Shoeless Joe Jackson

[bbcard1]

Shoeless Joe is a romantic character...his omission from the Hall of Fame, much like Pete's, has done more to make him famous than his inclusion would have. Had everyone just vote in him ago, he would have been spoken of in more or less the same way as Cap Anson or Al Simmons are... which is to say not much. Which is why I would open the doors wide for McGwire, Bonds, Clemens and not worry much about it. But I can certainly respect hard core opinions on the other side of things. Folks in the middle are the problem.

[Republicaninmass]

"I'm no Barry Bonds fan, but in terms of cheating I'd say he couldn't hold a candle to Cobb or some of the great dirty ballplayers of the deadball era, where spiking, punching, rubbing the ball with shoe polish, mud, spit, vaseline, sandpaper, etc., holding on to guy's belts as they tried to steal bases, slugging them in the gut as they ran by, etc... the one-umpire days of baseball were the dirtiest, most dishonest, ugliest baseball, filled with the most cheating ever seen, no question. The simple reason was, there was only one umpire and they could get away with it."


I'd like to see that kind of stuff return to today's game!

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by bbcard1

Shoeless Joe is a romantic character...his omission from the Hall of Fame, much like Pete's, has done more to make him famous than his inclusion would have. Had everyone just vote in him ago, he would have been spoken of in more or less the same way as Cap Anson or Al Simmons are... which is to say not much.

There is some truth to this, but then again he not only had one of the great nicknames of all time, he hit .356.

[dstraate]

I hope I'm not out of line or bringing up taboos or anything, but

http://cgi.ebay.com/1930s-ADOLF-HITL...item3f05aeda7a

I was shocked when I saw this on EBay at 500 bucks. For me, the joy of collecting hinges upon identifying with a player. Even with Joe Jackson, I can put aside the unsavory reputation and admire the ballplayer. Heck. I like guys with a bad reputation because there have been times in my life when I've been less than perfect.

Still, there's really no way I can identify with Adolph. I can't imagine anybody could. Unless this is going to become a part of a propaganda exhibit, I don't get it.

[ALR-bishop]

In Jackson's testimony before the Cook County Grand Jury, which is publicly available ( I have a copy), he clearly admits taking the money and it is also pretty clear he knew exactly what was going on. In fact, there is some discussion in the testimony that he was upset that others were paid more than he got and for that reason may have decided not to participate.

[Ladder7]

David Straate, Yes, it's offensive and we all know that some of our species' freaks of nature will collect anything.

But, Im at a loss... What the Hell does it have to do with Jackson?

[dstraate]

Originally Posted by Ladder7

David Straate, Yes, it's offensive and we all know that some of our species' freaks of nature will collect anything.

But, Im at a loss... What the Hell does it have to do with Jackson?

I guess, more than anything, I have no issues collecting cards of a guy that may/may not have fixed games when there's a market for cards from the worst guy in all of humanity. To be entirely honest, I saw that card after reading this thread and thought that if people collect his artifacts, then Joe's supposed transgressions pale in comparison. I didn't intend to offend you. I just couldn't believe that when I saw it.

[Matt]

Originally Posted by ALR-bishop

In Jackson's testimony before the Cook County Grand Jury, which is publicly available ( I have a copy), he clearly admits taking the money and it is also pretty clear he knew exactly what was going on. In fact, there is some discussion in the testimony that he was upset that others were paid more than he got and for that reason may have decided not to participate.

I'm admittedly not an expert on the topic, but I believe he retracted the admission not too long after.

One other point - taking the money but not changing how he played in the games is very different then actually throwing a game. Granted, as a policy, the league must enforce the former, because it would be near impossible to prove that a player struck out on purpose, but the integrity of the game is only actually impacted by the latter.

[mighty bombjack]

Originally Posted by Matt

I'm admittedly not an expert on the topic, but I believe he retracted the admission not too long after.

You mean after he was banned for life and realized that he would never play pro ball again (and was no longer under oath in a court of law)? Is that when he retracted his admission?