Posted by MikeT23 on 1/29/2015 2:04:00 PM (view original):
Posted by AlCheez on 1/29/2015 1:53:00 PM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 1/29/2015 1:45:00 PM (view original):
I think we should ask Pete Rose.
Well, unless A-Rod finds a way to land himself on the permanently ineligible list, the situations aren't really comparable. We don't know what would happen with Rose today because he can't be considered, and only one person's opinion ultimately matters in changing that.
Yeah, they kinda are comparable. Only one person really cares about Pete Rose in the HOF. And I think he's making more $$ by not being in the HOF so I'm not sure how much he cares.
Right now, I'm not sure anyone cares about A-Rod in the HOF. I expect, in the near future, more people care about keeping him out than anything else about him. And I don't think, should the PED guys start making their way in, that his situation is the same as a Bonds/Clemens. He got busted AFTER the big PED explosion. When it was explicitly clear to everyone that PED were not going to be tolerated.
I just can't envision some big groundswell of "Let's get A-Rod in the HOF" support occurring.
Edit to convey what I meant.
There's not some mammoth groundswell for Rose, but I think if he were reinstated, he'd immediately be a serious candidate to get in the next time the VC votes on players from his era. Because I also don't think at this point there's particularly strong sentiment to keep him out based on what he did, but right now his punishment makes that irrelevant.
If the sentiment shifts to the point where a VC is letting the Bonds/Clemens of the world in, I don't suspect A-Rod getting caught at the tail-end of his career is going to be that big an extra hurdle. Especially because I'm willing to bet that 25 years from now it'll be common knowledge that the game isn't as clean now as people like to believe.