Rand defends Gretz; rips JoPo's article - Page 4

shaneo69 · 02-09-2007, 12:13 PM

RAND: Sympathy for the voters
Feb 08, 2007, 4:24:41 AM by Jonathan Rand

I’m never sure whether to be amused or disgusted by the criticism directed at Hall of Fame voters in any sport whenever a local favorite falls short of induction.

If all the fans and media critics in every city could get all their favorites enshrined, every Hall of Fame would have so many members as to render itself meaningless. If you elect 1,000 players, what you’d have is a gigantic card show, not a Hall of Fame.

Certainly, anybody has the right to question a selection or omission for any Hall of Fame. But why does the criticism have to become personal and even slanderous?

When our own Buck O’Neill was passed over for Cooperstown by a special Negro Leagues committee, we read about some never-substantiated personal grudge that supposedly derailed his chances.

Now that former Chiefs linebacker Derrick Thomas has fallen short of the Pro Football Hall of Fame for the third time, a local columnist belittles the election committee as a “40-man party crew,” as if there’s something reckless or inebriated about its decision making. And, actually, there are two women on the committee now.

This is reminiscent of Lawrence Taylor. The former Giants linebacker, convinced he might be denied election because of a disgraceful series of drug arrests, claimed the electors were hypocrites because most, he said, were drunks chasing little girls on Miami Beach. Because the Pro Football Hall of Fame takes personal behavior off the table, Taylor was a first-ballot inductee in 1999.

This is some party. As a former Hall of Fame elector, I can assure you that serving on that committee is an honor. It’s also a pain in the butt. You spend the Saturday before the Super Bowl, your only free day of the week, cooped up in a hotel meeting room listening to presentations and discussions for all finalists, which numbered 17 this year.

Personally, I would rather walk barefoot on the ice in my driveway than listen to a one-hour discussion over whether former Commissioner Paul Tagliabue belongs in the Hall of Fame. It’s beyond me why you would enshrine an executive because he did for the league — albeit very well — exactly what he was hired to do.

The vast majority of the electors have watched pro football for decades, diligently prepare their homework and care passionately about voting for the right people.

A case for a candidate that might seem overpowering to the average fan may be badly flawed in the eyes of voters who know a sport inside and out. Once you’re caught with gaping holes in your argument, your candidate is finished. If Kansas City representative Bob Gretz can’t make a convincing case for Thomas or any other candidate, nobody can.

The decisions are difficult because you’re often trying to distinguish between truly excellent football players and the all-time greats. This is the border Thomas keeps trying to cross.

Some votes are philosophical. How can you exclude Ray Guy, indisputably the greatest punter of all time? The prevailing sentiment is that a guy who trots in and kicks the ball six times a game and seldom gets his uniform dirty is not a Hall of Famer.

The seamheads who vote for the Baseball Hall of Fame fancy themselves the best informed and most discriminating voters for any Hall, and maybe they are. But they absorb plenty of cheap shots, too.

There was a lengthy Sunday opinion story in the New York Times a few years ago claiming that former Boston Red Sox outfielder Jim Rice keeps getting excluded because of his contentious relationship with reporters. (My few encounters with him were fine.) Nowhere was it mentioned that pitcher Steve Carlton, possibly the most media-hostile star in the history of baseball, was elected to Cooperstown on the first ballot.

Hall of Fame electors must have thick skins, though I must admit even I became offended once. An NFL ex-star once approached me and said he’d been told that he wasn’t in the Hall of Fame because I didn’t like him. He added that he couldn’t understand this because we’d gotten along so well during his playing days.

I never knew the man during his playing days. But you know what? He made almost as much sense as most of the people who rip Hall of Fame voters.

The opinions offered in this column do not necessarily reflect those of Carl Peterson.

http://www.kcchiefs.com/news/2007/02...or_the_voters/

**Rain Man** · 02-09-2007, 05:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by shaneo69

A case for a candidate that might seem overpowering to the average fan may be badly flawed in the eyes of voters who know a sport inside and out.

Yeah, because sportswriters who watch games week in and week out for two decades know a lot more than people like me, who do nothing but watch games week in and week out for three decades.

Demonpenz · 02-09-2007, 06:11 PM

I am wondering how much the fact that thomas rarely just blew someone up. Comes into play. Other like backers. Butkis, singeltary, Lawrence taylor all where physical nightmare, with DT you knew you were probably just going to be stripped, not paralized.

Hammock Parties · 02-09-2007, 06:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Phobia

You've already got that with journalists covering the same team. Do you think Gretz doesn't vote for every Steeler and Chief who becomes eligible?

No, and it's not the same. It would be far worse with players.

Dr. Johnny Fever · 02-09-2007, 06:27 PM

I'll probably get butchered for this... but I'm not sure DT was a HOFer. Great yes.

C-Mac · 02-09-2007, 07:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by beer me

I'll probably get butchered for this... but I'm not sure DT was a HOFer. Great yes.

Go read or reread JoPo's article, he nails it.

htismaqe · 02-09-2007, 08:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ari Chi3fs

I think anyone named Gretz or Mods named Parker are full of shit.

Sound argument there. Hard to argue with such impeccable logic.

htismaqe · 02-09-2007, 08:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Demonpenz

I am wondering how much the fact that thomas rarely just blew someone up. Comes into play. Other like backers. Butkis, singeltary, Lawrence taylor all where physical nightmare, with DT you knew you were probably just going to be stripped, not paralized.

BLASPHEMY!

shaneo69 · 02-09-2007, 09:01 PM

I will be interested to see how quickly jackass Seau makes the HOF (1st ballot, I'm sure). Because there is no way Seau was better than DT. And I'm sure the Chiefs record during the '90's was better than the Chargers. So it's not like Seau played on great teams in a huge market.

htismaqe · 02-09-2007, 09:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by shaneo69

I will be interested to see how quickly jackass Seau makes the HOF (1st ballot, I'm sure). Because there is no way Seau was better than DT. And I'm sure the Chiefs record during the '90's was better than the Chargers. So it's not like Seau played on great teams in a huge market.

I GUARANTEE you he will be 1st ballot. Just wait and see.

shaneo69 · 02-09-2007, 09:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by htismaqe

I GUARANTEE you he will be 1st ballot. Just wait and see.

So either you think Seau was better than DT, or you think Gretz has fugged up 3 years in a row.

htismaqe · 02-09-2007, 09:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by shaneo69

So either you think Seau was better than DT, or you think Gretz has fugged up 3 years in a row.

Absolutely not.

I think the committee plays favorites. DT isn't getting in, Gretz or no Gretz.

htismaqe · 02-09-2007, 09:16 PM

This whole argument is laughable.

On one hand, we're supposed to believe that these people are committee members because they have observed decades of football and are experts in their field.

And on the same hand, we're also supposed to believe that whether a player gets in or doesn't depends completely on whether or not a representative can convince the rest of the committee that they belong.

I'm sure anybody with half a brain can see the contradiction in that.

Eric · 02-09-2007, 09:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Phobia

You've already got that with journalists covering the same team. Do you think Gretz doesn't vote for every Steeler and Chief who becomes eligible?

Yes.

02-09-2007, 12:13 PM
shaneo69 Smug Weasel Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: Bleachers at Busch Casino cash: $10004900	Rand defends Gretz; rips JoPo's article RAND: Sympathy for the voters Feb 08, 2007, 4:24:41 AM by Jonathan Rand I’m never sure whether to be amused or disgusted by the criticism directed at Hall of Fame voters in any sport whenever a local favorite falls short of induction. If all the fans and media critics in every city could get all their favorites enshrined, every Hall of Fame would have so many members as to render itself meaningless. If you elect 1,000 players, what you’d have is a gigantic card show, not a Hall of Fame. Certainly, anybody has the right to question a selection or omission for any Hall of Fame. But why does the criticism have to become personal and even slanderous? When our own Buck O’Neill was passed over for Cooperstown by a special Negro Leagues committee, we read about some never-substantiated personal grudge that supposedly derailed his chances. Now that former Chiefs linebacker Derrick Thomas has fallen short of the Pro Football Hall of Fame for the third time, a local columnist belittles the election committee as a “40-man party crew,” as if there’s something reckless or inebriated about its decision making. And, actually, there are two women on the committee now. This is reminiscent of Lawrence Taylor. The former Giants linebacker, convinced he might be denied election because of a disgraceful series of drug arrests, claimed the electors were hypocrites because most, he said, were drunks chasing little girls on Miami Beach. Because the Pro Football Hall of Fame takes personal behavior off the table, Taylor was a first-ballot inductee in 1999. This is some party. As a former Hall of Fame elector, I can assure you that serving on that committee is an honor. It’s also a pain in the butt. You spend the Saturday before the Super Bowl, your only free day of the week, cooped up in a hotel meeting room listening to presentations and discussions for all finalists, which numbered 17 this year. Personally, I would rather walk barefoot on the ice in my driveway than listen to a one-hour discussion over whether former Commissioner Paul Tagliabue belongs in the Hall of Fame. It’s beyond me why you would enshrine an executive because he did for the league — albeit very well — exactly what he was hired to do. The vast majority of the electors have watched pro football for decades, diligently prepare their homework and care passionately about voting for the right people. A case for a candidate that might seem overpowering to the average fan may be badly flawed in the eyes of voters who know a sport inside and out. Once you’re caught with gaping holes in your argument, your candidate is finished. If Kansas City representative Bob Gretz can’t make a convincing case for Thomas or any other candidate, nobody can. The decisions are difficult because you’re often trying to distinguish between truly excellent football players and the all-time greats. This is the border Thomas keeps trying to cross. Some votes are philosophical. How can you exclude Ray Guy, indisputably the greatest punter of all time? The prevailing sentiment is that a guy who trots in and kicks the ball six times a game and seldom gets his uniform dirty is not a Hall of Famer. The seamheads who vote for the Baseball Hall of Fame fancy themselves the best informed and most discriminating voters for any Hall, and maybe they are. But they absorb plenty of cheap shots, too. There was a lengthy Sunday opinion story in the New York Times a few years ago claiming that former Boston Red Sox outfielder Jim Rice keeps getting excluded because of his contentious relationship with reporters. (My few encounters with him were fine.) Nowhere was it mentioned that pitcher Steve Carlton, possibly the most media-hostile star in the history of baseball, was elected to Cooperstown on the first ballot. Hall of Fame electors must have thick skins, though I must admit even I became offended once. An NFL ex-star once approached me and said he’d been told that he wasn’t in the Hall of Fame because I didn’t like him. He added that he couldn’t understand this because we’d gotten along so well during his playing days. I never knew the man during his playing days. But you know what? He made almost as much sense as most of the people who rip Hall of Fame voters. The opinions offered in this column do not necessarily reflect those of Carl Peterson. http://www.kcchiefs.com/news/2007/02...or_the_voters/
Posts: 4,910

02-09-2007, 06:11 PM	#47
Demonpenz I got Rice cookin in the micro Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: Apartment "G UNIT!" Casino cash: $3102136	I am wondering how much the fact that thomas rarely just blew someone up. Comes into play. Other like backers. Butkis, singeltary, Lawrence taylor all where physical nightmare, with DT you knew you were probably just going to be stripped, not paralized. __________________
Posts: 54,274

02-09-2007, 06:27 PM	#49
Dr. Johnny Fever stax of wax Join Date: Feb 2004 Casino cash: $10004900	I'll probably get butchered for this... but I'm not sure DT was a HOFer. Great yes. __________________ courtesy of BoneKrusher "Baseball? It's just a game. As simple as a ball and bat, yet as complex as the American spirit it symbolizes. It's a sport, a business and sometimes a religion." Ernie Harwell
Posts: 34,865

02-09-2007, 09:01 PM	#53
shaneo69 Smug Weasel Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: Bleachers at Busch Casino cash: $10004900	I will be interested to see how quickly jackass Seau makes the HOF (1st ballot, I'm sure). Because there is no way Seau was better than DT. And I'm sure the Chiefs record during the '90's was better than the Chargers. So it's not like Seau played on great teams in a huge market. __________________ "I like Chiefs president Carl Peterson. I respect his business savvy. I envy his management skills and his penchant never to be driven by the whims of popularity. I admire his willingness to take responsibility for decisions that don’t work out the way he would have wanted." - Rufus, from KCChiefs.com ----------------------------------------------------------------------
Posts: 4,910

02-09-2007, 09:16 PM	#57
htismaqe 'Tis my eye! Join Date: Aug 2000 Location: Chiefsplanet Casino cash: $10269900	This whole argument is laughable. On one hand, we're supposed to believe that these people are committee members because they have observed decades of football and are experts in their field. And on the same hand, we're also supposed to believe that whether a player gets in or doesn't depends completely on whether or not a representative can convince the rest of the committee that they belong. I'm sure anybody with half a brain can see the contradiction in that.
Posts: 100,022