NonSports Forum

Net54baseball.com
Welcome to Net54baseball.com. These forums are devoted to both Pre- and Post- war baseball cards and vintage memorabilia, as well as other sports. There is a separate section for Buying, Selling and Trading - the B/S/T area!! If you give an opinion of a person or company your full name needs to be in your post. Contact the moderator at leon@net54baseball.com should you have any questions or concerns. Enjoy!
Net54baseball.com
Net54baseball.com

Go Back   Net54baseball.com Forums > Net54baseball Postwar Sportscard Forums > Watercooler Talk- ALL sports talk

View Poll Results: Shound Barry Bonds and/or Roger Clemens be inducted into the HOF?
Bonds - in 78 50.00%
Bonds - OUT 78 50.00%
Cemens - in 76 48.72%
Clemens - OUT 77 49.36%
Multiple Choice Poll. Voters: 156. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #91  
Old 01-05-2018, 10:44 AM
packs packs is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 4,819
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth View Post
But your starting point was that it was public opinion making the decisions. Your reasoning seems odd.
In what way? Opinion decides who is elected, not proofs or some kind of formula. If you don't like the word public then replace it with writer or voter. The outcome is the same. An opinion is still the decision no matter how you want to phrase things. Opinion has been that these two players do not belong in the HOF. Like all things that could change. Are you saying that an opinion is not at play in HOF voting?

Last edited by packs; 01-05-2018 at 10:46 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #92  
Old 01-05-2018, 10:56 AM
Peter_Spaeth's Avatar
Peter_Spaeth Peter_Spaeth is offline
Peter Spaeth
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 12,801
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by packs View Post
In what way? Opinion decides who is elected, not proofs or some kind of formula. If you don't like the word public then replace it with writer or voter. The outcome is the same. An opinion is still the decision no matter how you want to phrase things. Opinion has been that these two players do not belong in the HOF. Like all things that could change. Are you saying that an opinion is not at play in HOF voting?
Of course it's opinion. Just a question of whose opinion. You said public opinion, and I questioned whether writer opinion was really a proxy for public opinion.
__________________
Buy high, sell low.
Reply With Quote
  #93  
Old 01-05-2018, 10:59 AM
packs packs is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 4,819
Default

That seems like it doesn't matter much. My point was that you don't need some kind of guilty verdict or evidence or anything else to keep someone out. And I stand by the point that if Bonds and Clemens are voted in, then it leads the public to believe that the HOF is accepting of HGH and steroid use.

Also, if public opinion plays no role in HOF voting, what would motivate Joe Morgan to write his letter?
Reply With Quote
  #94  
Old 01-05-2018, 11:37 AM
dgo71 dgo71 is offline
Derek 0u3ll3tt3
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 858
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by vintagetoppsguy View Post
And that's where you just lost your argument. You're just like Packs. You made some valid points, then say something ridiculous. Nolan Ryan got better with age too. Do you think he took steroids?

Edited to add: Contrary to what's been written in this thread, there are a lot of players that have gotten better with age. And not only baseball, other sports too. Sports like basketball and football where the game takes more of a toll on your body.

One more edit: So what if his name was in the Mitchell report. Half the names in the report I've never heard of. I guess it didn't help them much, huh? And if you want to use the Mitchell report as your standard, do we assume that anyone not named in the report is innocent? Come on!
No, you're right, im sure all those allegations were unfounded. Clemens was totally clean, yup. Must've just been a slow news day when he was accused of steroid use. And again when he was brought before Congress. And again when he was indicted. If you think those guys should get in because they were good enough before they cheated that's your prerogative. But to say Clemens didn't use is downright silly. It doesn't matter if you steer the conversation to Nolan Ryan or any of the unheard of names on the Mitchell Report. We're talking about Clemens and Bonds. It's delusional to think they didn't use given the amount of suspicion surrounding them. Again, where there is copious amounts of smoke...

As for the Mitchell Report, no, just because someone isn't named doesn't make them innocent. That's a ridiculous extrapolation to make. But being named sure isn't a good sign! Just because Shane Monahan didn't become an All-Star doesn't mean steroids didn't help him. Maybe he never even gets to the big leagues without help, who knows. Because everyone didn't benefit equally from PEDs doesn't negate the fact that using them was cheating. If your point is that Clemens was already better than Monahan, then my response is of course he was. So what? That doesn't absolve Clemens, or make his PED use any better than Monahan's.

You still haven't answered my question. Where does it end? Does McGwire get in? Manny? At what point should players who cheated the game and the record books stop being rewarded for their dishonesty?
Reply With Quote
  #95  
Old 01-05-2018, 12:15 PM
vintagetoppsguy's Avatar
vintagetoppsguy vintagetoppsguy is offline
D@v!d J@m3s
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Richmond, TX
Posts: 4,645
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dgo71 View Post
No, you're right, im sure all those allegations were unfounded. Clemens was totally clean, yup. Must've just been a slow news day when he was accused of steroid use. And again when he was brought before Congress. And again when he was indicted. If you think those guys should get in because they were good enough before they cheated that's your prerogative. But to say Clemens didn't use is downright silly. It doesn't matter if you steer the conversation to Nolan Ryan or any of the unheard of names on the Mitchell Report. We're talking about Clemens and Bonds. It's delusional to think they didn't use given the amount of suspicion surrounding them. Again, where there is copious amounts of smoke...

As for the Mitchell Report, no, just because someone isn't named doesn't make them innocent. That's a ridiculous extrapolation to make. But being named sure isn't a good sign! Just because Shane Monahan didn't become an All-Star doesn't mean steroids didn't help him. Maybe he never even gets to the big leagues without help, who knows. Because everyone didn't benefit equally from PEDs doesn't negate the fact that using them was cheating. If your point is that Clemens was already better than Monahan, then my response is of course he was. So what? That doesn't absolve Clemens, or make his PED use any better than Monahan's.

You still haven't answered my question. Where does it end? Does McGwire get in? Manny? At what point should players who cheated the game and the record books stop being rewarded for their dishonesty?
Allegations doesn't equal guilt. There are many that were wrongfully convicted of crimes they didn't commit (even though there were witnesses that "saw" them do it) only to be overturned years later due to DNA evidence.

This conversation is going nowhere. Look at the results of this poll. Congrats, your opinion is in the minority. Enough said.

I will answer your question though. I believe if you're going to let one cheater into the HOF, then you have to let them all in - Manny, McGwire, Sosa, etc. On the other hand, if they want to banish all the cheaters, then I'm also OK with them keeping the PED users out. Eirher way, it should just be fair. Let the cheaters in or keep them out. Doesn't matter to me, but be consistent. And IMO, as I've already said, cheating is cheating, it doesn't matter the extent of it.
Reply With Quote
  #96  
Old 01-05-2018, 12:45 PM
dgo71 dgo71 is offline
Derek 0u3ll3tt3
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 858
Default

I guess if the HOF ever drastically changes their stance on removing plaques we'll have another lively debate to look forward to. It might be unrealistic for your idea of consistency to stretch across the 70+ years of the Hall's existence. People change their viewpoints and opinions when presented with new information and the voters are no different. I may be in the minority here but we'll see on January 24th how the voters feel.

Last edited by dgo71; 01-05-2018 at 12:47 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #97  
Old 01-05-2018, 12:46 PM
packs packs is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 4,819
Default

The HOF is not a legal process and the ideas of guilt, evidence, and proof do not apply. The only thing that applies is opinion.
Reply With Quote
  #98  
Old 01-05-2018, 12:50 PM
dgo71 dgo71 is offline
Derek 0u3ll3tt3
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 858
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by packs View Post
The HOF is not a legal process and the ideas of guilt, evidence, and proof do not apply. The only thing that applies is opinion.
A good point. I imagine a good percentage of voters that elected Gaylord Perry aren't even alive today. Hard to have consistent results among an ever changing voting body.

Last edited by dgo71; 01-05-2018 at 12:51 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #99  
Old 01-05-2018, 12:53 PM
packs packs is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 4,819
Default

The poll got brought up too. As the poll currently sits neither Bonds nor Clemens would have enough percentage of votes to be elected.
Reply With Quote
  #100  
Old 01-05-2018, 01:21 PM
vintagetoppsguy's Avatar
vintagetoppsguy vintagetoppsguy is offline
D@v!d J@m3s
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Richmond, TX
Posts: 4,645
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by packs View Post
The poll got brought up too. As the poll currently sits neither Bonds nor Clemens would have enough percentage of votes to be elected.
It's a poll of opinion, not a vote for enshtinement and your opinion is in the minority.
Reply With Quote
Reply



Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
PSA vs SGC Poll Buythatcard Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions 16 05-19-2010 12:39 PM
What would you do? - poll Leon Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions 33 05-06-2010 07:30 PM
NEW POLL! Archive Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions 6 07-10-2008 04:02 PM
New Poll Archive Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions 54 12-21-2006 08:03 PM
New Poll Archive Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions 23 10-09-2005 08:30 AM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:49 AM.


ebay GSB