Pete Rose For The Baseball Hall of Fame

"On The Stephen A. Smith Show, Smith gives you his renowned point of view, breaking barriers beyond the world of sports, and tackling pertinent issues across entertainment, pop culture, society, business, and politics. Three times a week, you'll hear his LIVE unfiltered opinions on the day's biggest headlines as well as straight-shooting interviews with top celebrities, game-changers, and thought leaders across the societal arena." 

Source:Stephen A. Smith talking about Pete Rose for the MLB-HOF.

From Stephen A. Smith

"Pete Rose, Shoeless Joe Eligible For Hall Of Fame After Being Removed From MLB Blacklist" 

Source:The Pat McAfee Show talking about Pete Rose for the MLB-HOF.

From the Pat McAfee Show

“If Pete were to get in now, it seems cruel. Just cruel," Bob Costas said. They should have done it years ago, he continued, and noted on his plaque that in 1989, after he got those 4256 base hits, he gambled on baseball and was banned for life." 

Source:The 92nd Street Y talking about Bob Costas about Pete Rose for the MLB-HOF.

From the The 92nd Street Y

From what I said about this in 2014: 

"The only reason why Pete Rose is not in the Major League Baseball Hall of Fame (and he would’ve gone in I believe 1992) has to do with his gambling on Major League Baseball games. Which he gambled on even as manager of the Cincinnati Reds and even betted on Reds games. Pete being out of the Hall of Fame has nothing to do with his playing career and nothing to do with his playing career is keeping him out of the Hall of Fame.

I could understand banning Pete from ever being a MLB manager, coach or executive for life. Because betting on your own team’s games is a pretty bad offense. Especially if you are betting that they lose and have a say in the outcome of their games. But to keep him out of the Hall of Fame in general, when he’s arguably the best all around player of his era and generation, (and we are talking about a career that covers twenty-four seasons from 1963-86) makes no sense from a Hall of Fame perspective.

Keeping Pete out of the Hall of Fame also does more damage to Reds fans and the Cincinnati Reds organization than Pete. Because of all the respect and luster that comes from not just seeing one of your own players in the Hall of Fame, but having that person in the Hall of Fame: 

“That player was not just a great player, but he played for us and we won a lot of games with him and he’s in the Hall of Fame as one of us”. 

Things that the Reds organization and the Reds fans can’t say right now because they are denied of seeing Pete Rose in the Hall of Fame.

We are not talking about whether Pete Rose should be in the Hall of Fame as a manager or even as a human being. He would never make it to the Hall of Fame based on that criteria. We are talking about Pete Rose the player and based on his playing career and because of the facts that he’s the best player who’s been retired for at least five years from playing, not in the Hall of Fame. And of course what he did as a player would’ve put him in the Hall of Fame over twenty-years ago. Pete Rose should definitely be in the Hall of Fame. Just don’t allow him to manage or be an executive."

From The New Democrat

If you read my post about this from 10 years ago, this should be no newsflash for you. And no, I've never even met Bob Costas before, let alone talked to him about whether Pete Rose should be in the Hall of Fame or not, but Costas and I completely agree here. 

“My position and the position of millions of others is, yeah, we get it, he broke the cardinal rule. He should be banned from baseball under that rule for life,” Costas acknowledged. “But somebody got those 4,256 base hits and those three batting championships.

Put him in the Hall of Fame. Put it at the bottom of his plaque, ‘Banned from baseball in 1989 for life’ as part of the record. But he should be in as a player. If you have a slow day on a talk show and you just say, ‘Hey, should Pete Rose be in the Hall of Fame?’ The phones light up. All those decades after he last played, he remains a central figure in the minds of baseball fans. Including baseball fans who never saw him play.”

The Baseball Hall of Fame, is not Heaven, it's not Sainthood. It's for the best people ever, who've ever served in Major League Baseball. And I'm talking about what they contributed to the game as players, managers, executives, announcers, etc. Not people who could be the Pope or something because they hold such high moral standards and live by them. 

As Bob Costas also said, someone got those 4,256 hits and is still the all time MLB leader in hits. And I would add: 

Pete Rose is just 1 of 2 players ever with 4,000 hits and 2,000 runs 

1 of 14 players with 3,000 hits and 2,000 runs. 

Name 5-10 better all around offensive players in MLB than Pete Rose, in the 1960s and 70s. You would have a really hard time dong that. 

Not a Gold Glove fielder, but you are talking about a player who could play 2 outfield positions, could play 3rd, 2nd, and 1st, and do a good job for you. 

A player who could steal a base when you needed it. Could stretch a single to a double, get to home plate from 1st on a double.Not someone with great athletic ability, but someone who had the work ethic and professionalism of an entire platoon of great Marines and soldiers, all in 1 man. 

No one wanted to succeed and to win more than Pete Rose. And no one did more to win and to succeed than Pete Rose. He's the player that millions of fathers wanted there sons to be like as baseball players, simply as far as how they played the game and how hard they played and prepared to do well. 

And all due respect to the Baseball Hall of Fame, we're not talking about Heaven or Sainthood here. We're talking about the best people who've ever served in MLB, as far as what they brought to MLB. We're not talking about the best people who've ever lived on Planet Earth. 

If the HOF was in the business of just electing Saints, the Kenesaw Mountain Landis's, Thomas Yawkey's, the George "Highpockets" Kelly's, the Freddie Lindstrom's, would perhaps not get into the HOF today, because of their ties to racism. At least by the social and cultural standards of today. Ty Cobb wouldn't be in the HOF today, if you had to be a great person, just to be eligible for it. 

Yes, Pete Rose because he not just gambled on baseball, but his own freakin team, including the Reds... he should've been banned from ever managing and serving as an executive for the rest of his life. No question. But put aside the gambling, he probably doesn't get in as a manager or executive anyway. But as a player, where most of his baseball career came from... no question he's a Hall of Famer based on what he contributed to baseball as a player. And he should've gone in while he was still alive. 

You can follow me on Threads.

You can also see this post on WordPress.

The Washington Post: George Will: 'Saying Goodbye To Football: Baseball is The True American Pastime'

Source:The Washington Post- talking about football & baseball.

“Baseball is older than the Republic, but that’s not the only reason columnist George Will says it has an edge over football…

Source:The Washington Post

I’m a big fan of baseball myself. Along with football, baseball is the only sport that I can follow for the entire season and actually still enjoy watching regular season games. Not just with the Orioles who I grew up with in Bethesda, Maryland and still consider them to be my number one team even with the Nationals now in Washington. And the Nationals who brought Major League Baseball back to the nation’s capital where it’s always belonged.

I just don’t get the same satisfaction from the NBA or NHL with those two leagues today and I’m only interested in those leagues as far as how the Wizards and Capitals are doing as far as their playoff contention and to a certain extent their playoff games.

I don’t feel the need to watch the NBA Finals or Stanley Cup Finals anymore. It’s just not that interesting for me anymore. That just might be me growing up and having better things to do in June now, or the quality of those leagues especially the NBA, not being what they were in the 1980s when I was a big fan of the NBA especially.

I’m not a fan of the current Roger Goodell and this league really is his league and he now owns it.

It’s a league where defense is discouraged,

Where the average playoff team probably throws the ball 60% of the time, because the NFL wants scoring and high-octane offense over everything else

Where playoff teams only have enough defense in order to get key stops towards the end of games.

Where certain franchises are marketed and weighed more than others, because they’re popular and the NFL believes if those markets are promoted more and better than others, that will somehow make the NFL more profitable. And of course I’m thinking of a certain franchise that plays near Boston, but they’re other franchises that the NFL sees as the faces of the NFL with the Dallas Cowboys, New York Giants, and perhaps others.

The NFL is now a celebrity oriented entertainment corporation, instead of a major pro sports league.

But where I disagree with George Will, has to do with the MLB becoming more popular than the NFL at some point. Even with the ratings and attendance down in the NFL ( as they should be ) Americans and this goes back to the early 1970s or so, prefer sports where there’s a lot of action instead of seeing a lot of guys standing around on a field waiting for something to happen. Baseball like pool, is very interesting even with the delays in between action on the field.

But the reason why the NHL is a major pro sports league in America now is because of the constant fast paced action on the field. The hard-hitting and seeing these athletes do some incredible things on skates and on the ice.

Even with the dangers of football, the only thing that I can see bringing that league down to the point where it’s no longer the most popular league in America ( if not the world ) is Roger Goodell himself. And Americans get fed up with the corporate celebrity driven entertainment oriented format of the league. With celebrities being taken seriously as real NFL analysts ( to use as an example ) and Americans decide that they want their sports to just be their sports and their entertainment and celebrity news, to just be those things. But not all combined in the same pot. Which is what you get with the NFL today.

You can also see this post on WordPress.

NBA-TV: Kobe Bryant Retiring From The NBA After 2015-16 Season: Kobe Bryant's Time Has Come

Source:The Daily Review

Probably easy to say this now, but Kobe Bryant’s time to retire from the NBA has been here for a while. And it was really just about him finally seeing that and deciding to give up what has been one of the great NBA careers of all-time. As far as what he’s personally accomplished and what the Los Angeles Lakers have accomplished with him. At least arguably the team of the 2000s winning four NBA Finals and six Western Conference Finals. The player of the 2000s at least if not post-Michael Jordan. 2008 MVP, 11 times All-NBA First team. But the Lakers haven’t made the NBA Playoffs since 2012 and have been pretty bad since. Actually being the second best team not just in Los Angeles, but at Staples Center with the Clippers becoming a real force in the NBA. Yes the Clippers and you’re not seeing that, because you’re high right now. Either on Red Bull, or something illegal.

Kobe, has been beat up the last few seasons, because of age and so many miles that he’s piled up on the NBA court which takes a toll on anyone’s body even great players who accomplish superhuman feats. So Kobe I believe is late on this and the Lakers still aren’t very good and again looking like one of the worst teams in the NBA at 2-13 right now. Headed to their fourth straight non-playoff season in a league where 8-15 teams make the playoffs in each conference. All you have to do is be mediocre to make the NBA Playoffs and the Lakers aren’t even that right now. So as great of a career that Kobe has had and I at least believe the best player post-Michael Jordan, at least in the 2000s. But not the greatest Los Angeles Laker ever. Both Kareem and Magic are better, but it has been time for Kobe to call it a career.

I grew up watching NBA basketball in the 1980s just outside of Washington with the Lakers being my second team behind the Wizards, who were called the Bullets back then. And fell out of love with the Lakers when they signed Shaquille O’Neal and went to a more ball control half court style of offense. Which was common for most NBA teams in the 1990s. But I’ve always have a lot of respect for Kobe Bryant, because he was truly a great player and not just a great talent. He was a gentlemen and professional basketball player in an era of realty TV and pop culture celebrity wannabes who played basketball really just to get on ESPN Sportscenter, be celebrated online and further their NBA careers. Kobe, is very similar to Tim Duncan in how he presents himself as the constant professional who lets his game speak for itself. He was a great player who would have thrived in the NBA hey day of the 1980s just like Big Tim and will be surely missed.

CBS News: Sunday Morning: 'Take Our Poll: Should Pete Rose be in the Hall of Fame'

Source:CBS News- Pete Rose, with the Cincinnati Reds.

“The Reds’ announcement came after MLB commissioner Rob Manfred last month rejected Rose’s application for reinstatement. Manfred concluded that baseball’s career hits leader continued to gamble even while seeking to end the lifetime ban imposed in 1989 for betting on numerous Reds games while playing for and managing the team.

The Reds’ team hall of fame induction is planned for the weekend of June 24-26 in the 74-year-old longtime Reds’ hometown.

The National Baseball Hall of Fame in 1991 adopted a rule keeping anyone on the permanently ineligible list off the ballot. Rose said after Manfred’s decision that he still held out hope he would one day be inducted into the national hall.”

Source:CBS News

The only reason why Pete Rose is not in the Major League Baseball Hall of Fame (and he would’ve gone in I believe 1992) has to do with his gambling on Major League Baseball games. Which he gambled on even as manager of the Cincinnati Reds and even betted on Reds games. Pete being out of the Hall of Fame has nothing to do with his playing career and nothing to do with his playing career is keeping him out of the Hall of Fame.

I could understand banning Pete from ever being a MLB manager, coach or executive for life. Because betting on your own team’s games is a pretty bad offense. Especially if you are betting that they lose and have a say in the outcome of their games. But to keep him out of the Hall of Fame in general, when he’s arguably the best all around player of his era and generation, (and we are talking about a career that covers twenty-four seasons from 1963-86) makes no sense from a Hall of Fame perspective.

Keeping Pete out of the Hall of Fame also does more damage to Reds fans and the Cincinnati Reds organization than Pete. Because of all the respect and luster that comes from not just seeing one of your own players in the Hall of Fame, but having that person in the Hall of Fame: 

“That player was not just a great player, but he played for us and we won a lot of games with him and he’s in the Hall of Fame as one of us”. 

Things that the Reds organization and the Reds fans can’t say right now because they are denied of seeing Pete Rose in the Hall of Fame.

We are not talking about whether Pete Rose should be in the Hall of Fame as a manager or even as a human being. He would never make it to the Hall of Fame based on that criteria. We are talking about Pete Rose the player and based on his playing career and because of the facts that he’s the best player who’s been retired for at least five years from playing, not in the Hall of Fame. And of course what he did as a player would’ve put him in the Hall of Fame over twenty-years ago. Pete Rose should definitely be in the Hall of Fame. Just don’t allow him to manage or be an executive.

You can also see this post at The Daily Press, on WordPress.

NFL: Phil Clark- 'Football Championships Still Won by Complete Team'

Source:Sports Illustrated- The Seahawks defense, dominating Peyton Manning and Broncos offense, in Super Bowl 48.

"Sports Illustrated's Boomer Esiason discusses why he believes the Seattle Seahawks had greatest defensive performance in Super Bowl history. Subscribe to Sports Illustrated."

Source:Sports Illustrated- The Seahawks defense, dominating the Broncos offense, in Super Bowl 48.

From Boomer Esiason at Sports Illustrated

Roger Goodell and company may want to try to outlaw defense in the National Football League and try to make the NFL look like flag football, where perhaps even tackling may soon become illegal, because they believe offense makes money and defense holds down profits, turning the NFL into the AAML or the All About Money League instead of the NFL.  They are trying to get non-traditional football fans who are really only interested in celebrity culture and so-called reality TV, and perhaps are casual football fans at best, because they think some of the players are awesome or whatever. Defense still wins championships and it always will.

As Phil Clark said on his blog, you don't need a great defense to win the Super Bowl but you can't have the worst defense. And the only thing I would add to that is you can't have a bad defense either. You need to at least have a good defense.  A defense that gets stops, meaning consistently, prevents the other team from scoring. It doesn't get run over in the running game on a regular basis and doesn't consistently give up big plays in the passing game because it has a weak secondary or a weak pass rush, or a combination of the two.

If you look at all of the Super Bowl Champions, all 48 of them had defenses that were in the top 10 or near that and didn't give up a lot of points either. You can't say that about the Super Bowl runner ups, because several of them were toward either the bottom of the NFL or in the low twenties when it came to yardage and points given up. The 1984 Miami Dolphins come to mind very quickly and so do the 2007 New England Patriots, which were 18-0 going into Super Bowl 42 before they were upset by the New York Giants and did have one of the top defenses in the NFL that year.

There also have been explosive, high-scoring and yardage Super Bowl runner ups that were ranked pretty well in defense the year or years they went to the Super Bowl but not only lost the Super Bowl but lost it badly. The Buffalo Bills of the early 1990s come to mind very quickly, where they gave up a total of 140 points in their 4 losses, 30 or more in the 3 blowout losses, not because they had a bad defense but because they had an undersized defense going up against big physical teams with great running games: New York Giants in 1990, Redskins in 1991 Dallas Cowboys in 1992 and 1993.

And again the casual NFL fan who may only be interested in offensive football may say, well, what about the St. Louis Rams on 1999 or the Green Bay Packers of 2010 or the San Francisco 49ers of the 1980s or the Redskins of the 1980s. They were all very offensive-oriented teams that all racked up a lot of yards and scored a lot of points. True, but all of these teams, and the 49ers and Redskins specifically, were all consistently ranked high on defense in the top 10. I mean, the 1991 Redskins Super Bowl Championships team scored over 500 points, over 30 points a game, but they gave up only14 points a game and won a lot of blowouts.

The record and evidence are very clear, that if you are think about building a Super Bowl winner and you think you are going to put together a great offense and see how many points you can score that season or in that era, make sure you also invest well in your defense so you are not giving up nearly as many points and yards against your opponents as well, because when the playoffs come around, chances are you'll face at least one good defensive team that can move the ball and score points as well that may match up well with you. And you may need to get a lot of stops in that game to have a good chance at winning, as the 2007 Patriots found out the hard way in Super Bowl 42.

As much as Roger Goodell and company may want to change this, football still has three sides of it and the NFL is not arena ball, where it is mostly about offense. You still need to play good defense and have a good special team as well, no matter how many points you score and yards you put up. Breaking offensive records doesn't lead to championships but to having a good balanced team that scores, defends, covers kicks, kicks the ball, blocks and tackles, and so forth, which is still what it takes to win the Super Bowl.

You can also see this post at FRS FreeState, on Blogger.

Bleacher Report: Matt Fitzgerald- ‘Athletics May Reportedly May Play at Giants AT&T Park if New Coliseum Deal Fails’

Source:Bleacher Report- two of the Oakland Athletics.

Source:The Daily Times

“Jean Quan, the Mayor of Oakland, confirmed that the Athletics will stay in the Oakland Coliseum through 2015…

From the Bleacher Report 

At risk of stating the obvious: (trust me, not the first time I’ve taken this risk) for the Oakland Athletics to remain in the City of Oakland, they’re going to have to get a new ballpark and perhaps renovations to the current Oakland Coliseum (whatever the hell the current name of choice is) in order to remain competitive and not end up in San Jose, Sacramento, Portland, or Las Vegas.

The USFL History: The United States Football League Comes Back

Source:Real Life Journal

I have already written a blog about why the United Sates Football League failed in the mid 1980s and how it could've succeeded. So I'm not going to focus too much on that but the reasons why the USFL could've succeeded and still be in business today are the same reasons how a USFL could make it today, because there are enough non NFL markets in America, to support a USFL franchise. And enough good NFL caliber players, to make the USFL work today, who maybe aren't ready for the NFL yet or have been overlooked and just need that one shot to make it.

The NFL is somewhat short on quarterbacks offensive lineman, defensive lineman and there are plenty of NFL players, that simply aren't ready to be stars in the NFL today. And need time to develop and when they are sent out to play now, they simply don't look ready to play yet, but if they are playing in the USFL and given a chance to develop and play and not have to worry about playing against the best football players in the World, then the pressure is off to a certain extent instead of trying to live up to some huge contract that they signed and would be better off starting in the USFL.

Put those players in the USFL, they would be surrounded by good young players, who just need time to develop or that shot to be a good NFL or USFL player. The USFL could serve as either a developmental league for the NFL or they could end up, however they develop their players and are able to attract players to their league perhaps one day end up being part of the NFL or perhaps merging with the Canadian Football League, the USFL and maybe we could end up with some type Continental Bowl in the future.

But in the short-term, the USFL needs to be about developing NFL players, that aren't ready to be in the NFL yet or players that are so far down on the depth chart, that they aren't getting a chance to develop. And they need do this by being a spring league at least in the beginning, basically starting training camp and Preseason after the Super Bowl and playing in major non NFL markets. Again a big reason why the USFL failed, was because they were in big NFL markets, like Washington, Philadelphia, New York, Boston, Detroit, Chicago etc.

The USFL can't do that again and need to go to places like, Orlando, Birmingham, Memphis, perhaps Columbus, Ohio, San Antonio, Portland, Salt Lake, Las Vegas, Los Angeles, perhaps San Jose or Sacramento. Major big cities like this that want pro football but don't have an NFL Franchise yet that would especially support a USFL franchise in the spring. And you take the players from the NFL or were overlooked by the NFL, that are simply not ready to play full-time in the NFL yet, thats how the USFl could succeed.

CBS News: Tony La Russa Retires as St. Louis Cardinals Manager

Source:The Daily Press 

The only thing keeping Tony La Russa out of the Hall of Fame as a manager was himself, because he's been managing for 33 years consecutively, his whole career, and I believe he's been the best manager in Major League Baseball that whole period, and that includes people like Tommy Lasorda, Billy Martin, Earl Weaver briefly, Bobby Cox. Joe Torre, Roger Craig, Jim Leyland, and many others.   Some may say Joe Torre because of the championships:  4 World Series Championships, 6 American League Championships, 11 Eastern Division Championships, and 13 playoff appearances.  Only Tony La Russa and Bobby Cox come close to those accomplishments in this time period.

But when Joe Torre was with the New York Yankees from 1996 to 2007, you could make a case that he had the best team in MLB every year he was there, especially from 1998 to 2007, but they came up short several times, as in 2001 losing to the underdog Phoenix Diamondbacks, 2003 losing to the underdog Miami Marlins, both in the World Series, 2002 losing to the underdog Anaheim Angels in the American League Championship, and 2004 blowing a 3-0 Series lead to the Boston Red Sox in the American League Championship, something that will always be hated by Yankee Fans and loved by Red Sox Fans.  I know a few of those fans myself. And of course the Yankees always had the most money in this time period and could always basically put all-star teams together to win the World Series.

Other than the time period during which Tony La Russa was with the Oakland Athletics from 1988 to 1990 or 1991, he was there from 1986 to 1995, but in those 4 years you could make a pretty good case that the Athletics should have won at least three World Series if not four, because from 1988 to 1990 they had the best three teams in baseball.  And they only won one World Series.  Of course, one is better then nothing but in the two World Series that the Athletics lost in 1988 and 1990, they won a total of one game.

They lost 4-1 in the 1988 World Series to, I believe, the worst World Series Champion since 1969, the Los Angeles Dodgers, who only won something like 85 games that season.  And of course you had the famous Kirk Gibson home run in game one to win that game against the best closer in baseball at the time, Dennis Eckersly.  When Tony La Russa was in St. Louis with the Cardinals from 1996 to 2011, he didn't always have the best team and he still won 7-8 Central Division Championships, three National League Championships, and two World Series, and made the playoffs 9-10 times again. When only four teams make the playoffs in each league, they may go up to 5-6 teams in 2012, but we'll see. 

Tony La Russa was the best manager in MLB in his era as well as today because of what he got out of his players for the most part, not including his time in Oakland, but definitely in St. Louis, a midsize market. But with a great fan base, if not the best in MLB, it was just a matter of when Tony La Russa would retire.  That would determine when he was going into the Hall of Fame, because he's a first ballot Hall of Famer in waiting.

IMS Soccer News: Report: Brian Quarstad: USL Announces Merger With Major Indoor Soccer League

Source:The Daily Press

As someone who grew up as a sports junky, but now considers myself a recovering sports junky as an adult, who still have a healthy appreciation for sports, even though it’s no longer my main interest, perhaps not even by far, I was introduced to indoor soccer in my late teens. Seeing the MISL on ESPN and the Baltimore Blast who are still in business today on local sports TV. I got to appreciate and understand the game. Its sort of like a combination of basketball and hockey, as far as the side of the field and the ball movement. With the positives of soccer as well, but its a much faster game inside. Smaller field, fewer players and faster, with no offsides. So players have more freedom to actually try to score and to win.

In outdoor soccer, managers and teams, tend to play not lose and for a tie. Which happens a lot in soccer. And with this sports fast paced and high scoring, I always wondered why the sport has never taken off. And least become as popular as Major League Soccer. I just don’t believe the sport which I call futsal, which is what it’s called in Europe and I believe in Mexico, has been marketed very well and doesn’t have a strong enough connection with pro soccer. And it doesn’t have a farm system, like pro minor Leagues as well as college level leagues. Or like little leagues for kids. Americans, generally don’t grow up playing futsal. They come by it as pro soccer players, because they haven’t made it to the majors generally.

I’m glad the MISL has merged with the United Soccer Leagues or USL. Which is basically in charged of minor league soccer in America. Because this will save the MISL and prevent it from going out of business. But I believe the MISL is a lot better than a minor sports league. And at some point could become a major pro Sport in America, like in Mexico. Because the players are here to make that happen. But for that to happen, I believe the MISL needs to merge with Major League Soccer. And have each MLS franchise sponsor and run a MISL franchise in their market. With the MISL playing in the fall and winter and of course the MLS playing in the spring and summer. This would save the MILS indefinitely, because the leagues could market each other together and grow together.