TheBigHurtIsBack

Yes, misquoting someone and then banning them repeatedly afterwards simply because said person corrected you on what they actually said, let's throw that in there. Banhammer in 3... 2... 1...

LOL, just when I keep thinking nothing you say could be any worse than some of the OTHER stuff I've heard you say. I just... wow.

I didn't realize Leyland was even gone. Did his contract simply end, or...? I have a hard time seeing a reason they wouldn't want to keep him around. Also funny seeing a name now coaching that was on the Astros team we beat in 2005... gives you a real sense that was now a very long time ago.

Glad to hear the Sox got their man. I really don't know much about Abreau but I've seen people salivating over him on the board for a while so hopefully this is a great signing.

What the hell? Since when was everyone around here anti-ADA? Is this place manic these days?

Yeah, a couple of those comments are pretty egotistical regarding himself but as far as the Cubs go he's correct, sadly.

Personally think this is dumb. It took HOW long to fire Walker? And Manto gets the boot after 1 season? That certainly seems odd.

Sure, it was illegal. My point is it was in no way related to his production on the field, at least in terms of raising his ceiling. PED's can do that, gambling can't magically make you better than you are. Pretty simple concept. I am pretty hefty on morals, believe it or not. But in my opinion it's irrelevant. Granted, and I meant to say, "supposedly" when referencing him being clean, but as long as he's been around there's been no proof so we can't hold that against him, otherwise by that logic no big hitter would be above suspicion.

PED's can physically alter your ability and allow you to go above and beyond your natural ability. Gambling on games can't. I don't know how I can be any clearer. What you are suggesting is absurd. Yes, it is. I disagree if the premise here is that your productivity on the baseball field as a player is not the be-all, end-all reasoning behind being in the hall of fame. Again, sports stars are not automatically role models. Just because they base their voting on something doesn't mean I have to agree with it. Period. Again, simply being written as a rule or law does not automatically make it right, or sensible. Whether or not the premise is indeed that is for another discussion, but my point stands. In my opinion, the all-time hits leader, who did nothing illegal or physically ability-altering to directly achieve that, should be in the hall of fame. That's my opinion and it's perfectly reasonable.

Riiiiiiight. He could have injected himself with a dose of GAMBLING to make himself play better. The hell... I can't do anything but laugh at that post, Jake. Because that makes absolutely no sense. If it wasn't out of context it would be quote worthy.

Once again... it has nothing to do with him PLAYING. Gambling has nothing to do with playing ability. This seems to be difficult for you to grasp for some reason. Sports players are not bound to being role models. I think Barry Bonds is a piece of s*** but had he never come under the suspicion of steroids you'd better believe he'd be deserving of being in the hall of fame. Was what Rose did disgraceful? Absolutely. Did it, at all, illegally alter or affect what he did on the field? No. What you do as a player on the field is first and foremost what is most important, otherwise the HoF is irrelevant. Sorry, but having a different viewpoint does not make me wrong. That's like saying that something simply being a rule or a law automatically makes it right. That's some very naive thinking. Pete Rose is the all-time hit leader and nothing suggests he went to anything illegal to do so, merely ability. He should be in the HoF. That's my opinion.

I missed the part why I have to agree. One of the best hitters in the history of the game not being in the HoF for something not related to what he did on the field invalidates it. If what you do on the BASEBALL FIELD is not the prime reason for being in the BASEBALL HoF then the whole thing is a joke and simply doesn't matter.

I don't give a flying f***. Being in the HoF is about what you did as a PLAYER. Sports stars are not role models by default; that it their decision. Based on what he did as a BASEBALL player, he should be in the BASEBALL HoF. Period. Absolute nonsense if EVER I have heard it. Like I said, you are in the baseball HoF because of what you did as a baseball player. PED's can alter your natural ability and help you put up artificial numbers as a player. Obviously gambling does not. Sorry wite, but I can't do anything but laugh at a post this silly.

Amen. Does anyone really give a f*** about what he did? Did he cheat at the game? Did he take PEDs? Unless something he did unfairly impacted what he did as a player, it shouldn't matter. Period. Pete Rose should be in the HoF, no question. As far as greg goes, why does anyone even bother trying to reason with him anymore? Lost cause if there ever was one.

Seriously I want to know why so many successful and/or adept players come here and suddenly take a huge nosedive. I'd like to blame it on something our staff or overall organization is doing but I can't assume that. But it bothers me quite a lot.