Quote:
Originally Posted by ThomasL
I believe Schilling apologized publicly for those comments I think you're referring to didnt he? If so why cant we accept that and move on (as far as HOF voting goes)
What about his ALS charitable work or does only a persons mistakes, errors and terrible moments count here?
Im not intending to sound like a Schilling schill here but only trying to be pragmatic about his HOF candacy is all
I think he's a HOFer based on his postseason work on the field. Perfect person...far from it...someone worthy of ignoring his baseball career and good deeds based on things he's said (some if not all of which he apologized for) I think is pushing the meaning of the moral clause too far...again just my opinion and I may be wrong and that's fine with me too.
I will also add I love drinking Guinness
|
Guinness is just a wonderful beer. It gets partial, yet significant, credit for my username. Also a big fan of Alec Guinness...
Schilling may have apologized for some of his comments, but there has been at least one recent one I would include as racist. But yes, apologies begin the healing process and should be factored in.
His ALS work should totally be factored in, too. In fact, I find it surprising that I never see it mentioned that he won the Roberto Clemente Award in 2001. He's done positive things, for sure. His candidacy is so complicated on so many levels, way beyond the field.
Limited to his performance on the field. I think Schilling is a beyond-a-doubt Hall of Famer, a clearly worthy candidate who should have/would have been in years ago.
Now... let's continue this conversation over a Guinness...