Jump to content

HOF & the Steroid Era

Umpire in Chief

By Umpire in Chief
in Off-Topic/Funny Stories

 Share
Umpire-Empire locks topics which have not been active in the last year. The thread you are viewing hasn't been active in 5212 days so you will not be able to post. We do recommend you starting a new topic to find out what's new in the world of umpiring.

Recommended Posts

Umpire in Chief

Umpire in Chief

Posted
Posted

We had another thread go off course so I'll re open the general topic here:

Hall of Fame and the steroid era. What do you think the outcome is going to be? Are the ballots going to me missing some names? Are some proven and/or alleged juicers ever going to get in? Is the mere allegation going to deny some otherwise deserving people?

Play nicely! :hi5:

  • Replies 16
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

Umpire in Chief
Umpire in Chief

DON'T TELL ME I TOOK IT THE WRONG WAY !!! I HAVE PLENTY OF VOICES IN MY HEAD AND YOURS IS NOT ONE OF THEM! THEY TOLD ME WHAT YOU REALLY MEANT. :P

Thunderheads

Thunderheads

Posted
Posted

There are a lot of variables, but ...I agree with a lot of what was said on the old post.

Integrity, sportsmanship and character are all factors in how one is elected into the HoF. If your name is surrounded in controversy with illegal substances, it needs to be taken into consideration. It would go against the factors listed.

It's that simple.

Now,...(caveat): The following is my personal opinion, not necessarily dripping w/ fact.....

Bonds used steroids, and lied, and while lying rubbed it into the face of everything that's baseball. Sosa, guilty. I don't care how much I enjoyed watching him, ...he's guilty. Roger Clemens ...guilty ....(plus he's a DB) McGwire admitted it ....finally ....

I actually have more respect for those who just came out and owned the fact that they did it! It doesn't bug me 1/2 as much as the ones who are lying.

It's tough to say what's going to happen on the ballots. Maybe, (what would be best is....) the names SHOULD appear on the ballot, and then let the percentage of votes speak the rest of the story.

Who knows, ...it's going to get interesting, and it'll probably get ugly too!

:2cents:

Another article ..........

http://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/nationals/after-helping-transform-shortstop-barry-larkin-elected-to-hall-of-fame/2012/01/10/gIQAXKZYnP_story.html

yawetag

yawetag

Posted
Posted

It's tough to say what's going to happen on the ballots. Maybe, (what would be best is....) the names SHOULD appear on the ballot, and then let the percentage of votes speak the rest of the story.

I agree that the names should be on there. After all, with or without steroids, they were the "best" players of the time. However, I don't see most (of any) of them getting inducted.

Sadly, though, there are going to be some names that deserve the HOF, but won't because they played during the "Steroid Era" -- whether or not they were linked to steroids. A perfect example is Bagwell: http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1008767-jeff-bagwell-astros-great-doesnt-deserve-to-be-a-casualty-of-steroid-era

Umpire in Chief

Umpire in Chief

Posted
  • Author
Posted

No Warren, you took it the wrong way....

I meant ....

The nomination process and what leads up to it will get ugly, .........not this thread ;)

DON'T TELL ME I TOOK IT THE WRONG WAY !!!

I HAVE PLENTY OF VOICES IN MY HEAD AND YOURS IS NOT ONE OF THEM! THEY TOLD ME WHAT YOU REALLY MEANT.

:P

  • Like 1
Thunderheads

Thunderheads

Posted
Posted

No Warren, you took it the wrong way....

I meant ....

The nomination process and what leads up to it will get ugly, .........not this thread ;)

DON'T TELL ME I TOOK IT THE WRONG WAY !!!

I HAVE PLENTY OF VOICES IN MY HEAD AND YOURS IS NOT ONE OF THEM! THEY TOLD ME WHAT YOU REALLY MEANT.

:P

Now THAT is funny stuff!!!!!!! :D

yawetag

yawetag

Posted
Posted

No Warren, you took it the wrong way....

I meant ....

The nomination process and what leads up to it will get ugly, .........not this thread ;)

DON'T TELL ME I TOOK IT THE WRONG WAY !!!

I HAVE PLENTY OF VOICES IN MY HEAD AND YOURS IS NOT ONE OF THEM! THEY TOLD ME WHAT YOU REALLY MEANT.

:P

I think this goes beyond the "short leash" comment. :D

Umpire in Chief

Umpire in Chief

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Back to seriousness...

This is going to be an issue for at least the next 5-10 years.

I have my opinions of who I think juiced it up, but there are a whole second tier of people who had rumors surrounding them but didn't draw the attention others did. Will they be stained by the sins of their potential HOF classes?

LA ump

LA ump

Posted
Posted

"Integrity, sportsmanship and character are all factors in how one is elected into the HoF. If your name is surrounded in controversy with illegal substances, it needs to be taken into consideration. It would go against the factors listed."

If the above statement is true, then half the people in the HOF should tossed out. It's full of racists like Ty Cobb and Cap Anson, drunks like Babe Ruth and Mickey Mantle, but voters back in those days looked at what was done on the field.

mstaylor

mstaylor

Posted
Posted

Being a drunk should hurt you on the field, not help. Taking steroids is an enhancing drug, that means their numbers are falsely obtained. Yes, you still have to have skills, you still have to be able to put the bat on the ball, but when the player's strength is greater, weight is higher and hands are faster then numbers become very suspect. I think they should be excluded, if they go in they need a huge asterick beside their name.

Thunderheads

Thunderheads

Posted
Posted

"Integrity, sportsmanship and character are all factors in how one is elected into the HoF. If your name is surrounded in controversy with illegal substances, it needs to be taken into consideration. It would go against the factors listed."

If the above statement is true, then half the people in the HOF should tossed out. It's full of racists like Ty Cobb and Cap Anson, drunks like Babe Ruth and Mickey Mantle, but voters back in those days looked at what was done on the field.

True, and a good point. However, ...remember, ....back then, the "information flow" wasn't like it is today. Actually, today, ...info flows at light speed in comparison, so back during the Cobb, Anson, Ruth era,.... things didn't 'get out to the public' like they do today.

Umpire in Chief

Umpire in Chief

Posted
  • Author
Posted

I read something that said the Yankees (and many others in MLB) of the Ruth - Mantle era were using cocaine and amphetamines as PED of that era. Many of those people may have turned to steroids if the pharmacology was available then.

LMSANS

LMSANS

Posted
Posted

No Warren, you took it the wrong way....

I meant ....

The nomination process and what leads up to it will get ugly, .........not this thread ;)

DON'T TELL ME I TOOK IT THE WRONG WAY !!!

I HAVE PLENTY OF VOICES IN MY HEAD AND YOURS IS NOT ONE OF THEM! THEY TOLD ME WHAT YOU REALLY MEANT.

:P

I think this goes beyond the "short leash" comment. :D

It's his leash. :smachhead:

Thunderheads

Thunderheads

Posted
Posted

I, personally, haven't made up my mind. I'm leaning towards those taking PEDs not getting in, but...

Also, an aside to Thunderheads, I wasn't saying that Bonds should be allowed in.

That's cool, ..thanks ..........

No, you did not. However, I can see where someone could think it was insinuated....but, ....no big deal.

It's all good. As another aside ....... there's nothing wrong with a healthy debate, and steroids sure conjures up good ones! ;)

JaxRolo

JaxRolo

Posted
Posted

Will steroids make me a better Umpire?

Do MLB umpires get drug tested?

(null)

 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...