[Archive]

Posted By: warshawlaw

The disquiet I have with the current veterans committee, which I think many share, is that many of the voters are ignorant when it comes to the history of the game. I've met a number of HOFers. Some are, shall we say, less than striking in the brains dept. I'd venture to say that most of us know more about baseball history than most of the HOFers who vote on the nominees. The old system was cronyist, but it had the advantage of including people who cared about the result and were interested enough to learn and participate. The new system doesn't ensure that outcome at all.

I still think there needs to be a veterans system. Many of us could name multiple players from various eras who should be in the Hall of Fame. Count Mullane comes right to mind, as would several of the guys on the ballot this year who didn't make it.

I think the Academy Awards for the less "sexy" categories are decided on a better approach. Any Academy member can vote for best picture, etc., but if they want to vote for documentary or foreign film, they have to go to a special screening to become eligible to vote. In that way, the people who are not interested in the category aren't allowed to vote on it just because there is a box on the ballot. Seems to me that the vote for the veterans committee should be limited to HOF writers, sportscasters, executives, and a group of volunteer players. That way you get the real observers of the game and the players who are interested enough to volunteer and to learn the history, instead of anyone who is alive.