2013 MLB Hall of Fame Screechfest

Thanks, SoCal.

 

Can you expand on this? ... 'Cause I am curious.
What do you think this says about sports journalism as a profession?

 

It says that some of the most accomplished members of said profession, as measured by their careers, were willing to violate major tenets of said profession to make some statement about their own sense of moral superiority. And that sucks. Fish rots from the head and all that.

 

If I didn't know better, I'd call it collusion.

 

Random musings to a number of posts:

The PED backlash has always been a media induced frenzy, and not something the regular public got behind with anywhere near the level of disdain of the media. John Q might have been slightly perturbed about the steriod influence, but they never viewed it as a personal affront to the game. Not that it matters, since the public doesn't have a vote; but if they did, Bonds and Clemens would have cleared 75% with ease today.

Have never understood the whole 15 year premise. Either you're in or your not; and nothing over the passage of a decade is going to change your value or standing. Make it five years. At least that would give more of sense of urgency to the vote; more likely for someone to be very careful about who they leave off the ballot.

And what's the use of putting someone in after they're dead? Seems pretty silly to me. Should be a reward that people can enjoy while they're alive; not something a descendent who had nothing to do with the on filed accomplishments stands up and receives.

I do see where today will invoke change, if for the only reason being PR and money. The HOF ceremony is a marketing device for baseball, and an empty podium that leads to emptier coffers is not something the national pastime will be willing to accept.

 

How does Piazza not get in? That's a no-brainer right there.

 

I'm glad to see the voters took a stand. If Pete Rose is permanently ineligible, so should the PED guys. They damaged the game far more than Rose ever did.

That said, I think quite a few of the players on this year's ballot will eventually get enshrined, so to me the delay is not a big deal. Not like they are coming out of retirement anyway.

Mixed feelings on Bagwell and Biggio.

If you ever vote Bonds in, how can you not vote in McGwire? Same criteria, it seems.

Was sad to see Dale Murphy didn't make it. Didn't expect him to, nor would I have voted for him given my strict standards on ANY HOF nominee. But he was a good guy on some decent teams in the pre-steroid era.

 

Which PED guys? The ones who failed drug tests or the ones everyone "knows" cheated?

 

What damage was done to the game by PED use?

 

JC, I think it can be argued it helped imbalance the game towards hitting, and it also gave the players who were already the best even more of an advantage, but otherwise, Mark's statement is nonsense.

 

It can also be argued it made the game more popular than it has ever been.

 

A-QB, I'm actually pleasantly surprised that you and I agree on this one. Situations like this year's Hall of Fame vote are exactly why it drives me nuts when people toss around steroid accusations too casually.

Mark, you really have no idea what you are talking about. Do you really think the game had no steroid users when Murphy played?

More importantly, you think McGwire was anywhere close to the player Bonds was? Of course voters can put Bonds in but not McGwire. There is a massive difference between the two.

All of that pales in your foolish comparison of PED use to what Rose did. No, PED use does not damage the game nearly as much as a participant betting on the games. Fans need to believe that everybody is trying to win. When a manager bets on his team some days and not others, or bet more on certain days, that calls into question the integrity of his decisions.

Say what you will about Bonds or Clemens. Was there ever any question about their desire to win every time they stepped on the field?