Do you think that the Baseball Writers Association should no longer be the only determining factor in the?

Question

HOF voting? Or should they have anything whatsoever to do with the HOF voting? It's clear that the present system just doesn't work.

Answer 1

I'm not always supportive of their choices, but I think you're going to have problems with whatever choice on which you decide.



If you give former players more input, for example, then you'll have the same situation we see from the Veterans Committee, voting in guys who have no business in the HOF, or bypassing others for personal reasons. And lord knows I'd never open it up to the fans, or we'd end up with a Hall of Fame full of David Ecksteins, all the scrappy players that everyone loves.



Besides, the current system gives us plenty of fodder for debate. What would we do without their bad decisions?

Answer 2

The writers have the same likes and dislikes as fans. Since they cover the sport, and this is their job, there is the presumption of knowledge, intelligence, and history of the game. They at times inexplicably show a lack of knowledge for the history of the game, and vote older players in who have no right to be inducted into the Hall(i.e. Mazeroski, Rick Ferrell). I think the present system is OK. I feel the Hall of Fame should include the best of the best players, not the very good players.

In the long run, life goes on, and I am not bothered by off the field stuff, like All-Star Game voting, MVP or Cy Young Awards. If a player receives an award, or gets elected into the Hall of Fame, I will congratulate them.

Take care!

Answer 3

They are not the only determining factor. You need to read up on the Hall of Fame.

The system we have, may very well be flawed, but in general, the Hall does a very fair and good job.

It is difficult to see any other body doing a better job.

We can't undo past mistakes, but we can and do make small improvements in the process of selecting Hall of Fame candidates.

The actual voting in of a certain candidate is then up to the BBWAA voters.

However, that 15 year wait list is pretty cumbersome as no candidate can ever improve his status or stats while waiting.

Isn't it fun to jaw about it, though.

Answer 4

I've been saying this for years. Why not have the members of the HOF put in a vote, as well as the team owners, etc. it shouldn't just be up to the writers.

Answer 5

You are 100% correct. There needs to be a revamping of the voting process and only people who are active writers or whatever the criteria is. None of this 'long retired" crap or people not currently involved. I'm not sure how to redo it but I say after the criteria is set so knowledgable people are voting, reset the limits to a 5 year wait, no more, and a 65% requirement for induction and get rid of the VC. You get in in five years or never.

Answer 6

While the BBWAA certainly is imperfect as the Hall's primary electorate, it does do a very good job of gatekeeping. The electorate itself, however, could probably be significantly improved with a good culling of the ranks, clearing out the ones who haven't been near a ballpark, telecast, or hot shower for the past five, ten years.



The Hall remains a privately funded institution and can solicit whomever it wants as its voting college.

Answer 7

As long as it goes no where near the fans hands, I'm impartial. I don't think they do a bad job.



When people complain about upmires, they complain about the 1 call out of 10,000 that they make wrong, and forget that there were just 9,999 correct calls.



Certainly things like Rafael Palmeiro winning a gold glove despite 28 defensive games should have been investigated.

Answer 8

Agreed. The only people who don't know how bad it is are the writers and MLB. I'm not exactly sure how it should be structured, but certainly the fans could have input, as well as the retired players. It currently is who gave the writers good stories while they were playing. Most terribly subjective.

Answer 9

Good question!!!



This is a higly controversal one to though. I dont think you could get 10 people in baseball to agree on a system that works. However if you chance it you would be starting the controversy of so & so only got in becuase of the new rules & the arguments would never end!

Answer 10

Get a clue...u obviously know very little of what or whom you speak..speaking from ignorance just shows stupidity..i've never had a problem with whom they have voted in...

Answer 11

why, cuz some player you wanna didnt get selected, so the system is flawed?