PDA

View Full Version : Should Pete Rose Be Inducted Into the Baseball Hall of Fame?



The Dork Knight
01-07-2004, 12:21 AM
Yes, I think he should be inducted into the Baseball Hall of Fame. Since he has finally told the truth, he should be put in regardless of what happened before.

- The Dork Knight

Eddie G.
01-07-2004, 12:43 AM
Joe Damaggio beat up Marylon Monroe, Pete Rose bet on some games and tried to cover it up. If I had to pick which one to put in the hall of fame, I'd pick Rose. Therefore, since Joe is already in the Hall, Rose should be in there in my opinion.

Tapout
01-07-2004, 02:47 AM
Definately. I don't care if he bet against his team every game they played when he was managing. What he did on the field as a player speaks for itself and that's what the Hall should be about. Anything else is irrelevant.

Senbei Norimaki
01-07-2004, 03:02 AM
Yes, I would elect him to the Hall but not while he is still living. The rules say if you bet on baseball you are banned for life. Pete Rose is a jerk who lied to the public for 14 years. I have no problem with letting him in after his death though. I mean if a racist nasty man like Ty Cobb is in the hall then they'll let anybody in.

SSJPabs
01-07-2004, 03:11 AM
I could stomach him being in the hall if it was done after he was dead. However, he bet on baseball. He profaned the game, a game that to me is only a step short of sacred. If it were up to me Pete Rose would never be inducted into the Hall of Fame until the sun rotted and dropped from the sky.

PaQ
01-07-2004, 03:15 AM
If i could vote him in I would. It doesn't matter what he did while he was a manager, he was one, if not the greatest player of all time. And no I'm not a Rose mark, but to not have the All-time Hit King in the Hall is crazy. Especially since no one will go near 4000 anytime soon. He should go into the hall as a player no matter what.

Rose being reinstated to have a job in baseball (Reds manager) is debateable but something after his playing career should not keep him from entering the hall.

I will say I was surprised he admitted he lied. If I was him I would've admitted a long while ago and not wait 14 years, but I think he realized his chance to have any future with MLB were dwindling with every year that passed by. Although him doing this just swung all the power to Comissioner Selig since it seems he might suffer a backlash for lying.

Corrado
01-07-2004, 06:46 AM
Yes, he should be in the Hall of Fame.

He fessed up, and that and he's one of the greatest players ever makes this choic a no-brainer.

Bluntman
01-07-2004, 12:09 PM
Okay, here's a way to handle the Pete Rose debacle. Let him in The Hall Of Fame. As a player, and only a player, he accomplished great things. Those things should be recognized. And let Shoeless Joe Jackson in as well, since it has been proven that he was not involved in the Black Sox Scandal. That said, I would tell Pete outright, "We will allow you to be elected to The Hall Of Fame, but you will never be allowed to work in baseball again." Betting on baseball is not allowed. This edict is posted in every single lockerroom in baseball. However, he bet on baseball after his career was over. So this should not detract from his days as a player. Besides, if you've got womanizers, racists, and possible murderers in The Hall, you can let a gambler in.

Condiment King
01-07-2004, 12:19 PM
Yes, even though I don't agree of the way he went about his confessing.

Good Ol' Batmanuel!
01-07-2004, 12:27 PM
Yes. And I'll say what millions of others have: he should be in The Hall based solely on what he did on the field.

Lots of athletes that are already in their sport's respective Halls of Fame have done really stupid things! But this gambling thing is so touchy that I can't imagine what will happen if he does get in. Protest groups? :p Who knows? Or maybe people in general will finally just think "whatever..."

Tienshin
01-07-2004, 12:41 PM
Like few other posters I think the hall of fame in any sport is based on the merits of ones performance on the field/court/ice. Especially considering some of the more unsavory types in the baseball hall of fame (Ty Cobb...I am looking at you)

However, he should not be allowed to ever participate in MLB as a manager, front office type.

SSJPabs
01-07-2004, 01:47 PM
The problem is, he did something that HURT THE GAME. Gambling on the game HURTS THE GAME's integrity. (Yes you can say there is no integrity in a time a big salaries and prima-dona players but that's not my point.) It goes to the heart of the game, and can potentially alter the way the game is played. Something that the other unsavory types brought up on this board don't do. I stand by my earlier statement.

Failure
01-07-2004, 06:44 PM
Before these recent events, I would've said yes unequivocally, but now... I'd waver, but I'd say vote him in. His so-called "apology" really bugged me... it was a total crock. He doesn't really feel sorry at all. The only reason he's apologizing is to get what he wants. But he probably should get into the hall, his accomplishments as a player are impossible to ignore. Gamblings bad, but depending on how this current steroid controversy ends up, I'd say Rose's crimes do not fit his punishment. Of course, just because he deserves to be in the Hall doesn't mean he should ever be allowed to coach again. I'd be more than content if they allowed him in the hall, but chose to ban him from ever working in a MLB capacity.

Vyse
01-07-2004, 07:30 PM
Sould Pete Rose be in Cooperstown?
[STONECOLD QUOTE] Yes. [/STONECOLD QUOTE]

But only as a player.

Should Pete Rose manage baseball again?
*shakes up Magic 8-Ball*
Magic 8-Ball: All signs point to no.

Weatherman
01-08-2004, 01:05 AM
I say yes. It's not like he'd be the worst person in the Hall. I'm sure plenty of guys in the Hall have bet on a game at one time or another. To single out Pete Rose for exculsion when all of those other quite less repuitable players and coaches are in there is more than a thouch hypocritical.

As for the timing of Pete's anouncement, pure showboating for the new book, but better late than never.

Senbei Norimaki
01-08-2004, 03:06 AM
I say yes. It's not like he'd be the worst person in the Hall. I'm sure plenty of guys in the Hall have bet on a game at one time or another. To single out Pete Rose for exculsion when all of those other quite less repuitable players and coaches are in there is more than a thouch hypocritical.

Pete Rose is not being singled out. There is nobody in the Hall that has been caught betting on baseball. It would be hypocritical to let him in the hall.

wolverine0815
01-08-2004, 03:13 PM
If Pete Rose is let in the Hall of Fame as a player than I guess down the road we will have to let in today's sluggers even though IMO they are using anything they can that will enhance their play.

Carolina Red
01-08-2004, 04:50 PM
I wouldn't put him in the Hall for two reasons:
While he has admitted to gambling, it has damaged the reputation of the game, and it still has to this day. Sure, there were some bigger jerks who are in the Hall like Ty Cobb - and I am certainly glad that Nap Lajole will never get in, since he isn't even on the ballots anymore - and I really do think that Cobb should be out of the Hall. But anyone who hurts the image of the game shouldn't be honored in a place where a sport is being celebrated. That would be a complete contradiction!

Also, the primary reason why I wouldn't let him in is because he should be used as a deterrent for players of today and future - follow the rules or you will get in trouble, and you will be caught. Pete Rose broke the rules, and look what happened to him. Players should learn from him what can happen when you don't obey the rules regardless of how great or popular a player is.

Ajax
01-08-2004, 05:53 PM
Before these recent events, I would've said yes unequivocally, but now... I'd waver, but I'd say vote him in. His so-called "apology" really bugged me... it was a total crock. He doesn't really feel sorry at all. The only reason he's apologizing is to get what he wants. Not to get what he wants, its because he's running out of time, he has intill 2005. At first I felt that he should be let into the hall of fame, because he bet on baseball after his playing carrer. But during his interview, when Rose said yes to betting on baseball he went on to say he was wrong for not admiting 14 years ago (what about being wrong because you bet on baseball:rolleyes: ) His apology is BS. He's not sorry, and not only that but Rose is still not telling the whole truth.

wrenchien
01-08-2004, 06:02 PM
i don't think he will.

just cause someone finally admits guilt doesn't clear him of the guilt denying him glory he would have earned if he had not done the bad things he did while gaining said glory in the first place.

Ajax
01-08-2004, 06:15 PM
i don't think he will.

just cause someone finally admits guilt doesn't clear him of the guilt denying him glory he would have earned if he had not done the bad things he did while gaining said glory in the first place.True but its not the case in this siutation. Comissioner Selig said if Rose were to amit to betting on baseball, Rose would be able to get in the hall of fame.

Carolina Red
01-08-2004, 11:11 PM
Not to get what he wants, its because he's running out of time, he has intill 2005. At first I felt that he should be let into the hall of fame, because he bet on baseball after his playing carrer. But during his interview, when Rose said yes to betting on baseball he went on to say he was wrong for not admiting 14 years ago (what about being wrong because you bet on baseball:rolleyes: ) His apology is BS. He's not sorry, and not only that but Rose is still not telling the whole truth.I just saw the Primetime interview, and he isn't really sorry at all. He acknowledges the fact that he gambled, but he is still refusing to admit that those were his betting papers or phone logs or that he had a problem. And I think that losing $15,000US a day in 1987 would be a serious problem. He knew what he was getting himself into at that time. ($15k is a lot today, but it was worth even more back then!) If he's not willing to admit 100% of the details the league has on him and just say that he bet on the game, then he can't really be completely sorry for it.

By the way, Pete Rose could still be voted in by the Veterans Comittee in a few years, but don't count on that happening. They have shown serious disapproval for him over the years.

SSJPabs
01-09-2004, 01:04 AM
True but its not the case in this siutation. Comissioner Selig said if Rose were to amit to betting on baseball, Rose would be able to get in the hall of fame.Wow, if Selig were to do that then that would have to be the final nail in his coffin (at least for me). Killing the Brewers, bilking states out of money to spend on stadiums, the revenue sharing scheme, cancellation of the all-star game... I guess maybe he sees it as a way to get in good with fans.