Would you vote for Barry Bonds or Roger Clemens for the HOF?

And that is why they have to be put in. Both are players of their generation and even though they juiced, so did a great portion of their generation, and yet these guys were the premier at their positions either way. Yes they Juiced but so did a great number from their generation and these guys were the best


If you are ready to call this the steroid era, then it is an official era in baseball and that requires that its greats have their place in canton just as those from the era of guys like Ruth and Gehrig.

 

I said yes to McGwire, so there's no way these two don't deserve it.

It was the Steroid Era. F that "live ball" bullshit. It was all powered by PEDs. It's done, it's over, people are still baseball fans. Time to move on.

 

I voted for Bonds.....because Clemens is white.

 

Uhh, what?

 

let me break it down for you

1) They're both superstars at their positions, albeit, performance-enhanced of course.
2) They're both assholes.
3) They've both been raked through the coals by the media....justifiably.

I figured the only difference between the 2 is something as "minute" as their skin color. I decided to vote for Bonds specifically on a whim.

I really have no preference, and could care less. I might as well have flipped a coin.

 

I dig. The white comment just threw me off.

 

that was the intention :smile:

 

The all time homer run leader is not going to be left out of the hall. So Barry makes it. Maybe Roger isnt so lucky.

 

You could've voted for both, you know. :wink:

 

i know that.....i just don't like Clemens.

I'm playing favorites, here.

 

You don't know how fickle sports writers are....

HE DIDN'T GRANT ME AN INTERVIEW 17 YEARS AGO! IT DOSENT MATTER THAT MY QUESTIONS WERE ALL ASKED 30 DIFFERENTS TIMES BY OTHERS. HE DIDNT ANSWER MINE. NO HALL.

 

Clemens was a BJ tho!

He's an asshole, but he was a damned good ball player.

 

I hate that the writers make the decision. They've never played the game at that level. They've never lived the life of a guy trying to make it in the minors. And if any sports writer tries to say they never took a shortcut somewhere along the line to their own careers, I'll call bullshit almost every time. You can tell just from the shitty writing style and grammar they use that they got a boost here and there themselves.

I get that they probably know more history and understand the statistics better and such, but there should at the very least be a committee of guys who are in the Hall already who get an equal say in every vote.

 

I can see people voting Yes to Bonds and No to Clemens because before Bonds bulked up towards the end of his career, he was still a HOFer. A lot of people believe Clemens was on the stuff his whole career, or at least the vast majority of it.

 

i don't let homerism get in the way of my opinions.

 

Willie Mays was a huge juicer back in the day from what I hear.

 

Gin and Juice, maybe.

 

Absolutly. It's beyond stupid that some bitter sportsdick decides who gets enshrined. Thank god for the veterans commitee.

 

The Veteran's Committee has always been a sham to me. I went looking for information about it because I was pretty sure writers still stuck their grubby hands into that as well, and I wasn't far off the truth. Here's what Wikipedia says:

So while the writers may no longer actually vote for who gets in on the Committee's ballot, they get to decide who is on the ballot, rendering the Vet's Committee all but useless.

The Veteran's Committee should be given a list of names for anyone who is eligible based on length of service and time since last played, and given free reign to vote for whoever they want from that list, using any criteria they choose. Even if the election came with a note that the player was a Vet's Committee selection, it would still at least give players who earned the respect of their peers the honor they deserve.

 

Actually, for the most part, they really don't.