Jump to content

Recommended Posts

That's good stuff.
Way past time for this guy to get in. If you were lucky enough to see him play you'd understand. His passion for the game was relentless. Think Biggio before his time with a little more attitude. He had a little gambling problem and bet on his team to win. HIS TEAM. the stuffy shirts of baseball that have refused to let the game progress and pretty much killed the MLB are the same turds that are still blocking one of the toughest, hard nosed, players to ever wear a uni from being recognized by his generation of fans. Maybe the last generation of "Fans".
Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's good stuff.
Way past time for this guy to get in. If you were lucky enough to see him play you'd understand. His passion for the game was relentless. Think Biggio before his time with a little more attitude. He had a little gambling problem and bet on his team to win. HIS TEAM. the stuffy shirts of baseball that have refused to let the game progress and pretty much killed the MLB are the same turds that are still blocking one of the toughest, hard nosed, players to ever wear a uni from being recognized by his generation of fans. Maybe the last generation of "Fans".

 

I despised him as a fan when he played for the Phillies. He would make that 3rd out at 1B and run across the mound and spike the baseball. Hated that!

 

He was an outstanding player. No contest. That should not be taken away from him, He deserves to be in the HOF.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I do not care how good he was as a player. He bet on games he played and coached in and for that he deserves to spend the rest of baseball in purgatory.


You guys really think he is the only HOF eligible player or even HOFer that bet on baseball games????
Get of the high horse before ya fall of and bump ur head again.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pete deserves to be in the hall based on his play. if his gambling was on his team to win, there should really not be a problem with it. That is more of a confidence thing in my eyes. If he bet on other teams with inside info or his team to lose where games could have been thrown then it is a different issue. Look how many players in the hall have supposedly used performance enhancers. Even though they may not have been illegal, they still skewed performances. Pete knows he made a mistake and has tried to make amends for it, he has paid for it many times over.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pete deserves to be in the hall based on his play. if his gambling was on his team to win, there should really not be a problem with it. That is more of a confidence thing in my eyes. If he bet on other teams with inside info or his team to lose where games could have been thrown then it is a different issue. Look how many players in the hall have supposedly used performance enhancers. Even though they may not have been illegal, they still skewed performances. Pete knows he made a mistake and has tried to make amends for it, he has paid for it many times over.

Agree with you 100%
Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is no spread in baseball. Based on money lines. However, there is a run line which is also essentially a money line, just makes each team a 1.5 run favorite or dog.

If Pete Rose isn't going to be allowed in the Hall, there are a LOT of current members who should be removed. The player Pete passed for all time hits leader makes Pete look like a choir boy. Cobb was a despicable human being. But to me, the HOF is about honoring the greatest players to have played the game. And Pete not only fits that category, he also played the game the way we all could admire.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Member Statistics

    45,977
    Total Members
    1,837
    Most Online
    cfbswami
    Newest Member
    cfbswami
    Joined


  • Posts

    • Manchin may get it but any mention of the radical left that wanted to get rid of the filibuster and end almost 220 years of history because the Democrats are mad?  The House and Senate are obviously different legislative bodies with entirely different election processes and rules for a reason. The House can vote on laws with a simple majority vote. The Senate put rules in place that it would make it much tougher to pass laws. Laws should be difficult to pass. The Senate is often the holdup of the right and left. It takes 60 votes to break the filibuster so any law will almost certainly require agreement at least in part, from opposing sides of an issue. Because they can’t get laws passed, the radical left is like a baby having a tantrum and wants to change over 200 years of history and make it potentially ridiculously easy to pass laws. I have seen current poll maps and it is possible for the Republicans to sweep into complete power in November but by the tiniest margin. That would possibly mean that a single vote margin in both houses could enact what you might call the radical right laws. There would be nothing that the Democrats could do to stop any legislation whatsoever if the left (they are all radical, minus Manchin) got their filibuster rule changed.  That is where the current filibuster comes into play as any new law would require several Democrats to agree with the majority Republicans and vice versa.  Do you want the potential for your radical right to have free rein as the radical left wants by killing the filibuster or is the radical left just as (if not more) dangerous? Let’s see if we have a history in this area? Oh yeah, the Democrats changed the rules in the Senate to allow federal judges to not have to overcome the filibuster. Obama was not getting his federal judge nominations passed and being angry, they changed the rules instead of nominating more moderate justices. They were warned that it would come back to bite them. They didn’t care and chose the nuclear option to change the rules. Oops! Any guess how Trump got all of his Supreme Court nominees passed against strong Democrat opposition? The Democrats got rid of the filibuster for federal judges after another tantrum   So when you are so worried about the radical right, are you equally concerned in what the radical left is always doing by changing rules and history which were put into place just for situations like we are in? So while Manchin gets it, what about his other 50 colleagues (49 + Harris)?  What concerns you more, Abbott and Paxton or the Democrats who want to make it to where if the Republicans do take over, they can go wild… at least in your mind? 
    • MODS please remove that ISD twitter link! I had no idea it would copy the whole posting. I only highlighted the portion about the venue change. Sorry about that!
    • See why I don't trust my Hogs?
    • Come on dude, don’t take anything away from the kids on the field. If you want to talk uncharacteristic, we made what 3 or 4 errors in game one. Y’all had 2 EARNED runs.  Defense is normally our strong suit. Your ace didn’t strike out a single one of our kids. Like I said also, you did not out hit us in game 1. Hell you barley out hit us in game 2. We had all the uncharacteristic walks. Josh pitched a hell of a game is what made that game what it was.
  • Topics

×
×
  • Create New...