In partnership with CBSSports.com
Online Now 691
Online now 989 Record: 11761 (2/27/2012)
The Web's No. 1 forum for coverage and discussion of Terps sports
Visitor discussion of University of Maryland and college sports
A place for lively discussion for all other sports unrelated to Maryland athletics
Feedback for IMS and 247Sports
You have no favorite boards.
The most viewed topics.
The most replied to topics.
The most up-voted topics.
The most down-voted topics.
The most up-voted posters.
The most down-voted posters.
The most followed posters.
the number 50 in itself isn't what's suspicious. when you have a previous career high of 21, it is. and then add in the time period in which it took place.
lol, nice logic.
so you think absent amphetamines and steroids, the league leader in home runs would have about 13 each season?
point is, stop obsessing over the morals and look at the performance. that is really the issue. who cares if they are bad guys? question is how much did it help their performance on the field.
I'm fine with letting the steroid era into Cooperstown as long as they set up a separate wing for them that tells the whole story of the era from all stakeholders. They get honored, shamed, separated from their peers and it becomes a teachable moment for all.
Assumed the sarcasm would translate.
That's ridiculous. You're either a Hall of Famer or you're not. They're eligible for election so if they get elected, they deserve to be in there with everyone else. And in my opinion, their plaques should make no mention of steroids either. It should have their Hall of Fame merits, just like all the current plaques, and leave it at that. Nothing in the Hall of Fame bylaws or whatever says that "steroids" are a different story than every other vice current Hall of Famers have in their resumes. There are already cheaters in there, if not steroid users. This is undeniable. Would you move their plaques to this new wing? What if a current guy admits to having used steroids? Move his plaque? What about all the other questionable characters who could easily have had the "character clause" thrown in their face?
No, you vote in the guys who belong. If you as a voter want to be stubborn and not vote for the best players of this generation, even though they're eligible, then so be it. But if those guys get in, they belong with everyone else.
Have you ever been to Cooperstown? There's a hell of a lot more to that museum than the plaque gallery. The Hall has the whole rest of their space to have "teachable moments." Pete Rose is there, Joe Jackson is there, Barry Bonds is there, Roger Clemens is there. They just don't have plaques (yet). The Hall of Fame plaques are for those enshrined, and should make no distinctions amongst them.
Piazza is not going in because he dated Sam Champion
Detroit Hustles Harder
Yeah, this is completely wrong. As long as Pete Rose isn't in, there's no way in hell I would ever vote any of those fucktards who have completely tarnished the record books.
If baseball would add asterisks to the record books, I might be okay with it. But since they refuse to do it, I don't want any of them discracing the hall of fame with their plaques.
First of all, have any of you been to hall in the last decade? They already have crap about steroids, and they will in the future. The Hall has nothing to do with MLB, and the hall would def put stuff about the era. So we are not going to keep just those who were caught out, we are going to keep any that played in that era?
Even though your opinion is hideously short-sighted, narrow-minded and stubborn, my last post was not about whether or not those guys should be voted in. It just said that if they are elected, it's ludicrous to put them in a separate area than the rest of the inductees, which it absolutely is. How can you separate out the steroid users from the illegal spitballers/ball doctorers that are already in? For that matter, when the only thing really keeping them out is the Character Clause, how can you separate them from the racists, criminals, alcoholics, etc. that are already in?
Quite simply, because they aren't in yet. I can't do anything about those let in long ago (well, I can't really do anything about this either), but I still hold on to my opinion that letting these guys in is disrespectful to the history of the game. Everyone will know their numbers from the record books, but that doesn't mean we have to immortalize them in Cooperstown. (I suppose being immortalized can be interpretted many ways)
You can probably add a dozen people from the earliest reaches of baseball who gained an unfair advantage because blacks couldn't play baseball.
I get that, but I don't get how you can realistically implement this remotely correctly. The only thing that can possibly keep these guys out of the Hall of Fame is the character clause, and there is no way you can argue that it applies only to steroid users.
So OK. You want to give all the character issues from 1939-2013 a pass, but from now on they're in a separate wing. OK. Then I have these questions: if Mike Piazza gets inducted, would you include him in this group despite there being no real evidence to suggest he was a steroid user? What about Greg Maddux, just because he played in the steroid era? If you say that no, you wouldn't separate Piazza, what if he gets inducted and then we learn five years later that he did do steroids, either by his own admission or some evidence that surfaces later? Would you move him? If so, would you also move Rickey Henderson or someone else inducted pre-2013 if evidence surfaced about him?
What constitutes "cheating" that gets you into this secondary wing? What if Maddux admitted next week that he doctored the baseball, but gets inducted next year anyway? He would be just as much a cheater as Barry Bonds. If you put him in that wing, what about Gaylord Perry?
I hope you see my point that it is nearly impossible to be sure that such a separation is correctly administered, and the Hall of Fame should be too important for such editorial decisions in the plaque room itself. I have no problem talking about all these problems in other areas of the museum. And after thinking about it, I'd be OK if guys like Rose had something on their plaque explaining that they were ineligible from 1989-20XX if they ever got in, since he was actually ineligible for induction. But by the rules of the Hall of Fame, all the steroid users that are starting to come up for consideration are just as eligible as Cal, Willie Mays, Ted Williams and Babe Ruth were.
"Maryland football: Where everybody gets hurt and the starting left tackle has an existential crisis."
247Sports In partnership with CBS Sports