Contrarian points of view can be cool. Except when they're wrong

I received an unsolicited e-mail the other day from TSE Sports and Entertainment proclaiming that not only will animosity towards Barry Bonds dissipate over time but, get this, he will actually be 'celebrated' by future marketers.

The TSE folks who '....work to lock (yes, lock) athlete and celebrity talent for endorsement and appearances,' must be injecting and applying some banned substances themselves if they actually believe Bonds' image can be resuscitated.

TSE President Robert Tuchman predicts: 'As we move further away from his playing career and the issues at hand he (Bonds) will find himself with a wealth of opportunities to change his image.' Yeah, right.

There is no way any sane marketer would touch 'Barroid' now or in the future. The guy is pure poison and has become the poster child for everything that's gone wrong in professional sports: drug use, selfish play and boorish behavior, to name just a few.

Bonds is a bad man. Why would any future marketer want his or her brand associated with such a destructive personality?

If Tuchman believes that time heals all wounds and American consumers will one day want to purchase an item because Barry Bonds is shilling for the manufacturer, he's borderline delusional.

Nor does he know his sports marketing history. Before he proclaims Barroid's future marketability, Mr. Tuchman might want to check with Pete Rose and OJ Simpson. Unless I've missed something, quite a few years have passed since their transgressions and both remain totally untouchable from a marketing standpoint.