Baseball's Hall Of Fame is Stupid

                     

I said it...and I meant it:  Baseball's Hall of Fame is stupid.

It's dumb. 

It's full of crap.

Case closed.

In what is supposed to be the mother of all Halls of Fame, the baseball Hall of Fame is both full of itself and wreckless.  Not to mention that the voters of this Hall view themselves as the St Peter's of the baseball world.  The gatekeepers to immortality.

That's fine and dandy until they decide on other's mortality.  Check Mark McGwire's plight.

Now, I'm all for keeping Big Mac out.  His numbers are there....but I think he cheated.  Most baseball followers think he cheated.  And I have no problem with the voters that decided to keep McGwire out....or even the voters that wanted him in.  My thing is WHY voters did either.

If you think he cheated when you voted this year [barring information solidifying the opposite], then you think he cheated next year.  And the year after.  And so on.

Yet, next year, for some reason, McGwire will get more votes.  Why?  Why?  Why????  His numbers won't change in a year.  Neither, most likely, will be the facts around his perceived steroid use.  So why would he get more votes?

Oh, many voters forget to check Big Mac's ballot because they didn't want him to be a "first ballot Hall of Famer".  Whooooo.  A scourge if ever there was one.   As if being a 2nd, 3rd or 4th ballot HOFer means your plaque is near the bathrooms in the basement or something.  Ask Bruce Sutter if being a first time HOFer matters right now.  If you are in....you're in, regardless.

So why the charade?  If the man deserves to be in the Hall of Fame at any point...go ahead and vote for him.  Why vote NO in 2007 and YES in 2008??  Nothing about his candidacy is different.  Nothing!  The fact that these baseball writers who vote on this thing do stuff like this is moronic.  Again, the St. Peter reference. 

How about a new rule for induction....since the Baseball HOF loves rules:  if you don't make the first vote, you're never in.  Heck, make that the rule for all Halls of Fame.

My point is that if you are really, really, really, really a Hall of Famer, there would be no doubt that you should be there.  I think Bruce Sutter is a fine player....but the fact it took his so long to get in [on a ballot where no one else got in] shows that he really wasn't a HOFer, but a guy that got in because they had to elect someone. 

Sutter was elected on his 13th year on the ballot.  THIRTEEN YEARS!!  What all of the sudden made him electable last year, but not the previouse 12 years?  Honestly:  what?  Not that I am picking on him....but he was the most recent addition to the Hall and proves my point.

Tony Gwynn and Cal Ripken, Jr were darn near unanimous selections to be in the 2007 class into the Hall of Fame.  Everyone else should be lopped off the list.  Those guys deserve enshrinement and the fact there was no wavering makes them true members.  Bruce Sutter not only was wavered on for 13 years [and still is], but now opened the doors for many other "maybe/maybe nots" who can point to Sutter's status and cry, "why not me?".  If there is any debate about if you should be in or not....you shouldn't be in. 

Roger Maris is more famous that about half the people in the Hall....and he ain't in it. 

My point is that if you are a Hall of Famer ballplayer, there should be no doubt about it.   And baseball writers, stop the fakeness of being stoic against Big Mac's "transgressions" this year only to let him slide next year.