Nobody entering MLB HOF, fine by me.

keets

Apparently anyone who wants to be considered solely because of their on-field accomplishments will need to re-consider that thinking. They should probably live in a bubble or on an island. Somewhere in the future there will be a balance achieved between personal accomplishment and moral behavior, but it seems clear that the players aren't there yet and the voters aren't either.

Fans, they seem to be a different animal altogether. They need athlete heroes for some reason and will accept a lot.

Al H.

DrBuster

Corona dropped the votes. Only 1 more year for Bonds/Clemens...not looking good, which is a shame to me.

doubledragon

Nobody is ever going to get into the baseball hall of fame again. They should just close the place down, and turn it into a Popeyes chicken and biscuit.

ernie11

...and wait till next year's class, of course A-Rod will get in......not.

BLUEJAYWAY

I will survive.

jay0791

Is there a chicken HOF ??

1948_Swell_Robinson

I will defer from getting into the debate of Curt Schilling's tweets being the reason he is not in the Hall of Fame. Several writers have gone on record to state that Schilling's views and tweets are the reason they are not voting for him and are citing the "character" criteria, which is indeed an actual criteria for the Hall of Fame. Whether they are right or wrong, I care not to discuss.

The "character" criteria has been used in several cases to detract from a players' Hall of Fame merit. However,
I find it odd that "character" is almost never used to BOLSTER a player's Hall of Fame merit. If it is used to subtract, then why not to add? Why not add it to Dale Murphy's resume and use it as the last hurdle to put a borderline HOF player into the Hall of Fame?

bobbybakeriv

Cooperstown is a joke.

craig44

the character clause is ridiculous. what about adrian anson and tris speaker? I also don't think Ruth or Mantle were shimmering beacons of high character.

keets

the "character" criteria, which is indeed an actual criteria for the Hall of Fame. Whether they are right or wrong, I care not to discuss.

I think that the criteria for a player's inclusion in the Baseball Hall of Fame should be based on his performance in Baseball. to that degree, keeping someone out for substance abuse(PED's) seems legitimate to me. keeping someone out because you disagree with their politics should not be a disclaimer. I think it is because MLB sees it as representing MLB poorly, but a private citizen should be able to act as they choose after "the game" is no longer their livelihood.

ex-players can be good or bad ambassadors for MLB, but unless they have some contractual agreement.....................oh well. it shouldn't surprise us, and it doesn't surprise me. the majority of the voters are self-righteous jack-wads, many of them stuck 1-2 generations in the past. it explains why they can't unanimously elect members to the HOF.

if you feel sad for anyone it should be the citizens who live in and around Cooperstown, New York. they just lost the biggest financial day in the calendar year.

SanctionII

This issue has been the topic of discussion on sports talk radio this morning.

Interesting discussion, including the idea that the "character" selection criteria should be applied retroactively to expel from the hall of fame Ty Cobb and others selected in the distant past because they have off the field flaws (including racism, substance abuse, domestic violence, etc.).

If the character selection criteria is so important then by all means apply it retroactively to expel past inductees because the non baseball portion of their lives offend today's sensibilities.

Further use the character selection criteria to exclude Barry Bonds and other steroid users, plus use it to expel Bud Selig. Some say Bonds cheated and Bud Selig knowingly allowed the steroid era to take place.

The presence of the character selection criteria and the arbitrary way it is applied is a small example of a society wide trend that is known as "cancel culture".

Whether cancel culture is a good thing or a bad thing is open to debate, but there is no doubt it is present and trending.

One thing about the baseball HOF selection process that I scratch my head about is why it is the baseball writers alone have been given the power to select those who are get into the HOF.

Why are not others connected to baseball part of the group that selects who gets in?

Justacommeman

Next year you have Schilling, Bonds and Clemens on their final 10th year ballot. Then you have ARod and Ortiz on their first year of eligibility. What an over lap

mark

keets

This issue has been the topic of discussion on sports talk radio this morning.

Kevin, I understand that there are changing standards over time for different eras, it just isn't a wise thing to stand on the slippery slope of revisionist history and your "cancel culture" take on things. it is complex issue that calls for careful reflection. if I leave American Society out of it and focus on MLB and the current HOF, it makes no sense to apply current social norms to past social behavior. we can examine it and try to learn from it moving in the future, we just can't correct it.

racism and other forms of bigotry were common in the past and probably came to the minds of many in the past several days with the passing of Hank Aaron. to think TODAY that a black man could receive death threats because he's gonna break the home run record is absurd(to me at least) but when it happened to Hammerin' Hank it was accepted. everybody knows that Babe Ruth was a carousing, drunk womanizer, it was part of his charm!!! Ty Cobb was just one mean spirited SOB.

so we move on and learn from that if we can. inclusion in a Sport Hall of Fame should probably be based on performance within that Sport and personal conduct while still playing, on and off the field. JMHO, of course.

doubledragon

Curt Schilling is fed up with it all, on his Facebook page he wrote about next year's ballot, "I want to reiterate this final point, I will not participate in the final year of voting. I am requesting to be removed from the ballot."

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.sportingnews.com/us/amp/mlb/news/curt-schilling-ballot-missing-2021-hall-of-fame-induction/5dgoeatqo6901vo14bjx6ui3g

keets

yeah, but if he gets voted in would he attend and speak?? would they want him to speak?? that may be his chance to let everyone know how he really feels.

doubledragon

The BBWAA is urging the Baseball Hall of Fame to keep Curt Schilling on next year's ballot.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.espn.com/mlb/story/_/id/30788305/bbwaa-urges-baseball-hall-fame-board-keep-curt-schilling-2022-ballot?platform=amp

DeutscherGeist

Schilling will just get on the Eras Committees some day. No problem.

I wonder if Schilling voluntarily excluding himself from next year's vote is akin to cutting off your nose to spite your face.

SanctionII

Keets.

I agree with you. Retroactively removing players from the HOF and other efforts to cancel things erases history.

History, including history evidencing the worst of human nature has significant value.

One can learn from history and hopefully not repeat the bad parts of it today and in the future.

I think entry to the HOF should be determined upon one's performance in and overall participation in baseball. If someone who gets into the HOF is a horrible person outside of baseball, that should not be hidden from view. Let the public see their heroes, warts and all.

AFLfan

If you recall, Harry Carson asked the Pro Football HOF to remove his name from the ballot because in his mind, he had been overlooked for too long. However all was forgotten when he was selected in 2006.

I think that the Football and Baseball HOFs have recently been showing the flaws in their process. Honestly, if you want unbiased judgement made about a player's career, you should probably not ask individuals who know that person to make those calls. The writers cover these guys as players and for good or bad, build opinions of them along the way that often times affect the way they vote.

There has to be a way to assemble voting committees for both sports that consist of unbiased historians and/or statisticians - not former teammates, opponents and sportswriters. The fewer personal relationships those individuals have with ballot members, the better. Maybe begin by having each team make it's Director of Scouting available to be part of the voting committee.

orioles93

Not voting for Schilling because you disagree with his political views and personal opinions is ridiculous. Is he kind of a nut job and out there, yeah. But he was a hall of famer as a player and his politics shouldnt be a factor here. This is why the hall has become a joke. Not because it is to big, or undeserving players are in. It's because there are to many deserving players getting overlooked year in and year out and then all of a sudden are voted in. Like something changed in 5 years of voting, that the player is retired, that they are now deserving.

It's obvious there are problems with the voters when Adam Dunn, JJ Putz, Brad Penny, Raul Ibanez, Cliff Lee, and Eric Chavez all get atleast 1 vote, but more deserving guys like Jones, Kent, Schilling, Bonds, Clemens, Rolen, Helton ,Sheffield, etc are being left off. It's getting to the point where it's obvious that the voters who dont make their ballots public are just trying to make a point and thats wrong. Every voter should have to make their ballot public. Tom Verducci did a special on MLB Network where he explains his ballot and thinking. It was great. This kind of transparency is what is needed.

Darin

Turn it into a teacher's HOF or some other occupation that is actually important.

BillJones

I will defer from getting into the debate of Curt Schilling's tweets being the reason he is not in the Hall of Fame. Several writers have gone on record to state that Schilling's views and tweets are the reason they are not voting for him and are citing the "character" criteria, which is indeed an actual criteria for the Hall of Fame. Whether they are right or wrong, I care not to discuss.

The issue sounds like more of an issue of politics than character. If you want to talk about gambling on games and taking performance enhancing drugs, that's character. If you talk about political views, that isn't unless you are a Nazi.

Brick

Whatever happened to "I don't agree with what you say, but I will fight to the death for your right to say it."?

BLUEJAYWAY

If it comes to pass in regard to Clemens,Bonds, that they get in via the VC, the point will have been made by the writers. They can get in, but not with our help. Almost seems like a side door entrance to get in via the VC anyway.

keets

that's one step away from Pete Rose territory. that would be something, the Hit King and the HR king not being in the MLB HOF.

DeutscherGeist

@BillJones said:

I will defer from getting into the debate of Curt Schilling's tweets being the reason he is not in the Hall of Fame. Several writers have gone on record to state that Schilling's views and tweets are the reason they are not voting for him and are citing the "character" criteria, which is indeed an actual criteria for the Hall of Fame. Whether they are right or wrong, I care not to discuss.

The issue sounds like more of an issue of politics than character. If you want to talk about gambling on games and taking performance enhancing drugs, that's character. If you talk about political views, that isn't unless you are a Nazi.

BillJames,

Great point here. Having a different political view is not necessarily a character issue or within that realm unless it is something really egregious like you mentioned. If Schilling did indeed support the insurrection at the Capitol, a point can be made about his character, but I know that will open up a lot of debate too.

bobbybakeriv

@keets said:
that's one step away from Pete Rose territory. that would be something, the Hit King and the HR king not being in the MLB HOF.

And the Cy Young king. I've heard that Clemens never tested positive while playing. Is this actually true? I believe Petitte testified that Clemens told him he was doing it but Clemens thought Andy "misremembered"

I acknowledge that Bonds' head size increasing is telling (i.e., HGH). Still, to me, Bonds should be in and perhaps if he hadn't been such a dick to the all-powerful writers he might be. I guarantee you that there are plenty of players in the Hall who did at least as much or even worse.

bronco2078

the writers are not powerful over anything but this. Baseball writer isn't even an actual job anymore

daltex

I think it is time to retire the various veterans committees. After over 80 years, there has been plenty of time to consider everyone who retired before 1934. Everyone else has had a chance to get in by the Writers. We can agree or disagree with their choices, but the fact of the matter is that the HoF has passed on Lou Whitaker and Barry Zito and they really don't need innumerable second chances. There should be a committee that meets every ten years or so to evaluate people whose primary contribution was not on the field rather than meeting every year to sift through the leftovers who were found unworthy.

craig44

@bobbybakeriv said:

@keets said:
that's one step away from Pete Rose territory. that would be something, the Hit King and the HR king not being in the MLB HOF.

And the Cy Young king. I've heard that Clemens never tested positive while playing. Is this actually true? I believe Petitte testified that Clemens told him he was doing it but Clemens thought Andy "misremembered"

I acknowledge that Bonds' head size increasing is telling (i.e., HGH). Still, to me, Bonds should be in and perhaps if he hadn't been such a dick to the all-powerful writers he might be. I guarantee you that there are plenty of players in the Hall who did at least as much or even worse.

you are correct. no failed test for Clemens. There was also no evidence against him. his case should have been thrown out. he had one disgruntled former employee who tried to bring him down. it is a shame Clemens gets lumped in with PED users. it really boils down to a lie, when told enough, becomes the truth.