truth about Braun, but his mannerisms and everything he said in the rest of the interview ruined any chance of believing his statement about Braun. He never takes his sun glasses off, he rarely looked the interviewer in the eye, he calls himself a "nutritionist", he claims he never saw the papers that they show him and that MLB has never tried to contact him or his attorneys (I'm pretty positive that they have contacted his lawyers). He walks away from an interview like a guilty person would tend to do. He reaks of being untruthful. It reminded me of one of those news stories where they try to go after dead beat dads.

[gregmag]

But there is SOME possible chance that he is telling the truth.

 

Perhaps he was telling the truth about Braun, but his mannerisms and everything he said in the rest of the interview ruined any chance of believing his statement about Braun. He never takes his sun glasses off, he rarely looked the interviewer in the eye, he calls himself a "nutritionist", he claims he never saw the papers that they show him and that MLB has never tried to contact him or his attorneys (I'm pretty positive that they have contacted his lawyers). He walks away from an interview like a guilty person would tend to do. He reaks of being untruthful. It reminded me of one of those news stories where they try to go after dead beat dads.

Your argument in this thread seems kind of strange to me, given that this whole case is based on notes written by this same guy whom you're now saying we shouldn't trust. If his word is absolutely meaningless, then why are we even having this conversation? I expect your answer might be that the notes are reliable documentary evidence of his state of mind at the time they were written. That may or may not be right, but if it is, one could defend the value of this latest statement the same way. It isn't self-serving; the guy has nothing to gain by throwing Braun a lifeline. It's basically the same kind of statement as the original notes: a gratuitous, apparently unmotivated expression in the ordinary course of business and/or conversation.