January 15: Would coming clean change things for McGwire?
-
- January
- 15
Speaking at a charity event, this is what Mark McGwire had to say about not being voted into the Hall of Fame: “I had an absolutely wonderful career that I am very proud of. I’m not in control of what happens—I was in control of hitting the ball.’’
What do you think? If McGwire is more forthright in the future about his steroid use, would it, or should it, have an impact on the Hall of Fame voting?
This entry was posted
on Monday, January 15th, 2007 at 3:06 pm by John Delcos.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
Print This Post
| 
Advertisement
I like the idea of Sosa competing for a spot on the Mets roster. He has a live arm and with Peterson around to straighten him up, he is worth the gamble. You have to wonder how many projects can Peterson handle? I guess the more potential pitchers the better chances of one or two of them coming around and becoming a quality starter or releiver. Assume Glavin, Hernandez and Maine as the Mets 1-3 starters. Who out of the rest do you think fills in the #4 and #5 spots? Perez then Pelfrey? Should be a competitive spring training…
coming clean would help him? ugghhhwhat? people are voting against him BECAUSE they suspect he used steroids, and they have a reason to believe that, if he admitted to it, that would strengthen the resolve of those who aren’t voting because of the suspicion, because then, it would be a fact. It’s not about coming clean, it’s about whether you want players who used steroids in the hall or not. I say it comes down to the individual voter, if you believe Mcgwire was a hall of famer without steroids (like say Bonds would have been) then vote for him, if not, don’t.
McGwire coming clean would have the exact same effect that coming clean had for Pete Rose a few years ago: none. Voters—and apparently many baseball fans—are on a righteous charge to make McGwire pay for the sins of the entire sport of baseball and frankly, much of the sports world.
And while people may not want Hall of Fame with athletes that took steroids in it, they should understand that a Hall of Fame that featured only players that never took any performance-enhancing drugs would be quite less populated than the one we currently enjoy in Cooperstown.
By comparison, if Dave Kingman had one season where he hit 75 home runs should he be in the HOF?
Hit or Miss Dave Kingman, there was no one more intimidating to come up against. :-)
There are several players I would rather see in the Hall than McGuire and one of them is out because of what? Gambling?
It’s all BS.
McGwire, Bonds, Rose, et al should not be in the hall of fame. Rose because of the rule against betting ( shoeless joe anyone? ), the others because they cheated.
I don’t care if Mark comes clean. He cheated. His records should have ** next to them and Ruth, Maris, Aaron, et al should reclaim their rightful place until that guy from Philly takes them out.
Dave
dave – i agree. Shoeless Joe didnt know any better and should get a fair shake. Rose should also get in. And a cheater is a cheater. if you need drugs to get the job done then you deserve nothing. Sami sosa should be taken out of it as well once they found the corked bats.
I agree with Dave, in that if McGwire or Bonds, or any player connected with steroids is elected to the Hall of Fame, that his plaque should have an asterisk or notation. The same with Rose and Shoeless Joe.
I have to stand my ground on one thing.
Shoeless Joe didnt know anything. he was a poor country bumpkin. he cant be held accountable for that mess.
To Steve C. (RE: Shoeless Joe)
Actually, all eight were found not guilty. History says Shoeless Joe didn’t have a clue.