Sound Off: Should Steroid Users Get in the HOF?

[cdawg44]

Re: Sound Off: Should Steroid Users Get in the HOF?

These guys should absolutely get in the hall. Most of the old farts whining about it benefited from the steroid Era and absolutely sat on their hands and said nothing for years, but now wanna stand up on principle. The worse part is they, with no hesitation endorsed Torre and LaRussa and other managers in the hall who clearly knew their guys were juicing and won championships and awards off of it, but get a free pass. My feeling is, unless you are going to vacate all the records and championships from the late 80s through 2003, let these guys in.

That's why I think its time to take the vote away from the writers and go to a committee like the NFL. The writers are all attention whores who have made the Hall about them, not the game. The fact you people voting for only Jack Morris is a flat out joke, and they have no business voting for such an important process

[DrJones]

Re: Sound Off: Should Steroid Users Get in the HOF?

These guys should absolutely get in the hall. Most of the old farts whining about it benefited from the steroid Era and absolutely sat on their hands and said nothing for years, but now wanna stand up on principle. The worse part is they, with no hesitation endorsed Torre and LaRussa and other managers in the hall who clearly knew their guys were juicing and won championships and awards off of it, but get a free pass. My feeling is, unless you are going to vacate all the records and championships from the late 80s through 2003, let these guys in.

That's why I think its time to take the vote away from the writers and go to a committee like the NFL. The writers are all attention whores who have made the Hall about them, not the game. The fact you people voting for only Jack Morris is a flat out joke, and they have no business voting for such an important process

They're not all attention whores. But the BBWAA should definitely clear out the deadwood. My suggestions:

1. Reduce the time it takes for a BBWAA member to get a HOF vote from 10 years to 5.

2. You only get a HoF vote for 15 years. After 15 years, you need to be still covering MLB on a full-time basis (no national writers or those who've moved onto other sports/jobs/retirement) to get a vote. If you're still a fulltime baseball journalist, you receive an extra 10 years of voting (or until you're no longer fulltime, whatever comes first). Nobody gets a lifetime vote.

This would bring in a lot of fresh blood and get rid of most of the grandstanding cranks.

[BDKiiing]

Re: Sound Off: Should Steroid Users Get in the HOF?

Just curious, but why not McGwire?

Mac's success came with the usage, more so than Bonds and Rocket. Bonds and Rocket had HoF credentials before their peak of using. I just don't have Mac or Sammy in HoF talk.

[dingleberryfinn]

Re: Sound Off: Should Steroid Users Get in the HOF?

Yes
I don't look at stats when I'm looking at Hall of Famers
I'm looking solely at the fame & love 'em or loathe 'em
none are as famous as Big Mac, Bonds, Clemens et al
And Rose for that matter. This is also why I steadfastly want to see
Tommy John in the HOF
[/2 cents]

[TripleCrown9]

Re: Sound Off: Should Steroid Users Get in the HOF?

Mac's success came with the usage, more so than Bonds and Rocket. Bonds and Rocket had HoF credentials before their peak of using. I just don't have Mac or Sammy in HoF talk.

Fair enough. I was just wondering what your reason was. To be fair though, McGwire didn't start using until after he won Rookie of the Year, and already had 114 home runs.

[jth1331]

Re: Sound Off: Should Steroid Users Get in the HOF?

Honestly, I see both points have valid responses.
They cheated and boosted their way to the stats/etc.

But, at the same time, how do we know who did/didn't for sure, and they put up insane numbers throughout their career. It takes more than steroids/PEDs to get that much better than other players, and guys like Bonds and Clemens, Piazza, Bagwell, McGwire, Sosa, those guys should be in the HOF.

[BDKiiing]

Sound Off: Should Steroid Users Get in the HOF?

But, at the same time, how do we know who did/didn't for sure, and they put up insane numbers throughout their career. It takes more than steroids/PEDs to get that much better than other players, and guys like Bonds and Clemens, Piazza, Bagwell, McGwire, Sosa, those guys should be in the HOF.

We don't. So the voters need to put players in completely based on statistics. You either put them all in who are worthy, or you put none. And with the latter, it makes the guy who didn't vote for Maddux or Glavine, or Thomas because they played during the steroid era (which is still going on) look like a genius. I agree with him. It's all speculation. My only out is that if you have a positive test or were suspended ever for PEDs, you do not deserve to be in, but if it's only speculation, you have to be judged fairly.

But who am I, I just think that anyone who fails a drug test should get the lifetime ban. One strike, you're out.

[pietasterp]

Re: Sound Off: Should Steroid Users Get in the HOF?

It's inevitable...no matter your opinion, at some point it has to happen, otherwise 2-3 generations and 20+ years worth of players will be excluded, fairly or unfairly. It's getting to that point now in terms of who is elligible; if the baseball writers really want to keep them out, they can all just take a vacation from voting for the next 25 years or so.

Besides, baseball fans have long memories; no matter when you visit the Hall (which, if you haven't been, I highly recommend), there will always be some loudmouth pontificating on this or that detail about a player's career, and so of course if Bonds and Clemens and others eventually get in, there will be constant chatter at their plaques about 'roid use, whether they should be in, etc. In a sense, that is their punishment: to forever have loudmouth baseball geek know-it-alls at their plaques bloviating on the relative merits of their inclusion for the rest of time.

[RuthMorrisonMR]

Absolutely not.
I think about the guy who never got a shot because a teammate never got hurt, or over-performed.
Or the money that wasn't dispersed evenly because some roided-up freak got $30M.
Or the legend that hit 500 or 600 HR's cleanly only to get passed by a cheater.

Not only that but it taints the wimzy that is associated with baseball.
It's the one sport where a grown man can transform into a 5 year old just being at the park.
Steroids kill that dream and adulation for these hero's. They're frauds and it can break the heart of fans, regardless of how old or young the fan is.

I completely agree with you. I remember being disappointed myself, when I found out that a wrestler I admired was taking steroids.

[Madden08PCgmr]

Re: Sound Off: Should Steroid Users Get in the HOF?

They should be in.

MLB knew all about this. Its impossible to say for how long, even. Roids played a HUGE role in saving them after labor armageddon, and I don't think they would have put an end to use if Congress hadn't FORCED them to do so.

So what buisness do pencil pushing, keyboard mashing twits have keeping these guys out? The people that signed the checks didn't care. Let this fall on their shoulders.

[JHodges57]

Re: Sound Off: Should Steroid Users Get in the HOF?

No they shouldn't. I also think those who gamble on games while active should be banned. People who cheat should not be bought back to manage after a 1 year suspension. They should also be permanently banned.


But to me, it's not what I think that matters. It's what the athletes and managers who didn't cheat think.

[Jolly Roger]

Re: Sound Off: Should Steroid Users Get in the HOF?

I'm in the "put them in with an asterisk" camp. A lot of guys from that era were using, from all-stars to solid utility men to bench sitters. The guys at the top were still the best.