My issue with Rose is that what he did was totally and beyond the shadow of a doubt against the rules for decades before he showed up. It was effectively baseball's cardinal sin for almost a century, he knew it, and he still willfully did it. It look at it the same way I do with the guys caught juicing after the crackdown went into effect: if you got away with it before baseball definitively said "no," good on you. If you made the choice to do it after it was completely and totally against the rules, tough [expletive]. Agreed 100% that he's a scum who knew what he was doing was wrong and he was flirting with danger, however... I think the debate lies in what you take the meaning of the Hall of Fame to be. I view it as a place to honor the best baseball has ever had it terms of skill/talent, but also how they have influenced the game positively or negatively. Yes, what Rose did was deplorable, but what he did as a hitter and the records he attained deserve to be honored in the Hall. He changed the way the game is played and to leave him out is a mistake. For this reason, I also believe that steroid users should get in as well. Just put it on their plaque that they were known users or accomplished these stats during the HGH Era and be down with it. Every generation of players in the Hall accomplished their stats during an Era that you can argue influenced them whether it be Dead Ball/HGH/No Black Players/Wars etc. Just my 2c though. I can certainly understand the counter arguments. It is a fun discussion for sure :)