Chris Russo Dogs Crow-Armstrong Over Ruth Comments

Pete Crow-Armstrong went on a podcast last week and said with a laugh that he likes the theory that Babe Ruth never existed. Baseball’s internet treated it like a confession, because that’s the society we live in now. It went viral, and of course it lit up the PC-Hate keyboard warriors.

“This is gonna be crazy,” the Cubs center fielder told Kristin Cavallari on the explicit version of her show Let’s Be Honest. “Ruth never existed is one that I like.”

The conversation was clearly playful, and PCA’s deadpan delivery made it more believable, but when questioned, he did not deny it. He picked up the theory from Tayler Saucedo, a Mariners pitcher at the time, who floated it on a podcast in 2024 because he had barely seen any video of Ruth playing. Saucedo said this was a discussion in the Mariners bullpen and that they also decided that Ted Williams‘ legendary 502-foot, red seat home run never happened either. What about Ruth’s infamous called shot?

Ed note: The called shot is a product of mythology.

The NL MVP candidate took it a step further when he said that the legendary Yankee put up his numbers against pitchers who were essentially throwing to him underhand. PCA also compared Ruth’s exploits to the conspiracy theory centered around the NASA moon landings. Ruth’s esteemed career was well-documented, however, even without the heavy presence of video that we have today. It seems as if Crow-Armstrong was questioning Ruth’s prowess rather than his existence, but that’s just my interpretation. You’re entitled to yours.

Pete Crow-Armstrong thinks it’s possible that Babe Ruth never existed pic.twitter.com/Zo8uehc3TM

— Talkin' Baseball (@TalkinBaseball_) August 3, 2026

On Wednesday, Chris “Mad Dog” Russo talked about the comments on the ESPN show First Take. He didn’t react very kindly to the theory, or to Crow-Armstrong perpetuating it. Russo labeled the take “derogatory” and said in his outrage that “it’s driving me nuts.”

“Hey Pete, you’re talking to me now about Ruth!” Russo said as he ran through Ruth’s historical numbers. “Nobody hit home runs like Babe Ruth. Say what you want about Shohei Ohtani, we understand that he’s a unicorn. Babe Ruth [was] so good it’s mindboggling. Did you know… that the Babe hit 27 home runs over 500 feet? Barry Bonds? Never. Not one. Ruth owned baseball; nobody hit home runs like Ruth! He out-homered leagues! To sit there and say they were pitching underhand, well why didn’t anybody else hit the home runs hitting underhand?

“Outside of Lou Gehrig, nobody hit home runs! It drives me crazy, especially in baseball, it drives me crazy when I hear today’s athletes and media guys who are 30 years old, who disparage the old-time guys.”

Russo is one of baseball’s more colorful analysts, and he has a charmless way of rapidly self-escalating when he goes on a rant. He certainly pulls no punches, especially when it comes to baseball history.

“Are you crazy?” Russo continued. “He would have been a Hall of Famer as a pitcher, forget as a hitter. There’s only one Babe Ruth. And when you start to knock Ruth…pay attention, do your homework. That was a disgrace what he said this week.”

The written history of Ruth’s accomplishments is voluminous and indisputable. You can find box scores to almost every game he played at Baseball-Reference. Plenty of video still exists, too. The question over Ruth’s greatness compared to today’s players is one that has been debated for years. Adam Ottavino took some shrapnel a few years ago for saying he could strike Ruth out.

Russo later said he did not like how people think that players from Ruth’s era are not nearly as good as players today.

“There’s only one Babe Ruth,” Russo said. “He’d hit anywhere, anyplace, anytime. He’s that good.”

Stephen A. Smith added that players like Crow-Armstrong are nothing more than children described as grownups. Then again, perhaps PCA caught John Goodman’s performance as Ruth in The Babe. That’d make a conspiracy theorist out of anybody. Smith did acknowledge, however, that baseball was segregated prior to Jackie Robinson, which may have inflated some of the Bambino’s records.

In Crow-Armstrong’s defense, he wasn’t dismissing Ruth’s numbers. He was basically saying Ruth’s numbers are so incredible that it’s hard to imagine they were real. Which is true, though we know they are. We watched Sammy Sosa and Mark McGwire do unfathomable things in 1998. Aaron Jones and Cal Raleigh are the more recent members of the 60-homer club. Henry Aaron held the home run record before Bonds bested him. Some of you may remember the battle between Roger Maris and Mickey Mantle in 1961.

It’s also fair to wonder how Ruth would have done against pitchers like Mason Miller or Jacob Misiorowski, but it’s all irrelevant. You can’t compare apples to watermelons.

If anything, PCA probably gave baseball writers something else to think about when they cast their MVP votes. It’s safe to assume Russo, if he has a vote, won’t name Crow-Armstrong. It’s a great story, however, and I don’t think the Chicago center fielder was as disrespectful as Russo thinks he is. Then again, PCA might want to walk some of that back.