The NFL says, "Yes."
Should all other sports simply admit that humans are flawed and give recognition to people like Charlie Hustle...or, is gambling on your game while you're still in it a banishing offence, period?
2007-05-23 08:10:39 · 11 answers · asked by TD Euwaite? 6 in Sports ➔ Baseball
The NFL say yes because they have never had an active coach betting on the game of football.
You have to understand that Peter Rose signed an official agreement with baseball and took an oath while as a manger he would never bet on the game of baseball. He broke the agreement and the oath. For that baseball banned him from the game of baseball for life.
In Pete Rose's on book "My Prison Without Bars" he admits to betting on baseball.
The captions read as follows.
"Yes sir, I did bet on baseball," he answered.
Asked how often, he replied, "Four or five times a week. But I never bet against my own team, and I never made any bets from the clubhouse."
When asked why, Rose responded, "I didn't think I'd get caught."
People like Pete Rose do not belong in the hall of fame period. He dishonored himself and America's past time. And for that baseball will never forgive him for it.
2007-05-23 10:35:30 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
I think so. A good player is a good player. Pete Rose will always be an interesting case as he was doing the illegal deeds while still directly involved in the game. People's off the field stuff shouldn't matter for the hall, but his wasn't off the field. Same with the Black Sox, that was something on the field.
We have a bunch of drunks and all sorts of other socially unacceptable behaviors in the hall, so where would we draw the line?? The steroid issue also is tricky. Would they have been as good without? Were they always using, or just toward the end of a career? How would we ever tell?
2007-05-23 16:10:22 · answer #2 · answered by BaseballGrrl 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
The NFL says Yes," and the NFL is wrong. They say that because they would have something more like a Hallway of Fame if they did not. Guys have gambled (Karras, Hornung, etc.) and used steroids (too many to count) and they got in. That isn't right.
Rose committed the cardinal sin in baseball and continues to pay. He needs to continue to be banished. Standards are only worth something when they are upheld. Baseball had those standards for HOF entry from the start. If the NFL didn't, that's their business.
Sports doesn't need to admit humans are flawed because we are all flawed from the time we leave the womb.
2007-05-23 15:34:50 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
No. I believe to make it to the Hall of Fame in any sport, you should conduct yourself accordingly both on and off the field. Granted, that could keep some great people out of the Hall, but I think being inducted into the Hall of Fame should be about the person as a whole and not just what happened in the sport.
2007-05-23 16:20:10 · answer #4 · answered by jessicar0918 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Yes and No. Not if you're a total dirtbag. I don't think people who kept their noses clean should be forced into any kind group with those who didn't but could. Obviously, certain offences are worse than others.
Should Pete Rose be in Cooperstown? Yes, but I'd rather see racist pricks like Cap Anson and Ty Cobb removed first.
2007-05-23 15:20:56 · answer #5 · answered by GOB BLUTH 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋
lets see its they are called the " Hall's Of Fame" not the "Hall's Of Nice Guy's" you should be recognized on your career on the field, period. Think about it, say there was a great running back voted into the Hall Of Fame and then later on in life killed 2 people, not that it would ever happen, should that person be removed from the Hall? Face the facts people make mistakes. It is just in our nature.
2007-05-23 16:05:42 · answer #6 · answered by tom S 2 · 0⤊ 2⤋
The field manager is very much involved in the game.
Any individual who is a serial rule-breaking disgrace within a given profession has no call to be bestowed that profession's highest honor.
(Outside of the federal executive, anyway.)
2007-05-23 15:21:02 · answer #7 · answered by Chipmaker Authentic 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Character counts!
2007-05-23 15:54:44 · answer #8 · answered by TheSafetyMan 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Yes it should be.Pete deserves to be in there.He was a great player.The only difference is he lied about gambling.If he just had a drug or drinking problem he would be in there.
2007-05-23 15:15:47 · answer #9 · answered by doodoo27 3 · 1⤊ 2⤋
no because most of the good players now are on some kind of drug that makes them better
2007-05-23 16:01:03 · answer #10 · answered by Matthew H 1 · 0⤊ 1⤋