The HOF is a lot more than just the plaque gallery.  It's a whole museum.  I think the average baseball fan is going to be more interested in the "museum" portion of the HOF, and only the more hardcore fan is going to enjoy the plaque gallery.

Unless you do the sleepover, which is what I did with my kids three years ago.  Then the gallery is much cooler.

Posted by seamar_116 on 8/1/2014 10:09:00 AM (view original):
You've said you haven't been to the HOF. I've been twice. It's not that big and the "average" fan is not going to Cooperstown to see the HOF anyway. I certainly did not feel over-whelmed by things to see. If there were only 75 players in it, you would definitely feel cheated...at least I would.

The wife and I spent two hours wandering around the Ted Williams Museum in Tampa.   I imagine the HOF is bigger than that.

Baseball needs to bring in the "average" fan.   Like it or not, it moves too slow for the "average" fan.    Having a HOF with 300 monuments is cumbersome for the "average" fan.   Baseball, on the whole, has to find a way to be more "average" fan-friendly.   The HOF is a place to start.

As I said, you have big displays for 5 at each position.    And small displays, with access to more info if desired, for less significant players.   You could do the whole thing in a couple of hours or spend an entire weekend digging into the likes of Enos Slaughter. 

IMO, one of the "problems" with baseball is that they're like the grumpy old man yelling "GIT OFFA MY LAWN!!!"    Baseball, and it's core fanbase, does not like change.   "It's always been that way and we like it like that!!!!"    Baseball needs to get with the program or we're all going to be watching soccer(for the passive people) or MMA(for the aggressive people) instead of baseball because it will be hidden on some bullshit channel like hockey.

I consider myself a baseball fan first but it's much easier for me to watch 3 hours of MMA than a game between the Twins and the White Sox.

If someone doesn't already like baseball, they aren't going to care about the hall of fame, regardless of its size and composition.

If someone already likes baseball, they A) don't need to be attracted to the sport and B) aren't going to stop liking baseball if the hall includes a lot of players. No one visiting Cooperstown is forced to study Enos Slaughter or Mickey Mantle. They can just read about Greg Maddux or Kid Nichols if they want. They are probably happier with a slightly bigger hall because it's more likely to include their favorite players.

Posted by dahsdebater on 8/1/2014 11:54:00 AM (view original):

Posted by seamar_116 on 8/1/2014 10:09:00 AM (view original):
You've said you haven't been to the HOF. I've been twice. It's not that big and the "average" fan is not going to Cooperstown to see the HOF anyway. I certainly did not feel over-whelmed by things to see. If there were only 75 players in it, you would definitely feel cheated...at least I would.

Mike won't read anything longer than a short paragraph.  His attention span is not very long.  Dude's about as intellectual as a gnat.  Which is fine, not everyone can be intellectual.  But if you don't want to see a lot of baseball history, you don't go to the Hall of Fame.  It seems silly to me for a guy who's never bothered to go to argue that he knows more about how it should be structured than the actual fans who actually take the time to see the thing.

You post like a woman.   So, yeah, I don't read long-winded posts.   It's the internet and you're just some jackass posting on it.   Why would I bother?

Give me something interesting and I'll read til my eyes bleed.   You're not it.  Sorry but everyone can't be interesting.

Posted by dahsdebater on 8/1/2014 12:18:00 PM (view original):
OTOH, if he thinks he would actually go if the Hall were structured in his way, maybe it would be a good change.  The majority of Americans have minimal attention spans.  You have to try to appeal to the masses.

This has actually been my point all along.

The world moves fast, people move with it.   Baseball moves slow, people bypass it.   If the monument to baseball history is clunky and crowded, people get bored.

To put it another way, almost everyone has the internet.   If you want a detailed history on a player or an era, you can look it up.   It's easy to punch in "Ed Delahanty" and find that he died after either jumping or falling into Niagra Falls.    But, IMO, the HOF should be a place that gives you a "feel" for history without crushing you with the minutiae.   You want 8 thru 88 to enjoy it.    I think a bloated HOF supresses fun like a 10 page handbook you had to read before playing your favorite video game. 

To be honest, the HOF should be completely virtual by now.  Each player should have a mini-bio with as much archival film footage as is reasonable.  Maybe put Ken Burns in charge of it.   Each year should have it's own video clip with the big events.  Every big moment could have a 30-for-30 type documentary.

Physically seeing the four-fingered leather gloves or Christy Matthewson's old uniform or the bat that Juan Marichal used to beat Johnny Roseboro has limited appeal, so keep that to the Cooperstown museum section.  The history of the game is documented VISUALLY, and we all have the means to view online.

Why traipse to New York?

There is that but it's the same as attending a game.   The best seat in the house is at my house.   Beer is cheaper and I'm the only ******* around(unless I have ******* friends over).    But being at the park is different.   Not always better but different.   The "feel" I mentioned in my previous post.

HOF should be for players that hit homer. Homer good.

Who is Homer?  And why does DIAH want someone to hit him?