Change in Rules for HOF voting

[bigtrain]

The Hall of Fame has just announced a major rule change. Recent retirees will only be eligible on the Baseball Writers ballot for 10 years rather than 15. Mattingly, Trammell and Lee Smith would be grandfathered as they are in years 15, 14 and 13 respectively. Sounds like a good move to me. Any thoughts?

[kengoldin]

I think this rule specifically hurts all ped users such as bonds and Clemens
My personal opinion was that they would eventually get in, maybe 10 + years from now when there was a significant turnover in the voting pool and the new members were more sympathetic or maybe a new policy in dealing with them was in place.
I think it was actually implemented to make sure that didn't happen

[sycks22]

I have no problem with it at all. I still don't get what makes a player a HOFer in their 14th year if they weren't in their 2nd year of eligibility.

[refz]

I agree with Pete

[bigtrain]

Originally Posted by kengoldin

I think this rule specifically hurts all ped users such as bonds and Clemens
My personal opinion was that they would eventually get in, maybe 10 + years from now when there was a significant turnover in the voting pool and the new members were more sympathetic or maybe a new policy in dealing with them was in place.
I think it was actually implemented to make sure that didn't happen

Not sure Ken. How do you think they will be treated by the veteran's committee? Might there not be former teammates and contemporaries who think that they should be in? The Baseball writers might have kept them out longer. Time will tell.

[Bored5000]

Originally Posted by kengoldin

I think this rule specifically hurts all ped users such as bonds and Clemens
My personal opinion was that they would eventually get in, maybe 10 + years from now when there was a significant turnover in the voting pool and the new members were more sympathetic or maybe a new policy in dealing with them was in place.
I think it was actually implemented to make sure that didn't happen

I dunno. I am not sure how much more favorably the PED users will be looked at in 15 years. How much is Ben Johnson's win in 1988 Olympic 100 meters viewed more favorably now? What about the East German swimmers of the 1970s?

[Klrdds]

I agree what makes a player more HOF worthy in their 5th, 10th or 15th year of eligibility. Granted HOF election in 1st year of eligibility will still be special.
Besides targeting PED users , do you think that they are trying to avoid all the hoopla concerning Jack Morris and his HOF worthiness and his final ballot year that went on this year?
Now if they would just expand the Veterans Committee categories from 3 to 5 and a 5 year category rotation I would be happy.

[midwaylandscaping]

Ten is more than enough in my opinion. If you can't get in within that time frame, you likely don't deserve to be in anyway. I've never understood how someone suddenly becomes a better candidate on ballots 12-15 than they were on ballot 1. Ten tries is plenty, no problem with the change here.

[drcy]

It may not make a big difference, as many voters likely look at how many years left a player is on the ballot. '2 years left' or 'Only 1 year left' will just come earlier. Most sports writers refer to and judge 'hangers on' in light of how many years left a player will be on the ballot. The focus is on the cut off date more than how long it took to be there.

[AMBST95]

I just hope the BBWAA changes their crazy way of holding off on votes and adjusting for time on ballot. The Hall should have changed the max votes from 10 to unlimited. With a loaded ballot last year, there were a lot of players being hurt by the max and the fact that they are shortening the eligibility time is going to make it tougher for some of those players. I agree with the earlier comments on this hurting the PED users. Unfortunately, the 20 percent of voters who continue to include guys like Bonds and Clemens have 2 less votes to work with for a clean player like a Mussina who got hosed last year in the voting.