Skip to main content

I don't want to debate the merits of Jim Rice and Bert Blyleven making the Hall of Fame. But given it took them so many years to get in there was reasonable doubt by many voters on their careers as Hall of Fame careers. The questions ...

Are more marginal Hall of Fame players getting into the Hall because writers aren't voting for certain players like McGwire and Palmeiro and feel they need to vote for someone?

Does a player need to be on the ballot for fifteen years. He's not getting better while retired. I can see a player being overlooked in a big year of studs becoming eligible. But shouldn't it be more like five years? It would maintain an eliteness to the Hall.

** The dream is free. Work ethic sold separately. **

Original Post

Replies sorted oldest to newest

quote:
Originally posted by RJM:
Does a player need to be on the ballot for fifteen years. He's not getting better while retired. I can see a player being overlooked in a big year of studs becoming eligible. But shouldn't it be more like five years? It would maintain an eliteness to the Hall.


My thoughts exactly. To me, if you can't make it the first year of eligibility, then you're probably not hall of fame material to begin with.

As for cutting eligibility from 15 to 5 years, that makes a lot of sense. This way, if the HOF wants to induct a limited amount of players each year and there is an abundance of hall of fame talent in waiting in a given year, then I could see having the lesser players wait the extra year, two or five.

If nobody in a given year makes the cut, that's fine too. It would be better to do that than to just put somebody in the hall just for the sake of doing so but I can see the problems that would cause business around Cooperstown if there's no induction in a given year with the lost tourists that would've turned out for the event.
The Hall of Fame is aptly named. It is for famous players not role models and/or heroes although some are famous and role models and heroes all wrapped into one. But some aren't and there is no reason to exclude them from the Hall of the Famous. I've been there with my kids and as we walked through we discussed the players....the good, the bad and the ugly. Putting players in like Rose, Palmiero, Bonds to name a few would acknowledge the reality of life....our closet has skeletons, our lives are imperfect, we acknowledge our failures but we can celebrate our achievements at the same time. With an approach like this there is room for many in the Hall of Fame. It is more a celebration of baseball than than it is a seal of approval on humankind's behavior.

Add Reply

×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×