Since Andy Pettitte announced Saturday night that he did in fact use HGH, Fernando Vina and Brian Roberts have both admitted to using HGH or steroids, while Roger Clemens has issued a statement saying he never did either. Well, there are a few points to mention here.

I know people will call me a hypocrite, but I have a much harder time believing Vina's admission than I do Pettitte's. When Andy Pettitte said he took HGH to speed his recovery in order to help the team, the admission actually coincided with what Brian McNamee stated in the Mitchell Report. Vina, on the other hand, said to Bob Ley on ESPN Monday, that he took HGH in 2003, however he never took steroids. He went on to say, that like Pettitte, he took HGH because he was injured and wanted to get back to help his team.

Well, one of the reasons why I have a harder time believing Vina is that Kirk Radomski has checks from Vina in the report from 2003 and 2005 for HGH and steroids, and went on to say that he worked with him from 2000-2005. So unlike Pettitte, Vina's story does not coincide with what is in the report.  

Secondly, if you actually watched the interview on ESPN, you could see the unease about Vina. It looked and sounded as if he heard what Pettitte had said, and thought to himself, "yeah, that sounds like a pretty good excuse. People will be more likely to forgive me if I say I took HGH so I could help my team...alright, let's go with that." Unfortunately for Vina's sake, that excuse was already used, and again, there was evidence to support that previous claim. Vina instead looked like he was trying to sneak through the back door, and it really didn't work.

Now as for Brian Roberts, his apology/admission has been the most sincere yet. Sure you could question if you believe he did steroids only once, just like you could with Pettitte saying he took HGH only twice, but like Pettitte, it at least corresponded with what was said about him in the report. Furthermore, he said he has no ill feelings towards Larry Bigbie for telling the Mitchell investigators about him. Roberts told the Baltimore Sun, "I don't resent Larry, I'm not mad at Larry. It boils down to me, not Larry. I have no problems there."

Roberts later said, "To not be able to look someone in the eye, to avoid phone calls and to deal with it that way, it's just not the right thing to do. I can't live my life that way. I've never been able to live it that way, and I never will. I've always been an honest person and I haven't been able to say things. I'm tired of it. That's what essentially has led me to really need to do this."

Does that sound like someone who's lying?

OK, time to move on to Clemens. Oh boy, where do we begin? I guess for Christmas someone should give him a shovel because he keeps on digging himself a deeper and deeper hole. And if you're really in the giving mood, you can engrave it, "Mr. Splittee." Seriously, has this guy not learned anything?

Just because he issues a very strong statement denying his use of either steroids or HGH does not mean he will be able to intimidate the media and the public like he did to batters for much of his career. As I have said before, there is just too much evidence against him to give Clemens the benefit of the doubt here, just like there's too much against Bonds.

And speaking of Bonds, many people are saying that these situations are the same, and Clemens should be ridiculed just like Bonds has been. Well, you know what, if he continues making statements like these, then I couldn't agree more.

I will say this though. While many people had their doubts about Clemens, there certainly wasn't the widespread speculation that he was on something like there was for Bonds, and the reason for that is because while Clemens' numbers were good, and got really good when he went to the Astros, he wasn't doing anything people had never done before in the history of the game, unlike Bonds. Plus, it's much easier for the common fan to see a difference in a hitter's stats than it is a pitcher's, especially when it's 73 home runs. Please don't get me wrong, I'm not making any excuses for Clemens, I'm merely trying to point out why people may not have suspected him using performance enhancers like they did with Bonds.

Dontrelle Willis and Curtis Granderson on the Tigers

On to a much brighter note, I'm very surprised that no one, to my knowledge, has brought up the fact that the Detroit Tigers now have two of the brightest, most articulate young stars in the game in Dontrelle Willis and Curtis Granderson, and both happen to be African-American. There's been so much written about the lack of African-American players in Major League Baseball, and now, a city like Detroit, which has dealt with its fair share of rough times, has two of the best and brightest. Honestly, I think it's awesome, and great for that city. Congratulations Detroit, you'll enjoy having both of them.

College Coaches in the Pros

After Bobby Petrino recently resigned from the Atlanta Falcons and signed with Arkansas, it got me thinking, why does any NFL or NBA team look to the college ranks for a coach, and why would any big-time college coach want to leave for the pros? Who was the last big-time coach in either sport to make the jump and have great success in the pros? In football, the last one that I could think of was Jimmy Johnson. Sure, Nick Saban had pretty good success with the Dolphins, and could have been a very good coach, but decided to return to the college game. In basketball it was Larry Brown, but he had experience in the pros before going back to Kansas. So while teams and coaches get filled with ideas, this is just another one of those misperceptions in sports, it doesn't work!