Ok, NOW does Pete Rose get in? - Operation Sports Forums

Hey everyone, just wanted to let you all know OS now has an official Discord that you can join right now. We’ve kicked around Discords for individual games in the past, but it felt like the right time to make it more of an official thing.

Steve and I have wanted to get this going for a bit because we obviously still hear from y’all who are unhappy with some stuff on the forums, plus when there are forum outages we still want to have a place for everyone to hang. My overarching goal for the longer term is to have both Discord and the forums ultimately work together. There are some logistical issues with the vBulletin forums that don’t allow things to sync right with Discord so there will be a little maneuvering as we try to get mods and forum members any proper roles/tags they need on the Discord, but we can work through that stuff easily enough as people join.

Our general goal is to give people more options to interact with OS community members, whether that’s Discord, the forums, this newsletter, or improved apps. If people want to stick more to the forums, that’s cool. If people want to stick more to the Discord, that’s also cool. In my perfect world, we do a lot of BSing and day-to-day chatting on the Discord about games and sports, and then more of the “in-depth” discussions or hefty things like long slider breakdowns or analysis of gameplay end up on the forums so that can act as a sort of “best of” area for anything OS community related. That said, you all will ultimately shape how the ecosystem shakes out, I just want to give you spaces you like so you can have a good time with other folks in the community.

The same general rules will apply on the Discord as they do on the forums, and we’ve brought most of the forum categories to the Discord as well so there should not be too much confusion as you navigate around.

With the Operation Sports and Discord announcement now out there, it’s also worth mentioning our OS premium newsletter, which quietly launched a couple of weeks ago. Built off the Not Just Another Roster Update newsletter, it offers a mix of retrospectives, guides, interviews and deeper dives into the sports gaming world—covering both current and classic titles.

X

nyisles16

All Star

Join Date: Apr 2003

Posts: 8317
#61

12-15-2007, 12:37 PM

Re: Ok, NOW does Pete Rose get in?

the problem lies with this.. betting on baseball has been a big "no-no" - while steroids never really were an issue until recently.. betting is viewed as more agregious because basically you can personally influence the outcome of a game.. while taking performance enhancers is bad, it doesn't affect games as betting would have...

Pete will never in my lifetime get into the hall (imo)..
Comment
Skerik

Living in this tube

Join Date: Mar 2004

Posts: 5215
#62

12-15-2007, 12:45 PM

Re: Ok, NOW does Pete Rose get in?

This just in: Pete Rose has never been proven guilty of betting against the Reds. Not in the Dowd report, not in interviews he's given, never. So guess what - he was playing to win too, just like the steroid cheaters were and are.

So if Rose bets on the Reds to win and manages the team trying to win, that's worse than a player who cheats to put up numbers that make him worthy of HOF induction? That makes a lot of sense....

Helen: Everyone's special, Dash.
Dash: [muttering] Which is another way of saying no one is.
Comment
jmood88

Sean Payton: Retribution

Join Date: Jul 2003

Posts: 34639
#63

12-15-2007, 01:11 PM

Re: Ok, NOW does Pete Rose get in?

Originally posted by TheLetterZ

And jmood, that's completely irrelevant.

Why is it completely irrelevant? He didn't have his players throw games and he hasn't been shown to have tried to get his teams to lose so he would win a bet.

Originally posted by Blzer

Let me assure you that I am a huge proponent of size, and it greatly matters. Don't ever let anyone tell you otherwise.

If I went any bigger, it would not have properly fit with my equipment, so I had to optimize. I'm okay with it, but I also know what I'm missing with those five inches. :)
Comment
TheLetterZ

All Star

Join Date: Jul 2002

Posts: 6752
#64

12-15-2007, 01:17 PM

Re: Ok, NOW does Pete Rose get in?

Originally posted by Skerik

This just in: Pete Rose has never been proven guilty of betting against the Reds. Not in the Dowd report, not in interviews he's given, never. So guess what - he was playing to win too, just like the steroid cheaters were and are.

So if Rose bets on the Reds to win and manages the team trying to win, that's worse than a player who cheats to put up numbers that make him worthy of HOF induction? That makes a lot of sense....

So you and jmood are making the argument that his betting had absolutely no impact on the way he managed games, and that he managed the Reds exactly the same regardless of whether he had placed a bet on that particular game?
Comment
jmood88

Sean Payton: Retribution

Join Date: Jul 2003

Posts: 34639
#65

12-15-2007, 01:20 PM

Re: Ok, NOW does Pete Rose get in?

Originally posted by TheLetterZ

So you and jmood are making the argument that his betting had absolutely no impact on the way he managed games, and that he managed the Reds exactly the same regardless of whether he had placed a bet on that particular game?

If he never bet on them to lose then why would it matter?

Originally posted by Blzer

Let me assure you that I am a huge proponent of size, and it greatly matters. Don't ever let anyone tell you otherwise.

If I went any bigger, it would not have properly fit with my equipment, so I had to optimize. I'm okay with it, but I also know what I'm missing with those five inches. :)
Comment
TheLetterZ

All Star

Join Date: Jul 2002

Posts: 6752
#66

12-15-2007, 01:26 PM

Re: Ok, NOW does Pete Rose get in?

You don't think he'd try harder to win games in which he had bet on the Reds as opposed to games in which he didn't bet on them? I do.
Comment
jmood88

Sean Payton: Retribution

Join Date: Jul 2003

Posts: 34639
#67

12-15-2007, 01:32 PM

Re: Ok, NOW does Pete Rose get in?

Originally posted by TheLetterZ

You don't think he'd try harder to win games in which he had bet on the Reds as opposed to games in which he didn't bet on them? I do.

And how would it be bad for the sport if he tried harder to win?

Originally posted by Blzer

Let me assure you that I am a huge proponent of size, and it greatly matters. Don't ever let anyone tell you otherwise.

If I went any bigger, it would not have properly fit with my equipment, so I had to optimize. I'm okay with it, but I also know what I'm missing with those five inches. :)
Comment
Beantown

#DoYourJob

Join Date: Feb 2005

Posts: 31523
#68

12-15-2007, 01:33 PM

Re: Ok, NOW does Pete Rose get in?

Originally posted by TheLetterZ

You don't think he'd try harder to win games in which he had bet on the Reds as opposed to games in which he didn't bet on them? I do.

Sort of like players are trying harder to win by taking performance enhancing drugs?
Comment
TheLetterZ

All Star

Join Date: Jul 2002

Posts: 6752
#69

12-15-2007, 01:39 PM

Re: Ok, NOW does Pete Rose get in?

There are plenty of ways for managers to make short-sighted decisions to win a game at the expense of other games. Going to the bullpen early, starting a guy on short rest, playing someone who's tired or nursing an injury, pitching a starter in relief, micromanaging a lineup, etc. Likewise, there are a multitude of decisions that give you a better chance of winning a game a day or two down the road while hurting your chances of winning today's game. These are all things a manager controls directly. Rose can say that betting on a game had no bearing on his decision-making, but I know that if I was betting on games, I'd sure as hell be making those kinds of decisions, and that's all the doubt I need.
Comment
Blzer

Resident film pundit

Join Date: Mar 2004

Posts: 42520
#70

12-15-2007, 01:41 PM

Re: Ok, NOW does Pete Rose get in?

Originally posted by Longhorn

Sort of like players are trying harder to win by taking performance enhancing drugs?

No, it's not the same comparison. You would have to say players are trying harder to win because of performance-enhancing drugs... which shouldn't be the case.

Samsung PN60F8500 PDP / Anthem MRX 720 / Klipsch RC-62 II / Klipsch RF-82 II (x2) / Insignia NS-B2111 (x2) / SVS PC13-Ultra / SVS SB-2000 / Sony MDR-7506 Professional / Audio-Technica ATH-R70x / Sony PS3 & PS4 / DirecTV HR44-500 / DarbeeVision DVP-5000 / Panamax M5400-PM / Elgato HD60
Comment
nyisles16

All Star

Join Date: Apr 2003

Posts: 8317
#71

12-15-2007, 01:49 PM

Re: Ok, NOW does Pete Rose get in?

Originally posted by Skerik

This just in: Pete Rose has never been proven guilty of betting against the Reds. Not in the Dowd report, not in interviews he's given, never. So guess what - he was playing to win too, just like the steroid cheaters were and are.

So if Rose bets on the Reds to win and manages the team trying to win, that's worse than a player who cheats to put up numbers that make him worthy of HOF induction? That makes a lot of sense....

I thought it was proven he bet not only on games, but Reds games as well (according to Rose, betting to win).. as what he did as a player, yes he deserves to be in.. what he did as a manager, and knowing that it was bad, no... the other difference between the two is that Clemens and Bonds were HoF worthy BEFORE they entered the steroid phase in their career, and the fact that Rose committed the "ultimate sin" in baseball makes it that much harder
Comment
Beantown

#DoYourJob

Join Date: Feb 2005

Posts: 31523
#72

12-15-2007, 01:50 PM

Re: Ok, NOW does Pete Rose get in?

Originally posted by nyisles16

the other difference between the two is that Clemens and Bonds were HoF worthy BEFORE they entered the steroid phase in their career..

And Rose was HoF worthy BEFORE he bet on games as a manager.
Comment
nyisles16

All Star

Join Date: Apr 2003

Posts: 8317
#73

12-15-2007, 02:00 PM

Re: Ok, NOW does Pete Rose get in?

Originally posted by Longhorn

And Rose was HoF worthy BEFORE he bet on games as a manager.

BUT - he bet on baseball -- that is and has been a clear cut "cannot do" in baseball for a looong time -- rules that have been in place written down saying this is forbidden... Shoeless Joe should be in the hall, & he was convicted of betting (or playing a role in) even though he didn't know what was going on - and he too will never get in... Steroids was a "secretive" subject that only came about now, and the fact that MLB didn't act tougher or was too slow in doing anything about it until now (basically going along with it too) makes it that much tougher to say these guys can't get in..

Rose crossed the line with what he did... as a player, i agree he should be in.. but once he crossed the written rule of MLB, he lost that chance.. There were no rules prohibiting performance enhancers, and because of the union, there may never be.. If there was, then these clowns too should not get in
Comment
TheLetterZ

All Star

Join Date: Jul 2002

Posts: 6752
#74

12-15-2007, 02:03 PM

Re: Ok, NOW does Pete Rose get in?

Originally posted by Longhorn

And Rose was HoF worthy BEFORE he bet on games as a manager.

Isles has his own outlook, but I see it differently. It's not necessarily just because Clemens and Bonds were Hall of Famers before they started using that they deserve induction; rather, their greatness transcends the blemishes. We don't know when guys like Palmeiro and McGwire starting taking performance enhancers; it's quite possible that if they had retired immediately or suffered some type of career-ending injury instead of making that decision, they would have merited induction. Their downfall is that they weren't great enough for their achievements to overshadow their transgressions.
Comment
Beantown

#DoYourJob

Join Date: Feb 2005

Posts: 31523
#75

12-15-2007, 02:06 PM

Re: Ok, NOW does Pete Rose get in?

Originally posted by TheLetterZ

Isles has his own outlook, but I see it differently. It's not necessarily just because Clemens and Bonds were Hall of Famers before they started using that they deserve induction; rather, their greatness transcends the blemishes.

And, in my opinion of course, Rose's accomplishments as a player transcend betting on the game as a manager.

Now, if there was ever proof that Rose threw games, I may think differently, but the Hall of Fame is for your performance on the field. Rose did it right. Clemens and Bonds used performance enhancers. At the very least, if they get in, their stats post-steroid use should be thrown out. And what I mean by that is, if there is proof that, for instance Player A took performance enhancing drugs in 2002, any stats after that should not be considered because we do not know if Player A would have achieved those stats without the enhancements.

If that as the case, Clemens would still get in, but I honestly don't know if Bonds would (if the stats after we discovered he was used PED were thrown out) and I would, honestly be fine with that.

Last edited by Beantown; 12-15-2007, 02:10 PM.
Comment

Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 template Next

Working...