Mark McGwire’s buddy act on ESPN is a poor show by both parties

Watching ESPN’s SportCenter for the first time in a long time, I was surprised to see Mark McGwire holding a mike and laughing it up with a baseball analyst. The emotion and setting reminded me of the farcical summer of 1998.

That year, ESPN’s coverage of the home run chase never hinted that something might be amiss. They were part of the baseball machine drawing monster ratings as Americans checked in to see who hit a home run on Baseball Tonight. Why should they, a news gathering organization and provider of content, question something that was so good for business?

Integrity is one reason. Even after that summer and people started to question baseball players accomplishments as being legitimate, ESPN and their baseball experts stuck to their guns and toed the baseball line: there’s no drug issue in baseball.

Turns out they were wrong. Whether they were wrong intentionally is another issue, but with the Mitchell Report, Game of Shadows and other revelations emerging that many players were cheating (including McGwire), ESPN then turned a different tune.

With that about face, ESPN should just cover McGwire returning to baseball as the hitting coach of the St. Louis Cardinals and move on. Instead, he’s being buddy-buddy with the analysts like the good old days. There’s a simple reason for this: he wants to get back in the good graces of baseball and possibly end up in the Baseball Hall of Fame. It should also be questioned whether McGwire is even qualified to be a hitting coach. He was known as a home run hitter with a less than mediocre average. His home run strength came from PEDs. It doesn’t appear to be a good fit.

McGwire's brother has even come out and said that Big Mac used PEDs to get bigger according to SI.com.  This would contradict his previous explanation to heal from injury why he cheated the game.

McGwire can chum it up with ESPN as much as he wants, but we know the real Mark McGwire and he’s not that guy on ESPN.

ESPN's conflict of interest

The worldwide leader in sports, ESPN, was not the network that aired Mark McGwire’s first interview. When Mark McGwire came clean (or as clean as he was willing to go) on television, he did so on the MLB Network with Bob Costas.

When Alex Rodriguez admitted to cheating, he was interviewed on ESPN by Peter Gammons. The interview and Gammons were mostly panned by critics since Gammons did not ask probing questions or follow up when necessary.

McGwire and his PR firm, the same firm that represents the reprehensible Bowl Championship Series, learned from A-Rod’s mistakes in admitting PED use. McGwire conducted a full court press with interviews to the AP, multiple newspapers, ESPN (via phone) and concluding with the television interview.

ESPN missed the boat on the steroid era. Their reporters never did any investigative reporting as to how these athletes were achieving these herculean results. Viewers were told countless times that these athletes are not cheating, rather it was an improved nutrition and workout program. The pundits always went back to the line of PEDs “don’t help you hit a fastball.”

No one ever doubted that. If I were to inject beef roids, I wouldn’t suddenly be able to launch moon shots in Yankee Stadium. If you believe that, I might need to confiscate your driver’s license. Where PEDs help baseball players is turning warning track power into home run power. Apparently, Mark McGwire didn’t get that memo by claiming he would have been able too hit all those home runs without the PEDs.

Did ESPN miss the story on purpose? It’s possible. After all, they are both a news gathering organization and partners with many sports when they produce and televise various events. Is it possible to do both and maintain one’s integrity?

It’s doubtful. ESPN’s fortunes were tied to the popularity of baseball. Why put a dark cloud on the sport by reporting that what the public was seeing was a sham? It would ultimately hurt ESPN financially if it was reported that were roids were rampant. Like the ad went, “chicks dig the long ball.” Apparently, everyone dug the long ball and there was no need to find out what caused the long ball.