Quote:
Originally Posted by _Sir_Charles_
Personally, I'd love it if all the voters abstained this time. Maybe it'll finally send a signal to the HoF to change their freaking rules. Put in players based on stats alone. Nothing else involved in the decision. If you want to put some comment about morality on their plaque, so be it. But let the performance on the field be the final and only determining factor in induction. Yes, that also means put Rose in there too. Ineligible by MLB or not, the Hall of Fame is a joke without these truly FAMEous players. (yes, I know it's spelled wrong) :O)
Of course in a perfect world, they'd take the writers out of the equation altogether. Let players, managers, gm's and current HoF'ers do the voting.
|
As someone who beleive that Pete Rose is clearly not HOF worthy, and neither are Bonds nor Clemens, I like it the way it is.
But people are entitled to their own opinion, and if they want to vote the cheaters in, so be it.
And a HOF without Rose is not a joke. It's a lot more classy to be sure.