Interesting Comment by Jason Stark on M&M today (1 Viewer)

[mmmWaffles]

"The HOF is a museum, not the Vatican."

Very interesting perspective. Made me think. This idea that we're going to leave out the most significant players in baseball's modern era flies in the face of this idea. Look, we have players who set records while everybody else was fighting WW2. We have players who set records before - and after the schedule was lengthened. Before and after the "greenie" era (likely far more prevalent than steroids - amphetamines).

What did they do? Presumably, there's as notation (Note: WW2 era, *162 game schedule, Domed Stadium, etc.)

Not that I give a rat's hiney about BB, but I think Stark's right; The HOF should be a museum to baseball, not the hall of the saints. - The good, the bad, the ugly, the controversial. - Yes, you should note the context of certain records - as is done now, but show it all to the fans. Are we just going to pretend an entire decade didn't happen?

I haven't seen his article yet, but I thought the quote was pretty compelling.

 

[apalmer]

It's a museum run by MLB. Why would they want to include matters they deem unacceptable or damaging to the sport? Should the Holocaust Museum include displays of the "good" side of Hitler?

 

[mmmWaffles]

It's a museum run by MLB. Why would tehy want to include matters they deem unacceptable or damaging to the sport? Should the Holocaust Museum include displays of the "good" side of Hitler?

Actually, MLB doesn't vote for HOF'ers. Swing and a Miss.

 

[kutta]

It's a museum run by MLB. Why would they want to include matters they deem unacceptable or damaging to the sport? Should the Holocaust Museum include displays of the "good" side of Hitler?

I don't think he is saying anything about "good" and "bad." Just that we should see it all.A better question would be, should the "History of the 1900's" museum include anything about Hitler? I think yes.

 

[apalmer]

It's a museum run by MLB. Why would tehy want to include matters they deem unacceptable or damaging to the sport? Should the Holocaust Museum include displays of the "good" side of Hitler?

Actually, MLB doesn't vote for HOF'ers. Swing and a Miss.

Never said they did. "run" /= "vote". Outside and high.

 

[Angus Lok]

link

MLB has nothing to do with the hall. It is a National Museum.

I agree with Stark, put everyone deserving in. Asterisk all records from the last 25 years. A sportswriters morals should have nothing to do with what an athlete did on the field performance enhanced or not. As far as the HOF's themselves and their votes, well your always going to have the " well in our era we never did this stuff argument" and as far as I'm concerned this is their right. The problem with the whole process is the bias anyway. It is a great honor, but I think it gets a little too carried away with the qualifications.

 

[HellToupee]

hey don't clutter our political and God talk in the ffa with baseball

 

[Mookie Blaylock]

I love that - and I'm not REALLY insinuating that you (the OP) feel one way about A-Rod and another about Bonds - the general impression I've gotten about this whole mess is that the public AND the media like A-Rod a whole lot more than they ever liked Bonds. It was so cut-and-dry when the Bonds mess was in full swing. If he cheated he's out. (I have nothing to support anything I have presented as fact, BTW). It's just amazing what kind of power the baseball writers actually have when it comes to these guy's legacies. Very interesting sentiment by Stark...not one that I agree with, but interesting.

 

[Sabertooth]

Never heard of Jason Stark. Is he one of Ned's kids?

 

[mmmWaffles]

hey don't clutter our political and God talk in the ffa with baseball

 

[mmmWaffles]

It's a museum run by MLB. Why would tehy want to include matters they deem unacceptable or damaging to the sport? Should the Holocaust Museum include displays of the "good" side of Hitler?

Actually, MLB doesn't vote for HOF'ers. Swing and a Miss.

Never said they did. "run" /= "vote". Outside and high.

Then what exactly did you mean by "Why would tehy want to include matters they deem unacceptable or damaging to the sport"??

 

[Angus Lok]

Never heard of Jason Stark. Is he one of Ned's kids?

 

[apalmer]

It's a museum run by MLB. Why would tehy want to include matters they deem unacceptable or damaging to the sport? Should the Holocaust Museum include displays of the "good" side of Hitler?

Actually, MLB doesn't vote for HOF'ers. Swing and a Miss.

Never said they did. "run" /= "vote". Outside and high.

Then what exactly did you mean by "Why would tehy want to include matters they deem unacceptable or damaging to the sport"??

"Run" may have been a little strong, but the Hall is obviously dependent on the cooperation of MLB for everything from exhibits to the annual HOF Game. Why would MLB want exhibits about what it considers a black eye? And, why would the Hall want to antagonize MLB for an exhibit exalting steroid users and risk that relationship? If the "interesting comment" was intended to apply to voters instead of management, I'd still disagree. Being elected is an honor--voting for a player signifies your respect for what he accomplished. If a voter doesn't respect what (or how) a player accomplished, they shouldn't vote for him.

 

[Drunken Cowboy]

"The HOF is a museum, not the Vatican." Very interesting perspective. Made me think. This idea that we're going to leave out the most significant players in baseball's modern era flies in the face of this idea. Look, we have players who set records while everybody else was fighting WW2. We have players who set records before - and after the schedule was lengthened. Before and after the "greenie" era (likely far more prevalent than steroids - amphetamines). What did they do? Presumably, there's as notation (Note: WW2 era, *162 game schedule, Domed Stadium, etc.) Not that I give a rat's hiney about BB, but I think Stark's right; The HOF should be a museum to baseball, not the hall of the saints. - The good, the bad, the ugly, the controversial. - Yes, you should note the context of certain records - as is done now, but show it all to the fans. Are we just going to pretend an entire decade didn't happen? I haven't seen his article yet, but I thought the quote was pretty compelling.

But why is it we think that the era of steriod use is over. Steriod testing is a joke.

 

[mmmWaffles]

It's a museum run by MLB. Why would tehy want to include matters they deem unacceptable or damaging to the sport? Should the Holocaust Museum include displays of the "good" side of Hitler?

Actually, MLB doesn't vote for HOF'ers. Swing and a Miss.

Never said they did. "run" /= "vote". Outside and high.

Then what exactly did you mean by "Why would tehy want to include matters they deem unacceptable or damaging to the sport"??

"Run" may have been a little strong, but the Hall is obviously dependent on the cooperation of MLB for everything from exhibits to the annual HOF Game. Why would MLB want exhibits about what it considers a black eye? And, why would the Hall want to antagonize MLB for an exhibit exalting steroid users and risk that relationship? If the "interesting comment" was intended to apply to voters instead of management, I'd still disagree. Being elected is an honor--voting for a player signifies your respect for what he accomplished. If a voter doesn't respect what (or how) a player accomplished, they shouldn't vote for him.

Again, I think it goes back to your view of what the HOF should be. Is it merely a PR vehicle or a Museum dedicated to the history of baseball? Did the HOF just expunge all refereneces to the 1919 World Series? Aren't players on amphetamines a "black eye"?Dunno. Not here to debate, just thought it was an interesting perspective. Personally, I tend to agree with Stark. And no, I couldn't give a rat's hiney about A-Rod. (to whatever poster referenced him). If he goes in, they all go in, or they all stay out. Just not sure how you do that with something like this. Wipe out an entire tainted decade?

 

[Leroy Hoard]

I think it goes back to your view of what the HOF should be. Is it merely a PR vehicle or a Museum dedicated to the history of baseball? Did the HOF just expunge all refereneces to the 1919 World Series? Aren't players on amphetamines a "black eye"?Dunno. Not here to debate, just thought it was an interesting perspective. Personally, I tend to agree with Stark. And no, I couldn't give a rat's hiney about A-Rod. (to whatever poster referenced him). If he goes in, they all go in, or they all stay out. Just not sure how you do that with something like this. Wipe out an entire tainted decade?

The entire sport is based on cheating one way or the other (stealing signals, framing strikes, etc). I want the best cheaters in the HOF as well those those we consider "clean", as long as they have the needed stats. Giving the media another way to screw over their least liked players is not the answer.

 

[Delusions Of Adequacy]

If you do things considered damaging to the sport, you don't get in.

This is not new. Pete Rose isn't in the HOF. Shoeless Joe Jackson's been waiting nearly 100 years.

 

[mmmWaffles]

Why would MLB want exhibits about what it considers a black eye?

So, OJ's in the NFL HOF WHY??

 

[mmmWaffles]

If you do things considered damaging to the sport, you don't get in.This is not new. Pete Rose isn't in the HOF. Shoeless Joe Jackson's been waiting nearly 100 years.

So, OJ's in the NFL HOF WHY??

 

[IvanKaramazov]

If you do things considered damaging to the sport, you don't get in.This is not new. Pete Rose isn't in the HOF. Shoeless Joe Jackson's been waiting nearly 100 years.

So, OJ's in the NFL HOF WHY??

Really?

 

[Controller]

If you do things considered damaging to the sport, you don't get in.This is not new. Pete Rose isn't in the HOF. Shoeless Joe Jackson's been waiting nearly 100 years.

So, OJ's in the NFL HOF WHY??

OJ's in the HOF because he was already in the HOF when he decided to turn his ex-wife and her boyfriend into human PEZ dispensers.

 

[HellToupee]

If you do things considered damaging to the sport, you don't get in.This is not new. Pete Rose isn't in the HOF. Shoeless Joe Jackson's been waiting nearly 100 years.

So, OJ's in the NFL HOF WHY??

OJ's in the HOF because he was already in the HOF when he decided to turn his ex-wife and her boyfriend into human PEZ dispensers.

wow