[z28jd]

While he did change the game, is it really for the better? I don't see him as a Hall of Famer, especially being someone who can't afford to go to major league games, because as the salaries went up, so did everything else. Now you have pampered superstars and stadiums that charge ridiculous amounts for everything. Baseball hats cost $30 at a game now...for a hat! I see him as the reason David Wright could not only ask for 7yr/125mil contract, but have the fans rally around him when he gets "insulted"(fans words,not from him) by a 6yr/100mil offer! As a Pirates fan, he gets negative Hall of Fame votes from me, I would physically take away someone else's voting privilege away if they tried to vote for him. Not a fan.

I will give him tons of credit for being great at what he did, don't hate on him for doing his job well. Just think he did more harm than good for the sport overall. That to me isn't a Hall of Famer. I rank him right up there with Steinbrenner for being bad for the game we have now. I think you got better baseball when players made a good living and had it in the back of their mind that they could be replaced easily, nothing was guaranteed. The good players would still be multi-millionaires now without him, but instead of Wright asking for 7/125, he might "only" get 7/70, who knows, maybe someone better would've come along.

In the end, no matter what I think of how he affected baseball now, he lived a good, very long life and helped plenty of people. That's all that really matters