I have always been amazed at what makes some baseball writers vote for or against an individual. Certainly, some players are borderline HOF'ers and a case could be made one way or another. But some writers leave you shaking your head.

 

Someone actually thought Pat Hentgen was HOF caliber? And two writers believe that Ellis Burke's numbers warrant Hall status? I wonder if these guys were among the 5 bozos that said Tom Seaver's credentials were not good enough to be a first-ballot Hall of Famer? What about the nine clueless writers that, apparently, felt Henry Aaron was a few homers short of being Coopersville worthy?

 

Like everyone, writers have their own biases and life experiences that affect their thinking. But, my goodness, how do you explain some of the voting?

 

Is there anyone here on BGP that doesn't think Bench was a first-ballot HOF'er? Not me, but 16 baseball writers did.

 

What do you think about the Baseball HOF voting and the evident quirkiness of some of the writers who vote?

I'd just like to know why Robby Alomar almost gets in, while Jack Morris only gets 53 percent of the vote. That's a crime, IMO.

Because a lot of the writers/voters have egos bigger than some of the players. They obviously carry grudges around with them concerning certain players. I think they should take the votes away from the writers, and let a panel of HOF members, former coaches, and managers vote.

Some voters are former players or are a part of baseball in some aspect. Some writers hold grudges against some of the players and they feel by electing other players into the hall it kind of "sticks it to them". It's wrong but until they fix it then that's how it'll happen.

I am sure a lot of writers carry grudges. Writers, both past and present day, let their egos get in the way of casting a sane ballot. I would say that the four writers who voted "no" to Cobb, probably had visions of his saliva dripping from their chins.

 

How else do you explain Catfish Hunter getting a larger percentage than Cy Young? Or Gary Carter getting a larger percentage of votes than Jackie Robinson?

Because a lot of the writers/voters have egos bigger than some of the players. They obviously carry grudges around with them concerning certain players. I think they should take the votes away from the writers, and let a panel of HOF members, former coaches, and managers vote.

 

:thumb: Great post.

 

It really irks me that writers such as Jay Mariotti (among others) get a vote. It even bothers me that John Fay, whose blog I read regularly, gets a vote.

Because a lot of the writers/voters have egos bigger than some of the players. They obviously carry grudges around with them concerning certain players. I think they should take the votes away from the writers, and let a panel of HOF members, former coaches, and managers vote.

 

I think stripping it totally away from the writers is a bit silly. They watched every day too, you know. I'll buy your panel idea, but to leave the writers out would be doing a disservice. It's not like HOF members, former coaches and managers are without biases either.

I can't remember for what HOF it was but Mike Greenberg received an invitation to be a voter and he turned it down because he said it's unfair because he is a radio host/analyst and doesn't focus his attention enough on that one particular sport.

I think stripping it totally away from the writers is a bit silly. They watched every day too, you know. I'll buy your panel idea, but to leave the writers out would be doing a disservice. It's not like HOF members, former coaches and managers are without biases either.

 

At least the former players, coaches and managers have played the game.

 

It may not relieve them of their biases, but it gives their vote more credibility to me.

 

What qualifications do guys like John Fay & Jay Mariotti possess? As far as I'm concerned, they're talking heads.

 

FWIW, I love John Fay's blog. I'm simply using him as a local example.

Alomar most definitely has Hall of Fame numbers and deserves to get in one day.

Let me ask you guys a question. Taking into consideration that Robby Alomar was only eight votes short of being elected on the first ballot, how many of you think that the spitting incident and/or the AIDS allegation was enough to cost him just the few votes that kept him out of the Hall this time ?

 

 

Another question: Should election be strictly about baseball and numbers or should consideration be given to character, controversy, and off-the-field issues?

I'd just like to know why Robby Alomar almost gets in, while Jack Morris only gets 53 percent of the vote. That's a crime, IMO.

Alomar is clearly a HOF-caliber player ...

Let me ask you guys a question. Taking into consideration that Robby Alomar was only eight votes short of being elected on the first ballot, how many of you think that the spitting incident and/or the AIDS allegation was enough to cost him just the few votes that kept him out of the Hall this time ?

 

 

Another question: Should election be strictly about baseball and numbers or should consideration be given to character, controversy, and off-the-field issues?

 

I know this arguement has been had a million times but its the Baseball Hall of Fame...not the Character Hall of Fame.

 

And to answer your first question...I definitely think that the spitting/AIDS stuff affected him.

I know this arguement has been had a million times but its the Baseball Hall of Fame...not the Character Hall of Fame.

 

And to answer your first question...I definitely think that the spitting/AIDS stuff affected him.

 

I agree... At least enough to cost him eight votes.

What about the possibility of revealing who voted for who? I mean if someone doesn't want to vote for Johnny Bench the first time around, I want to hear from them why he didn't deserve it then. Make them accountable for their vote.

 

And with that, maybe have a panel the periodically reviews the members and their voting habits. Anyone "abusing" their voting privileges gets them revoked.

 

Maybe between the two, we might eliminate some of these silly votes.