why can't we just leave it up to guys already in the HoF and the guys on ESPN baseball tonight?
2007-01-10 06:32:32 · 10 answers · asked by runforrest212 2 in Sports ➔ Baseball
The original concept behind Hall of Fame voting was to have the media who covered the game and thereby (in theory) knew more about the game do the voting. Back in the 30's that meant one group only - the writers. There was no TV, no Internet, radio coverage was limited. There were basically only newspapers.
The HOF has lost sight of that original idea. If the idea was to have media vote (whether or not this is appropriate is another discussion in and of itself) then the vote should be extended to ALL media that covers baseball - newspaper columnists, play-by-play announcers, television commentators, authors of baseball books, etc. The Baseball Writers Association of America now seems to think it's a birthright to which only they are privy which, of course, is pretty silly.
As an aside, the Veteren's Committee is responsible for the most ridiculous selections in the Hall's history. To say they never vote anybody in is misinformed.
2007-01-10 08:40:46 · answer #1 · answered by blueyeznj 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
The theory is that the writers (In order to get a HOF vote, they have to be a member of the Baseball Writers Association of America for at least 10 years) have enough experience covering baseball on a national scale and enough impartiality to be able to make a fair decision. While the process is not perfect, and is heavily tilted against the players, it has to be. The HOF is the greatest honor in any sport, and the process for selection should reflect that.
As far as the guys on Baseball Tonight, some of them should (and most likely do) have a vote, but a lot of people on that program are not career journalists, but retired players, and should put their dues in just like the writers that do have a vote do.
There is the Veteran's comittee, which can elect people to the HOF, but they have never managed to elect anyone.
2007-01-10 07:43:16 · answer #2 · answered by Bigfoot 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Maybe the hall of famers should vote, but I'm not sure their vote would weigh in much, there is not that many of them. I bet the ESPN guys would love to think they should make the call, and would be flattered you think so, too.
Maybe the writers vote because the Cooperstown people think the fans have already voted, by their ticket purchases. I know the sales in St. Louis went up when Mark McGwire was drilling baseballs out of the park. I think he should be let into Cooperstown, his name on the plaque. It took skill to do that, not just the possible use of steroids.
2007-01-10 06:43:51 · answer #3 · answered by riversconfluence 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Hall of famers should not vote because they might have been teamates or friends with some of the guys on the ballots. Maybe vote them in out of friendship then them deserving to be in. The writers write about the bad stuff as well as the good stuff and look at the overall picture, I think it should be left as is.
2007-01-10 08:01:09 · answer #4 · answered by nypokerplayer 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I don't believe the writers are as subjective as we would like to think, they go with what is convenient for them and not neccessarily the numbers. they have become a blacklisting click that chooses to ostercize players that don't have a good relationship with the media. I believe it needs to be taken out of their hands and it should be a combination of the Vets committee, current players with at least 5 years MLB experience and media writers not only from the baseball writers but from other organizations with proven impartiality and knowledge of the game.
2007-01-10 14:00:12 · answer #5 · answered by Tunka 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
stable element... kinda... writers would hate specific gamers simply by availability they make after video games and fees they supply... there continues to be the veterans committee if a participant does not make it in after 15 years however the corridor replaced the guidelines so its relatively confusing for them to vote a participant in. they vote b/c the corridor isn't a MLB association, they seem to be a private investment and that they get to make up their very own rules. The writers have been chosen b/c they are related to the fan's perceptions of the recreation. the corridor scopes the writers out formerly they supply em votes too.
2016-10-30 13:26:45 · answer #6 · answered by wolter 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Regardless of who votes it's still a subjective process. True, there are players being snubbed because of their bad relationship with the press (e.g. Jim Rice), but I suspect if you let HOFers vote there might be some unpopular teammates that get snubbed as well.
Perhaps a combination of the two.
2007-01-10 06:58:38 · answer #7 · answered by floundering penguins 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Because apparently they are the "experts" I agree that the veterans comittee should be the actual voters. There just seems to be a few weirdos that spoil the whole thing with biases and protests, etc.
2007-01-10 17:06:32 · answer #8 · answered by Eho 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Because they are the ones that know the most about the players why because it is there job to know everything about them they have the most nuetral opinion and they always pick the right people
2007-01-10 07:54:14 · answer #9 · answered by Mr. E 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Because they know lots of big words.
2007-01-10 08:48:03 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋