In my opinion, I really think cocaine or any other kind of drug addicts who are chosen for Hall of Fame is like giving a bad example to our children. How can Michael Irving be given a spot in the HOF with his addiction. That just teaches children that poisoning your brain with cocaine is ok. It is disappointing that the NFL, which is the league model for all sports, make this terrible and embarrasing mistake to allow drug addicts be given fame after all mess they did while playing.
2007-02-09 06:22:36 · 12 answers · asked by esnagui 4 in Sports ➔ Football (American)
so far, many of u state that drugs should not be linked to the HOF.... so well, i mean, children learn from everything. if the nfl bases hof eligibility, then it should start considering players´ lifestyle along with their troubles. This way, current players would stop messing up.
2007-02-09 06:41:50 · update #1
Yes, the drug use and general character should be a factor. It shouldnt automatically mean that one can't get in, but it should work against them.
The best example is Michael Irvin. Borderline stats, great player in 3 Super Bowls. But also a cokehead who liked to snort blow of strippers breasts.
On the other side, Art Monk, a class act who also has 3 rings AND has BETTER numbers than Irvin.
Irvin in, Monk denied, and that is bull****
2007-02-09 07:32:15 · answer #1 · answered by The Brain 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Two words for you: Brett Favre.
Did his pain killers drug addiction affect his winning a superbowl or becoming a future NFL Hall of Famer. No.
I'm not saying that what he or anyone else is doing, but the Hall of Fame is not just based on character. This isn't baseball where we have the steroids problem. Steroids (yes steroids is a drug, but I'm talking about hurtful drugs) affect performance, but a drug addiction if anything hurts their chances of performing well. So if you are going to keep Brett Favre, a Super Bowl winning QB that holds or will hold some of the most prestigious out of the hall of fame because of a pain killer addiction (the guy was in a lot of pain at the time http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1208/is_n22_v220/ai_18329544) then that is ridiculous.
2007-02-09 08:25:20 · answer #2 · answered by The Wise One 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I have mixed feelings on this. I don't think it sets too bad of an example for kids, because look at all the Hall of Famers that didn't do drugs, and look at the players that had their careers ruined by drugs (daryl strawberry for example.....barry bonds and mark mcgwire's names are forever tarnished)
another thing is it wasn't a performance enhancing drug, so the fact that he was such a good player, while dealing with a drug problem is even more remarkable.
however, i was very surprised that he got selected now, when he just recently got in trouble again for drug related charges
all in all, i dont know what the real answer is here.......yes he set a bad example as a role model, but i dont think the NFL set a bad example by selecting him to the hall of fame....people deserve second chances (although he has had about 8 now, haha).......he was an incredible player though (although i hate everything about the cowboys of the 90s)
2007-02-09 06:32:29 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
The Mission of the Pro Football Hall of Fame is:
To educate, promote, preserve and honor. . .
To educate the public regarding the origin, development and growth of professional football as an important part of American culture,
To promote the positive values of football,
To preserve professional football’s historic documents and artifacts,
To honor individuals who have made outstanding contributions to the sport.
That is the officaial mission statment of the NFL Hall of Fame. Notice there is a lot more than stats to be considered, "to promote the positive values of football" drug use and conviction of crimes doesn't seem to do that, nor does it "preserve the honor of the game"
The fact is that the hall of fame is based on more than just stats. The character of the player is also an issue, and I think it should be. Drug addicts, convicted criminals, and others should not be let in the hall of fame. Even if that means keeping out Favre, you can't let some drug users in and leave some out for the same reason.
2007-02-09 09:19:13 · answer #4 · answered by 7 Words You Can't Say On T.V 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Who is Michael Irving? Irvin never failed a drug test, so there is no proof he was an addict, all there is proof of is he occasionally liked to party and get some coke. You want to ban drug addicts? that means about half of the league would be ineligible. All the weed smokers, alcoholics and pill poppers are out (I'm talking to Bret Farve), pot, alcohol and pain killers are all drugs and not many players can play every week without some kind of pain killer, so that guy who plays hard every week and has for ten years, but needs a cortisone shot before every game is now ineligible.
and those poor kids who will grow up thinking its okay so to do drugs? I grew up watching hall of famer Lawerence Taylor, but that didnt make me go out and smoke crack
2007-02-09 07:10:05 · answer #5 · answered by rare breed 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The Hall of Fame isn't necessarily about character. It is about the person's skill and ability on the field. If it were about character all the racist athletes from the 20th and other centuries wouldn't be in the Hall of Fames. Everybody makes mistakes in their lives. The good things they do shouldn't be overshadowed by the bad things though. Then you'd send the message to kids that in life if you make one mistake, you're screwed forever. Then people wouldn't think outside the box for fear of making a mistake which is not something anyone in their right mind should encourage.
2007-02-09 06:32:05 · answer #6 · answered by marvelgamer001 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Your theory is based on football players being role models...which they shouldn't be, as a whole. Some, absolutely, but there are more poor characters in the NFL and the HOF than good ones.
2007-02-09 06:57:14 · answer #7 · answered by Gwydyon 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
You can go for days talking about this issue. i will make my answer short.
I think that the Hall should be for what players do on the field. Drug addictions, while they are bad for the player himself as well as his image for childern, are a disease. Mental and physical dependencies are very tough to break, whether or not you are a high profile celebrity.
Favre was addicted to pain killers.....would you keep him out of the hall for that? I wouldn't.
2007-02-09 07:05:29 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
I agree with you but the NFL, and all the other pro Hall of Fames, take in people based on stats and on-field performance/issues. Irvin apparently didn't have enough problems on the field to keep him out.
2007-02-09 06:35:29 · answer #9 · answered by trombass08 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes.
2007-02-09 07:01:24 · answer #10 · answered by pdub2 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋