Should McGwire be elected to the HOF next year?

[SouthSideRyan]

 

Maybe he's credible. I don't know. It's not really for me to decide. You obviously choose to believe him. The reporter obviously believes him. That's fine. I know that there were SEVERAL inconsistencies documented from his book. On a witness stand (which this isn't), that would probably be reason for a jury to question what he says. Like I said, believe what you want to.

 

Why do you believe secondhand accounts of illegally leaked grand jury testimony, but not firsthand accounts from an eyewitness/collaborator.

[K-Town]

 

Maybe he's credible. I don't know. It's not really for me to decide. You obviously choose to believe him. The reporter obviously believes him. That's fine. I know that there were SEVERAL inconsistencies documented from his book. On a witness stand (which this isn't), that would probably be reason for a jury to question what he says. Like I said, believe what you want to.

 

Why do you believe secondhand accounts of illegally leaked grand jury testimony, but not firsthand accounts from an eyewitness/collaborator.

 

 

Like I said, I'm not sure WHAT to believe. Personally, I'd let Bonds, McGwire, AND Sosa in the Hall of Fame. McGwire has been scrutinized plenty, and so has Bonds. I'm not sure what the Fox reporter was getting at. It's not like people haven't taken shots at McGwire.

[Banedon]

 

Maybe he's credible. I don't know. It's not really for me to decide. You obviously choose to believe him. The reporter obviously believes him. That's fine. I know that there were SEVERAL inconsistencies documented from his book. On a witness stand (which this isn't), that would probably be reason for a jury to question what he says. Like I said, believe what you want to.

 

Why do you believe secondhand accounts of illegally leaked grand jury testimony, but not firsthand accounts from an eyewitness/collaborator.

 

 

Like I said, I'm not sure WHAT to believe. Personally, I'd let Bonds, McGwire, AND Sosa in the Hall of Fame. McGwire has been scrutinized plenty, and so has Bonds. I'm not sure what the Fox reporter was getting at. It's not like people haven't taken shots at McGwire.

 

Well I'll agree with you on one thing....McGwire, Sosa and Bonds are all linked. Either they all go or none do. I say none. You say all. While I disagree, it's just a matter of interpreting the evidence and the what we want in an HOF inductee differently.

[Ding Dong Johnson]

Personally, I'd let Bonds, McGwire, AND Sosa in the Hall of Fame.

 

My vote is for none of them. There would be no better message to clean up this game than to have Mr 70, his trusty sidekick, and the all-time king playing euchre with Pete Rose somewhere lamenting their fate.

[K-Town]

 

Maybe he's credible. I don't know. It's not really for me to decide. You obviously choose to believe him. The reporter obviously believes him. That's fine. I know that there were SEVERAL inconsistencies documented from his book. On a witness stand (which this isn't), that would probably be reason for a jury to question what he says. Like I said, believe what you want to.

 

Why do you believe secondhand accounts of illegally leaked grand jury testimony, but not firsthand accounts from an eyewitness/collaborator.

 

 

 

Like I said, I'm not sure WHAT to believe. Personally, I'd let Bonds, McGwire, AND Sosa in the Hall of Fame. McGwire has been scrutinized plenty, and so has Bonds. I'm not sure what the Fox reporter was getting at. It's not like people haven't taken shots at McGwire.

 

Well I'll agree with you on one thing....McGwire, Sosa and Bonds are all linked. Either they all go or none do. I say none. You say all. While I disagree, it's just a matter of interpreting the evidence and the what we want in an HOF inductee differently.

 

If you're going to keep those three out, then you'd better be prepared to scrutinize every single player from that generation. Sosa, McGwire, and Bonds were the top of the class, breaking records, etc. So there was alot of scrutiny, and alot of digging done on those players. Unless you're going to do that type of digging for EVERYONE, then I say leave them alone, and move on.

[K-Town]

Personally, I'd let Bonds, McGwire, AND Sosa in the Hall of Fame.

 

My vote is for none of them. There would be no better message to clean up this game than to have Mr 70, his trusty sidekick, and the all-time king playing euchre with Pete Rose somewhere lamenting their fate.

 

 

Again.....

 

If you're going to keep those three out, then you'd better be prepared to scrutinize every single player from that generation. Sosa, McGwire, and Bonds were the top of the class, breaking records, etc. So there was alot of scrutiny, and alot of digging done on those players. Unless you're going to do that type of digging for EVERYONE, then I say leave them alone, and move on.

[SouthSideRyan]

 

Maybe he's credible. I don't know. It's not really for me to decide. You obviously choose to believe him. The reporter obviously believes him. That's fine. I know that there were SEVERAL inconsistencies documented from his book. On a witness stand (which this isn't), that would probably be reason for a jury to question what he says. Like I said, believe what you want to.

 

Why do you believe secondhand accounts of illegally leaked grand jury testimony, but not firsthand accounts from an eyewitness/collaborator.

 

 

Like I said, I'm not sure WHAT to believe. Personally, I'd let Bonds, McGwire, AND Sosa in the Hall of Fame. McGwire has been scrutinized plenty, and so has Bonds. I'm not sure what the Fox reporter was getting at. It's not like people haven't taken shots at McGwire.

 

Well I'll agree with you on one thing....McGwire, Sosa and Bonds are all linked. Either they all go or none do. I say none. You say all. While I disagree, it's just a matter of interpreting the evidence and the what we want in an HOF inductee differently.

 

What about the players who used amphetamines?

[Ding Dong Johnson]

Personally, I'd let Bonds, McGwire, AND Sosa in the Hall of Fame.

 

My vote is for none of them. There would be no better message to clean up this game than to have Mr 70, his trusty sidekick, and the all-time king playing euchre with Pete Rose somewhere lamenting their fate.

 

 

Again.....

 

If you're going to keep those three out, then you'd better be prepared to scrutinize every single player from that generation. Sosa, McGwire, and Bonds were the top of the class, breaking records, etc. So there was alot of scrutiny, and alot of digging done on those players. Unless you're going to do that type of digging for EVERYONE, then I say leave them alone, and move on.

 

We're talking about the HOF. How many more are going to be eligible and worthy of votes? They will all be scrutinized. Just because had 500+ HR during that era won't guarantee admission.

[Banedon]

 

Maybe he's credible. I don't know. It's not really for me to decide. You obviously choose to believe him. The reporter obviously believes him. That's fine. I know that there were SEVERAL inconsistencies documented from his book. On a witness stand (which this isn't), that would probably be reason for a jury to question what he says. Like I said, believe what you want to.

 

Why do you believe secondhand accounts of illegally leaked grand jury testimony, but not firsthand accounts from an eyewitness/collaborator.

 

 

Like I said, I'm not sure WHAT to believe. Personally, I'd let Bonds, McGwire, AND Sosa in the Hall of Fame. McGwire has been scrutinized plenty, and so has Bonds. I'm not sure what the Fox reporter was getting at. It's not like people haven't taken shots at McGwire.

 

Well I'll agree with you on one thing....McGwire, Sosa and Bonds are all linked. Either they all go or none do. I say none. You say all. While I disagree, it's just a matter of interpreting the evidence and the what we want in an HOF inductee differently.

 

What about the players who used amphetamines?

 

You know, I'm honestly not sure. But Bonds, McGwire and Sosa are a little bit victims of their own success here. The 3 of them were so successful, that the spotlight shines more brightly on them than others. None of them have confessed or apologized, but have made excuses and dodged direct answers. There's some PR involved in getting a HOF election, and the 3 of them have played that game poorly. Not only do I think those 3 shouldn't be in there, but I don't think they WILL be. I think this is an opportunity for the baseball writers to flex their muscles and keep these guys out.

 

I also don't think Giambi or Palmerio should make it.

[K-Town]

Personally, I'd let Bonds, McGwire, AND Sosa in the Hall of Fame.

 

My vote is for none of them. There would be no better message to clean up this game than to have Mr 70, his trusty sidekick, and the all-time king playing euchre with Pete Rose somewhere lamenting their fate.

 

 

Again.....

 

If you're going to keep those three out, then you'd better be prepared to scrutinize every single player from that generation. Sosa, McGwire, and Bonds were the top of the class, breaking records, etc. So there was alot of scrutiny, and alot of digging done on those players. Unless you're going to do that type of digging for EVERYONE, then I say leave them alone, and move on.

 

We're talking about the HOF. How many more are going to be eligible and worthy of votes? They will all be scrutinized. Just because had 500+ HR during that era won't guarantee admission.

 

That's fine. Anybody who has ANY chance at going to the HOF should be scrutinized, then. It's only fair.

[K-Town]

 

Maybe he's credible. I don't know. It's not really for me to decide. You obviously choose to believe him. The reporter obviously believes him. That's fine. I know that there were SEVERAL inconsistencies documented from his book. On a witness stand (which this isn't), that would probably be reason for a jury to question what he says. Like I said, believe what you want to.

 

Why do you believe secondhand accounts of illegally leaked grand jury testimony, but not firsthand accounts from an eyewitness/collaborator.

 

 

Like I said, I'm not sure WHAT to believe. Personally, I'd let Bonds, McGwire, AND Sosa in the Hall of Fame. McGwire has been scrutinized plenty, and so has Bonds. I'm not sure what the Fox reporter was getting at. It's not like people haven't taken shots at McGwire.

 

Well I'll agree with you on one thing....McGwire, Sosa and Bonds are all linked. Either they all go or none do. I say none. You say all. While I disagree, it's just a matter of interpreting the evidence and the what we want in an HOF inductee differently.

 

What about the players who used amphetamines?

 

You know, I'm honestly not sure. But Bonds, McGwire and Sosa are a little bit victims of their own success here. The 3 of them were so successful, that the spotlight shines more brightly on them than others. None of them have confessed or apologized, but have made excuses and dodged direct answers. There's some PR involved in getting a HOF election, and the 3 of them have played that game poorly. Not only do I think those 3 shouldn't be in there, but I don't think they WILL be. I think this is an opportunity for the baseball writers to flex their muscles and keep these guys out.

 

I also don't think Giambi or Palmerio should make it.

 

 

See, you can't just pick & choose. To me, that's not the American way. McGwire should have just as much opportunity to get in as Roger Clemens has. Whatever has happened has happened, and we'll never know the full truth about every player, so move on. There have been injustices in the past (amphetamines, cocaine, blacks not being allowed to play, etc.), and nobody was kept out of the HOF for those things. Baseball just try to correct the problems, and moved on.

[Banedon]

See, you can't just pick & choose. To me, that's not the American way. McGwire should have just as much opportunity to get in as Roger Clemens has. Whatever has happened has happened, and we'll never know the full truth about every player, so move on. There have been injustices in the past (amphetamines, cocaine, blacks not being allowed to play, etc.), and nobody was kept out of the HOF for those things. Baseball just try to correct the problems, and moved on.

 

Pete Rose would disagree.

[SouthSideRyan]

 

See, you can't just pick & choose. To me, that's not the American way. McGwire should have just as much opportunity to get in as Roger Clemens has. Whatever has happened has happened, and we'll never know the full truth about every player, so move on. There have been injustices in the past (amphetamines, cocaine, blacks not being allowed to play, etc.), and nobody was kept out of the HOF for those things. Baseball just try to correct the problems, and moved on.

 

Segregation and PEDs are 2 different issues. Unless we're talking Cap Anson, it's hard to fault an old player for playing against the competition he was put against.

[K-Town]

See, you can't just pick & choose. To me, that's not the American way. McGwire should have just as much opportunity to get in as Roger Clemens has. Whatever has happened has happened, and we'll never know the full truth about every player, so move on. There have been injustices in the past (amphetamines, cocaine, blacks not being allowed to play, etc.), and nobody was kept out of the HOF for those things. Baseball just try to correct the problems, and moved on.

 

Pete Rose would disagree.

 

Pete Rose made deal that kept him out of the HOF, didn't he?

[Banedon]

See, you can't just pick & choose. To me, that's not the American way. McGwire should have just as much opportunity to get in as Roger Clemens has. Whatever has happened has happened, and we'll never know the full truth about every player, so move on. There have been injustices in the past (amphetamines, cocaine, blacks not being allowed to play, etc.), and nobody was kept out of the HOF for those things. Baseball just try to correct the problems, and moved on.

 

Pete Rose would disagree.

 

Pete Rose made deal that kept him out of the HOF, didn't he?

 

I believe he did, but it was because he broke a baseball rule...so did Sosa, Bonds and McGwire.

 

While it's not in the baseball rulebook, in 1991, Fay Vincent sent a memothat stated

The possession, sale or use of any illegal drug or controlled substance by Major League players and personnel is strictly prohibited ... [and those players involved] are subject to discipline by the Commissioner and risk permanent expulsion from the game.... This prohibition applies to all illegal drugs and controlled substances, including steroids....

 

Pete Rose was scrutinzed for his behavior, why shouldn't these guys be scrutinized?

 

Life isn't fair...these guys are not going to be treated "like everyone else". They enjoyed the fruits of their success from the illegal substance, they made their bed, and now they get to sleep in it. I don't feel sorry for them or feel that they are being wronged somehow for having to pay for the things they've done.

Edited April 19, 2006 by Banedon

[K-Town]

 

See, you can't just pick & choose. To me, that's not the American way. McGwire should have just as much opportunity to get in as Roger Clemens has. Whatever has happened has happened, and we'll never know the full truth about every player, so move on. There have been injustices in the past (amphetamines, cocaine, blacks not being allowed to play, etc.), and nobody was kept out of the HOF for those things. Baseball just try to correct the problems, and moved on.

 

Segregation and PEDs are 2 different issues. Unless we're talking Cap Anson, it's hard to fault an old player for playing against the competition he was put against.

 

 

No, I don't want to punish an old guy. My point is that baseball typically realizes that they did something wrong, and corrects it, and moves on. They didn't go back and try to asterisk any records, or try to adjust numbers to account for the lack of non-white players. They recognized that something wasn't right, they corrected it, and moved on......... and nobody thinks anything of it today.

[K-Town]

See, you can't just pick & choose. To me, that's not the American way. McGwire should have just as much opportunity to get in as Roger Clemens has. Whatever has happened has happened, and we'll never know the full truth about every player, so move on. There have been injustices in the past (amphetamines, cocaine, blacks not being allowed to play, etc.), and nobody was kept out of the HOF for those things. Baseball just try to correct the problems, and moved on.

 

Pete Rose would disagree.

 

Pete Rose made deal that kept him out of the HOF, didn't he?

 

I believe he did, but it was because he broke a baseball rule...so did Sosa, Bonds and McGwire.

 

While it's not in the baseball rulebook, in 1991, Fay Vincent sent a memothat stated

The possession, sale or use of any illegal drug or controlled substance by Major League players and personnel is strictly prohibited ... [and those players involved] are subject to discipline by the Commissioner and risk permanent expulsion from the game.... This prohibition applies to all illegal drugs and controlled substances, including steroids....

 

Pete Rose was scrutinzed for his behavior, why should these guys be scrutinized?

 

Life isn't fair...these guys are not going to be treated "like everyone else". They enjoyed the fruits of their success from the illegal substance, they made their bed, and now they get to sleep in it. I don't feel sorry for them or feel that they are being wronged somehow for having to pay for the things they've done.

 

 

You're right....... Pete Rose was scrutinized. These guys are scrutinized. If McGwire or Bonds or Sosa want to cut a deal to keep them out of the HOF, then I won't feel sorry for them. I would have to assume that there was something that Pete Rose wanted to hide, and that's why he made the deal. If there's something likewise on McGwire (or any other player), then the commish can present it to them, and ask them if they want a "deal". So be it. Up to now, I don't think that the commish has anything to warrant such a deal being made.

[Banedon]

You're right....... Pete Rose was scrutinized. These guys are scrutinized. If McGwire or Bonds or Sosa want to cut a deal to keep them out of the HOF, then I won't feel sorry for them. I would have to assume that there was something that Pete Rose wanted to hide, and that's why he made the deal. If there's something likewise on McGwire (or any other player), then the commish can present it to them, and ask them if they want a "deal". So be it. Up to now, I don't think that the commish has anything to warrant such a deal being made.

 

Well I guess we'll see the result of the investigation, but I think the investigation is just a thinly disguised method to try to get Barry to retire, and to appease the fans and government. I don't think baseball wants Barry to break the HR record.

 

But I think it's a moot point anyway, because like I said. I don't think any of them will get the necessary votes.

[K-Town]

You're right....... Pete Rose was scrutinized. These guys are scrutinized. If McGwire or Bonds or Sosa want to cut a deal to keep them out of the HOF, then I won't feel sorry for them. I would have to assume that there was something that Pete Rose wanted to hide, and that's why he made the deal. If there's something likewise on McGwire (or any other player), then the commish can present it to them, and ask them if they want a "deal". So be it. Up to now, I don't think that the commish has anything to warrant such a deal being made.

 

Well I guess we'll see the result of the investigation, but I think the investigation is just a thinly disguised method to try to get Barry to retire, and to appease the fans and government. I don't think baseball wants Barry to break the HR record.

 

But I think it's a moot point anyway, because like I said. I don't think any of them will get the necessary votes.

 

 

I don't think so, either.