Will Pete Rose ever be inducted into the Hall of Fame? * POLL *

llafoe

Could you imagine the onslaught of Pete Rose cards if he was ever inducted into the Hall of Fame. They're be a Pete Rose something card in every pack!

grote15

Not in his lifetime at least. That window has closed..

orioles93

He will eventually get in with time.

It is of my opinion that everyone should PLAY like Pete Rose. He played every minute of the game hard with a passion for the game, and always hustled. I can't stand players who don't always run hard, no matter the play.

TNP777

I'm far from a Pete Rose fan - couldn't stand him when I was a yute in the '70s, and think even less of him now. Having said that, based on his accomplishments as a player he absolutely belongs in the Hall right now. His despicable actions as a manager should not reflect on what he did as a player.

PowderedH2O

I predict that he will be reinstated within a few months after his death. And he will be elected to the HOF with a 80% vote on the first ballot that he is eligible (assuming that he is still eligible to be voted upon). Otherwise he goes in via Vets Committee.

70ToppsFanatic

Joe Jackson has been deceased for decades and kept out of the HOF for far LESS provable evidence.

Without a doubt Rose is one if the all-time greats, but IMO his gambling activity is likely to keep him out of the HOF forever.

dtkk49a

Never while he is alive and he will probably never get in. He will be the new era's Shoeless Joe.

Ironmanfan

ain't happening ..dead or alive

IMF

aconte

I'd like to hope so as he deserves to be in more than the many of those are ready in.

aconte

RookieWax

The way he has been treated, it is as if he was betting against his own team - something I agree should ban a guy for life. But from all reports I have heard, he only bet ON his team. I don't see how that offense deserves a lifetime ban.

ahkmedbinladen

Yes...after he dies.

raykasa

betting against your team or betting on your team is the same thing....think about it. if Pete had 20k riding on a Red's win, he pull all stops to win that game that normally a manager would not do= starting players that are in need of a rest, puting in a starter later in the game, putting in a closer too early, etc. It's still not on the up and up...just saying...

NVbaseball

Whether he does or not does not change what he did when he was on the field

Unlike someone like Jeff Bagwell everyone knows his failure to be in the Hall-of-Fame has nothing to do with his talent or success

To me it really doesn't matter, but I would bet against it

NVbaseball

Other than suspicion by guys on the internet, there is so far no real evidence Bagwell used steroids, despite drug testing, Congressional hearings and a two year investigation. So failure to vote for him would be based on his perceived inabilities on the field. Same with Tim Raines or Dwight Evans or Scott Brosius. For Pete Rose his failure to make the Hall-of-Fame is far different. So unlike Bagwell or Raines it doesn't mean much to me

Griffins

<< <i>Joe Jackson has been deceased for decades and kept out of the HOF for far LESS provable evidence.

Without a doubt Rose is one if the all-time greats, but IMO his gambling activity is likely to keep him out of the HOF forever. >>



Spot on. Not a prayer, dead or alive.

70ToppsFanatic

<< <i>The way he has been treated, it is as if he was betting against his own team - something I agree should ban a guy for life. But from all reports I have heard, he only bet ON his team. I don't see how that offense deserves a lifetime ban. >>



And Joe Jackson hit better than .340 in the WS and was still accused of trying to throw it.

Whether he bet only on his own team is immaterial. His gambling behaviors would be effectively providing inside information in a way that undermines the integrity
of the game. That's why IMO Rose can never be allowed in. If baseball is serious about keeping its integrity then there can never be an avenue available whereby
someone who violates the rules has a way back.

Probstein123

not getting in ever...

WeekendHacker

It's really up to the Hall to determine if Rose (or Jackson for that matter) are Hall eligible. The Hall is a separate entity from MLB. The Hall has a policy that prevents players on the MLB banned list from being enshrined into their museum. Secondly he is no longer on the BBWAA HOF ballot - he would have to be elected by the veterans committee if (huge IF) the Hall ever lifted the ineligible for HOF if banned from MLB policy. I don't think he will ever have a plaque in the HOF - because I don't think MLB will ever lift his name of the banned list and the Hall will never lift their MLB banned HOF eligibility policy.

1980scollector

<< <i>It's really up to the Hall to determine if Rose (or Jackson for that matter) are Hall eligible. The Hall is a separate entity from MLB. The Hall has a policy that prevents players on the MLB banned list from being enshrined into their museum. Secondly he is no longer on the BBWAA HOF ballot - he would have to be elected by the veterans committee if (huge IF) the Hall ever lifted the ineligible for HOF if banned from MLB policy. I don't think he will ever have a plaque in the HOF - because I don't think MLB will ever lift his name of the banned list and the Hall will never lift their MLB banned HOF eligibility policy. >>



A year after he dies, he will be inducted.

PSASAP

How can the all-time leader in hits be denied a place in the hall? Would a rich guys hall of fame be complete without Bill Gates or Warren Buffett?

Griffins

<< <i>How can the all-time leader in hits be denied a place in the hall? Would a rich guys hall of fame be complete without Bill Gates or Warren Buffett? >>



What about Bernie Madoff?

royalbrett

Maybe around the year 2047.

EchoCanyon

never

53BKid

Pete Rose turned himself into major league baseball.

He had so much gambling debts, even after selling off his trophies and rings that his life was being threatened.

So he agreed to a "Lifetime Ban" in exchange for MLB's protection.

No, Pete Rose should not be allowed into the Hall of Fame unless he buys a ticket.

He deserves enshrinement in my opinion, but only after he's gone.

PSASAP

<< <i>What about Bernie Madoff? >>



He ain't so rich anymore, but that was a good retort.

NVbaseball

<< <i> There are prominent players who used that didn't trigger testing positive or come under Congressional hearings or pop up on an investigation. Ever hear of ARod, McGwire, Bonds, Clemens, etc. >>



Having heard of those four players, Rodriguez peed hot, McGwire and Clemens were named in the investigation and didn't come across as innocent in front of Congress; Bonds had an entire book devoted to what he did



<< <i> I would literally bet my entire net worth if I could that he did. >>



How would the bet be settled?

NVbaseball

<< <i> We all know that there were plenty of users that escaped being caught, and will probably never be exposed. >>



We also know some of them will be in the Hall-of-Fame

Yankees001

NEVER

jay0791

I think Rose never gets in. But u never know. Times change. A more liberal crowd could run baseball and change the rules.

If he does eventually get in...if.....then I hope they do it in his lifetime. It's a crime that Santo went before his election.

I hope Bags get in also. Speculation is just that....proof is another thing.

WeekendHacker

That famous line from the movie "A Few Good Men" from Tom Cruise comes to mind............................................It doesn't matter what I know; it only matters what I can prove!"

Then later in that same flick - not sure if this applies better to the fans or the front offices of MLB - when good ole Jack Nickelson blurts out..............."You can't handle the truth!"

ndleo

Once Bonds get in, and he will get in, there will be a movement to get Rose in. Time heals all wounds and Rose as a player deserves to get in.

JoeBanzai

Will not get in, should not get in.

Joe

cincyredlegs

Here is my take. I grew up with Pete Rose as my hero. I idolized everything about him.....his dedication, his hustle, his will to win. I think he is the greatest player in the history of the game....again, just my opinion. For the longest time, I was pissed with the ban and thought he should be in because of his stats and what he did for the game.

Now, I would never in a million years believe that Pete ever bet on the Reds to lose. To win, yes but not to lose. So some people would say, whats the big deal with that. There are two issues:

1) Point spread. Could this have caused him to alter the way he managed? Maybe.
2.) More importantly.......he was dealing with bookies and probably organized crime. Let's say he goes on a losing streak and he's down $1M. Fat Tony pays Pete a visit and says, either you throw the next 3 games or we are going to break your legs and kill your family. What is Pete going to do????

The point is, Pete knew there was one golden rule. Don't bet on baseball and he dis-regarded it. He needed to be made an example of. You cannot give organized crime a chance to get you behind the eight ball because it will ruin the game. Non-negotiable.

He should never be allowed in the Hall for this reason. If they would do it to the "Hit King", they will ban anyone.

Do I think he would be a great ambassador for MLB? Absolutly and that the shame of it.

Mark

mexpo75

I really hope that he will. but I doubt it will happen. He needed to come clean early on. I think had he done that he would have been allowed in. Real Shame.

53BKid

Ah, but he's making up for lost time!

I'm sorry I bet on baseball!

Albertdidit

Thats a great ball. Always looked up to him growing up as far as always giving it all out on the field.

CocoaBeachDodgers

IMO, He was one of the greatest players ever to play the game, but he broke a cardinal rule (or in this case a red's rule) so NO, he should never be allowed in the Hall.

As for Bagwell, I beleive he will make it this year for a couple of reasons.

#1) As many of you pointed out, there is no real proof he used, but there is no real proof Bonds, Clemens & McGwire used either. So it comes down to what the voters beleive, and because of past events, Bagwell appears less guilty in the voters eyes. How I back that up is just look at HOF voting.
Bagwell's first year of eligibility, 2011, he received 242 votes (41.7%) compared to McGwire's first year, 2010, when he received 128 (23.7%).
In McGwire" next two years, he has gone down on total votes each year. But in Bagwell's second year, he went up & received 321 votes (56%). Also, comparing Bagwell's total votes to some other HOFers, there are many that did not get near that many votes their first year of eligibility.
Just to name a few: Blyleven 83 votes (17.5%) / Gossage 166 votes (33.3%) / Sutter 109 votes (23.9%) / Rice 137 votes (29.8%)
So I still think Bagwell will get in, and what better year than this coming year. It would be great for the city of Houston if both Bagwell and Biggio went in the same year!!

alnavman

right after Shoeless Joe goes in.......

alnavman

just remembered something from football....didn't some of the players years ago also get caught gambling and if I remember correctly one of them is in the hof....

al.

Griffins

Didn't Paul Hornung get suspended for a year for gambling? Isn't he in the HOF?

Different sport though, obviously. Baseball has always had a strict standard on gambling.

Goodsport40

It is sad that one of my top 5 favorite players will never get in the Hall. However he truly brought all of this on himself.

This will never change the fact that he played the game the right way.

Actions have consequences.

Robert

fiveniner

Shoe has to get in first then I agree Pete has to go in.Shoe was illiterate and pushed into it.Pete paid his price.Others did it but did not get caught.

Joe and Pete get my vote.!!!!