Roger Clemens / Barry Bonds... HOF yay or nay?

[elephony]

I have always felt that punishing individuals for doping in the era when everyone was doping and MLB sold McGwire and Sosa is a bit hypocritical. Yes, Bonds and Clemens doped, so did almost all of their peers, they're being punished here for being successful among all of those peers, not solely for doping. I don't condone the doping, but if everyone is doing it like was true then, I don't condemn it either. I have a lot more condemnation for players caught now that it's effectively tested for, not tacitly accepted. Yay from me for sure.

I follow pro cycling too, which obviously had its own doping era and now has a similarly complicated present, and I've felt the same way about Lance Armstrong that I do about Barry Bonds. Undoubtedly an a-hole and for sure cheated, but was one of the very best ever and doped at a time when everyone did, so I think you still have to acknowledge their greatness even though you also have to acknowledge the doping.

[Jim Owen]

No to both. And keep Rose out. When he managed the Reds, he bet against his team. Mr. Giamatti banned him for good reason, and I accept his decision.

[fenderball]

nay, but i think they will both get in...

[FLRon]

Never let players in who did not abide by the rules. HOF used to mean something. In the last 20 years smh.

[Dru Edwards]

Originally Posted by Jim Owen

No to both. And keep Rose out. When he managed the Reds, he bet against his team. Mr. Giamatti banned him for good reason, and I accept his decision.

That's the thing about Rose, he bet on the Reds when he was managing them. Brutal! At least he came clean on what he did, although it was what, 15 years after denying it? Thinking he may be let in eventually posthumously when a future commissioner comes in that was a fan of Rose.

[catdaddy]

Nay to both.

While it's true that they might well have had HOF worthy careers if they'd never used anabolic steroids, that's not reason enough to reward their cheating and greed.

An argument that I've seen for their induction to the HOF in the past is that there are likely others in The Hall from that era who were steroid users. If that's true and can be substantiated, then I would endorse the removal of those who were proven to have done so.

[Lkristians]

Negatory. Nope.

[robj144]

Originally Posted by Jim Owen

No to both. And keep Rose out. When he managed the Reds, he bet against his team. Mr. Giamatti banned him for good reason, and I accept his decision.

Not taking Rose's side and I don't think he should be in the HOF, but I don't think there has ever been evidence he bet AGAINST the Reds. All the evidence, says he bet on the Reds.

But, that's not much better.

[Jim Owen]

You’re correct. I’ve made that assumption based on Mr. Giamatti’s making the ban permanent, as Judge Landis’ ruling on Cicote, Jackson, et al. who had thrown games. I’m thinking the commissioner knew more than we are likely to know.

[nitram]

I say no to both. When Bonds passed Hank Aaron's homerun mark I could have hurled. That's just not kosher.

[Dru Edwards]

Originally Posted by nitram

I say no to both. When Bonds passed Hank Aaron's homerun mark I could have hurled. That's just not kosher.

That's the way I felt when Bonds passed Aaron... it was a sad day given the PED use.

[roberts]

Rose accepted his ban resolution to save face and prevent the commissioner's report from being made public. Giamatti was guided by the spirit of what was in the best interests of baseball and his decision - the decision Rose AGREED to - did not take away his stats or ability to overcharge at card shows, or remove him from baseball's roles. It just said baseball was done with Rose and he agreed to go away. Of course Rose could never live with the divorce and has ended up looking pathetic.

The other guys - Bonds, Rocket, McGwire, Sosa, A Rod, all of 'em - they're out. Unless you want to construct a cheaters wing in the Hall, which would be pretty cool but redundant.

[ishtar]

Roger Maris. He should get in the HOF for having to endure Ford Frick’s frikkin’ asterisk. Talk about a travesty.

[Dru Edwards]

Alex Rodriguez is eligible for the HOF next year. He was a mess at the end, suing MLB and the Players Union as well. Probably a smart move to become a MLB analyst on tv... might help smooth out some of his past.

PEDs aside, ARod was an amazing player. When you think that Seattle had A-Rod and Griffey Jr at the same time, at least for 4 full seasons.

[Jim Owen]

A Hard Pass on ARod.