What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Pete Rose reinstated off MLB's permanently ineligible list (3 Viewers)

My memory is there was evidence that Rose bet against his own team. If I was a Hall voter, he still wouldn't get my vote.
nope, never been a thing. The only evidence ever found is that he bet on his team to win.
Thats just as bad IMO. Because what do you have to do to help your team win on a given night? In baseball that probably means your using your best pitchers and therefore excluding them from pitching on another night, which means your team is more likely to lose on that other night.
 
My memory is there was evidence that Rose bet against his own team. If I was a Hall voter, he still wouldn't get my vote.
nope, never been a thing. The only evidence ever found is that he bet on his team to win.
Thats just as bad IMO. Because what do you have to do to help your team win on a given night? In baseball that probably means your using your best pitchers and therefore excluding them from pitching on another night, which means your team is more likely to lose on that other night.
so rip Jordan from the hall of fame in the nba?
 
My buddies and I have argued over Pete Rose in the HOF for ages. My contention has always been if you keep Rose out because of improper activity, you may as well kick most of the HOF out. Probably some skeletons in just about everyone’s closet.
Not many broke the primary rule of professional sports.

To be clear, I'm a proponent of Rose getting in so long as the first sentence or two on his busk indicates that he received a lifetime ban for betting on baseball. But what he did compared to others, from a purely sports law standpoint, is much different and more egregious.
 
More interested in the chance Shoeless Joe gets into the Hall of Fame with this change.

He absolutely did. Today. I totally disagree with Rose getting in. He bet on his own team and A. Bartlett Giamatti, the commissioner, had the evidence. I mean, Rose is a terrible human being. He was cruelly insulting Giamatti after he died. He acted so totally aggrieved and put-upon, like everybody in baseball made you make those calls when you knew the punishment. And I don't even want to go into who vouched for Rose and damn if we don't need somebody to look that guy in the eyes and just say take a long walk off a short one. Eff this. What a dark cloud on what was a sunny day,
 
Oh, and Manfred is a joke. Houston and Boston both cheated flagrantly to win their titles in '17 and '18 and this guy doesn't do a thing to them and then COVID comes and we're supposed to have forgotten about it? Like, what? He moved an all-star game over an innocuous proposed bill about voting (I looked at the bill's provisions and it was totally misrepresented) that all the politicos on one side of the aisle ginned up a controversy about. What a small little gutless man he is.
 
My memory is there was evidence that Rose bet against his own team. If I was a Hall voter, he still wouldn't get my vote.
nope, never been a thing. The only evidence ever found is that he bet on his team to win. Jordan on the other hand?
i firmly support not putting jordan in the baseball hall of fame so i am with you take that to the bank bromigo
 
More interested in the chance Shoeless Joe gets into the Hall of Fame with this change.

He absolutely did. Today. I totally disagree with Rose getting in. He bet on his own team and A. Bartlett Giamatti, the commissioner, had the evidence. I mean, Rose is a terrible human being. He was cruelly insulting Giamatti after he died. He acted so totally aggrieved and put-upon, like everybody in baseball made you make those calls when you knew the punishment. And I don't even want to go into who vouched for Rose and damn if we don't need somebody to look that guy in the eyes and just say take a long walk off a short one. Eff this. What a dark cloud on what was a sunny day,
No one got into the HOF today. these players will be eligible.
 
More interested in the chance Shoeless Joe gets into the Hall of Fame with this change.

He absolutely did. Today. I totally disagree with Rose getting in. He bet on his own team and A. Bartlett Giamatti, the commissioner, had the evidence. I mean, Rose is a terrible human being. He was cruelly insulting Giamatti after he died. He acted so totally aggrieved and put-upon, like everybody in baseball made you make those calls when you knew the punishment. And I don't even want to go into who vouched for Rose and damn if we don't need somebody to look that guy in the eyes and just say take a long walk off a short one. Eff this. What a dark cloud on what was a sunny day,
No one got into the HOF today. these players will be eligible.

Oh, thank you. I'm like 0-5 today. Geeeeeez.
 
Hall of Fame shouldn't be a "good human" contest where writers decide what is moral and what isn't.
This is also my opinion. I don't know Pete Rose the person. I can make opinions. Definitely have examples of him leaning towards not being the best guy, but who are these writers to decide moral behavior? I know Pete the baseball player. Hall of fame career. Imo
 
Long overdue.

Not a good human by many accounts, but the Hall of Fame shouldn't be a "good human" contest where writers decide what is moral and what isn't.

It's a shame he wasn't inducted while alive.
True, but to say that the average voter for the baseball hall of fame is more than a bit sanctimonious would be underselling it. And most never even try to hide it.
 
Long overdue.

Not a good human by many accounts, but the Hall of Fame shouldn't be a "good human" contest where writers decide what is moral and what isn't.

It's a shame he wasn't inducted while alive.

He bet on his own games. That we even consider excusing this is like Harvard students protesting for Hamas. What is wrong with us?
 
RIP the greatest base hit player in MLB history.
:no:
Ichiro
:no:

Ted Williams*


*If we don't care about roids, then it's Bonds by a mile.
I wasn't talking about best overall hitter. Best singles hitter. Imo
Rose was a compiler. He was a solid hitter but not close to the best hitter or even singles hitter.

He isn't even in the top 10 of best singles hitter:

  1. Willie Keeler - .261 singles per AB
  2. Jeter - .241
  3. Ichiro - .234
  4. Ty Cobb - .233
  5. Gwynn - .232
  6. Cap Anson - .230
  7. Rod Carew - .227
  8. Nap Lajoi - .223
  9. Eddie Collins - .218
  10. Honus Wagner - .206
*I am sure there are a lot more as I only went down the list of players with the most singles in MLB history.

*** Rose was at .202 singles per AB.
 
My buddies and I have argued over Pete Rose in the HOF for ages. My contention has always been if you keep Rose out because of improper activity, you may as well kick most of the HOF out. Probably some skeletons in just about everyone’s closet.
Not many broke the primary rule of professional sports.

To be clear, I'm a proponent of Rose getting in so long as the first sentence or two on his busk indicates that he received a lifetime ban for betting on baseball. But what he did compared to others, from a purely sports law standpoint, is much different and more egregious.
I get that, but betting against the game is really only the primary rule of baseball (and other) because that is what the founders decided it should be.

Crimes like beating your spouse or injuring/killing someone, much less cheat in some way like throwing spitballs, using doctored bats, or taking steroids are much more accepted. Just don't bet on the game. I'm exaggerating a bit, but not too much.
 
I kind of like this.

Keeps the player who broke the big big rules from enjoying their induction and enshrinement and puts a big asterisk next to their for all time, but still provides a path into the Hall for players who are integral to the history of the game.
 
I get that, but betting against the game is really only the primary rule of baseball (and other) because that is what the founders decided it should be.

There would be nothing that would ruin a professional sports league faster than fans feeling the results are tainted due to gambling aspects.

Sure all those other things are worse as far as society is concerned but none go to the integrity of the games like gambling does.
 
I get that, but betting against the game is really only the primary rule of baseball (and other) because that is what the founders decided it should be.

There would be nothing that would ruin a professional sports league faster than fans feeling the results are tainted due to gambling aspects.

Sure all those other things are worse as far as society is concerned but none go to the integrity of the games like gambling does.
For sure, although with DraftKings, FanDuel, etc. so omnipresent and, in some cases, actual sponsors, the lines have definitely been blurred today.
 
I get that, but betting against the game is really only the primary rule of baseball (and other) because that is what the founders decided it should be.

There would be nothing that would ruin a professional sports league faster than fans feeling the results are tainted due to gambling aspects.

Sure all those other things are worse as far as society is concerned but none go to the integrity of the games like gambling does.
For sure, although with DraftKings, FanDuel, etc. so omnipresent and, in some cases, actual sponsors, the lines have definitely been blurred today.

It's not the gambling on the sport by the public - it's the fact Rose, himself, bet on the Sport including game involving the team he managed. Being in a world where gambling by the public is so prevalent would make the issue worse actually since those fans may actually lose money based on a "fixed" game.
 
I get that, but betting against the game is really only the primary rule of baseball (and other) because that is what the founders decided it should be.

There would be nothing that would ruin a professional sports league faster than fans feeling the results are tainted due to gambling aspects.

Sure all those other things are worse as far as society is concerned but none go to the integrity of the games like gambling does.
For sure, although with DraftKings, FanDuel, etc. so omnipresent and, in some cases, actual sponsors, the lines have definitely been blurred today.

It's not the gambling on the sport by the public - it's the fact Rose, himself, bet on the Sport including game involving the team he managed. Being in a world where gambling by the public is so prevalent would make the issue worse actually since those fans may actually lose money based on a "fixed" game.
I agree. Just saying it was a major no-no back in the 1980s. If it happened today, it would still be scorned upon by MLB, but I don't think as much given today's gambling culture.

Anyway, it is what it is and I think Rose may fall short in his first year of eligibility, but both he and Shoeless Joe will be inducted in short order.
 
I agree. Just saying it was a major no-no back in the 1980s. If it happened today, it would still be scorned upon by MLB, but I don't think as much given today's gambling culture.

I think this is way off - you don't think if Aaron Boone was found to be betting on Yankees games it wouldn't be a big deal?
 
I kind of like this.

Keeps the player who broke the big big rules from enjoying their induction and enshrinement and puts a big asterisk next to their for all time, but still provides a path into the Hall for players who are integral to the history of the game.
I guess this is kinda where I'm at but even though I grew up with the Big Red Machine, watching Charlie Hustle just get after it on the field, I still have that feeling in the pit of my stomach that you broke the one and only cardinal rule of the game and I don't like to see people (alive or dead) get rewarded for **** like that.

It's been so damn long I think most people are just worn out over the debate so are probably more ambivalent than anything else but if I'm walking through the Hall with my kid I'd damn sure point out, "yea he was great but..."
 
I agree. Just saying it was a major no-no back in the 1980s. If it happened today, it would still be scorned upon by MLB, but I don't think as much given today's gambling culture.

I think this is way off - you don't think if Aaron Boone was found to be betting on Yankees games it wouldn't be a big deal?
It absolutely would be - just perhaps not as much on a relative basis compared to the 1980s.
 
I agree. Just saying it was a major no-no back in the 1980s. If it happened today, it would still be scorned upon by MLB, but I don't think as much given today's gambling culture.

I think this is way off - you don't think if Aaron Boone was found to be betting on Yankees games it wouldn't be a big deal?
It would be a much, much bigger deal today. Back then only degenerates were gambling. Now almost everyone has access to gambling and have much more of a personal connection. It would be huge.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top