For the first time in years, nobody was elected to the Baseball Hall of Fame this year. My immediate reaction was satisfaction, as I felt that those connected to PEDs do not deserve a spot in this shrine. However, as I digest more of the debate surrounding this issue, I am reconsidering my position. The best point I have heard is the question, what do we want our Hall of Fame to be: a cathedral or a museum? If a museum, then the purpose is to capture and document the history of the sport. In that case, those affiliated with PEDs should be included because they represent the tumultous steroid period in baseball. If a cathedral, then the purpose is to honor those who achieved notable success in the sport. In that case, those affiliated with PEDs should not be included.
There is also the possibility of including the likes of Sammy Sosa, Roger Clemens, and Barry Bonds in the Hall of Fame, but with a note indicating their connection to PEDs. That might be a worthwhile compromise... If any of the steroid era players are elected, then how do we choose which? All of them? Can the baseball writers fairly cherry-pick which deserve inclusion and which do not? What about those players only rumored to be connected with PEDs versus those players who are known users? Are all players from this era to be tainted by steroids?
These are the questions to ponder...
Relatedly, next year will be the first year that Frank Thomas is eligible. Does Auburn have a player in the Baseball Hall of Fame or would he be the first?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I'm sure Frank Thomas would be the first former Auburn player to make it into the baseball Hall of Fame. He will eventually make it but I would predict not in his first year. Pete Rose should NEVER be admitted. He bet on the game. He bet on his own teams. He agreed to a lifetime ban. End of story. As to the steroid users or alleged users, well, I don't know. It's a tough problem. I do see the Hall as more of a cathedral.
ReplyDelete