The Amazing Race   American Idol   America's Next Top Model   The Apprentice   The Bachelor
Big Brother   The Biggest Loser   Dancing with the Stars   Survivor                Reality TV World
   
Reality TV World Message Board Forums
PLEASE NOTE: The Reality TV World Message Boards are filled with desperate attention-seekers pretending to be one big happy PG/PG13-rated family. Don't be fooled. Trying to get everyone to agree with you is like herding cats, but intolerance for other viewpoints is NOT welcome and respect for other posters IS required at all times. Jump in and play, and you'll soon find out how easy it is to fit in, but save your drama for your mama. All members are encouraged to read the complete guidelines. As entertainment critic Roger Ebert once said, "If you disagree with something I write, tell me so, argue with me, correct me--but don't tell me to shut up. That's not the American way."
"Baseball Hall Of Fame: the 1973+ committee."
Email this topic to a friend
Printer-friendly version of this topic
Bookmark this topic (Registered users only)
 
Previous Topic | Next Topic 
Conferences Off-Topic Sports Forum (Protected)
Original message

Estee 44384 desperate attention whore postings
DAW Level: "Playboy Centerfold"

11-15-10, 03:50 PM (EST)
Click to EMail Estee Click to send private message to Estee Click to view user profile Click to check IP address of the poster
"Baseball Hall Of Fame: the 1973+ committee."
Whatever they call themselves, they've got twelve names on their ballot and they're getting ready to vote. Given that we pretty much always follow suit, here's the list for your consideration.

Players:

Vida Blue
Dave Concepcion
Steve Garvey
Ron Guidry
Tommy John
Al Oliver
Ted Simmons
Rusty Staub

Manager

Billy Martin

Executives

Pat Gillick
Marvin Miller
George Steinbrenner

Some undeserving. Some potentially going in. At least one total snub.

  Alert Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

  Table of Contents

  Subject     Author     Message Date     ID  
 RE: Baseball Hall Of Fame: the 197... Molaholic 11-15-10 1
 Votes AyaK 11-17-10 2
 Voters identified. Estee 11-20-10 3
   RE: Voters identified. AyaK 11-20-10 4
 Worthless AyaK 12-06-10 5
   RE: Worthless Estee 12-06-10 6

Lobby | Topics | Previous Topic | Next Topic

Messages in this topic

Molaholic 7014 desperate attention whore postings
DAW Level: "Playboy Centerfold"

11-15-10, 10:39 PM (EST)
Click to EMail Molaholic Click to send private message to Molaholic Click to view user profile Click to check IP address of the poster
1. "RE: Baseball Hall Of Fame: the 1973 committee."
Is this the same thing as the "Veterans Committee"?

A little reinventing or just a way of hiding a few gray hairs?

Anywho -- on to the task at hand:

(and trying to be subjective without my innate anti-Yankee bias)

Players:

Vida Blue - Maybe
Dave Concepcion - Yes
Steve Garvey - Yes
Ron Guidry - Yes
Tommy John - Yes
Al Oliver - No
Ted Simmons - No
Rusty Staub - No

Manager

Billy Martin - Yes

Executives

Pat Gillick - No
Marvin Miller - No
George Steinbrenner - Yes

  Remove | Alert Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

AyaK 8129 desperate attention whore postings
DAW Level: "Playboy Centerfold"

11-17-10, 09:01 PM (EST)
Click to EMail AyaK Click to send private message to AyaK Click to view user profile Click to check IP address of the poster
2. "Votes"
LAST EDITED ON 11-18-10 AT 09:01 PM (EST)

I typed a long post and then inadvertently deleted it instead of posting it. Let's try again, although a little shorter.

As much as I despised him as a person, Steve Garvey is clearly the one HOF-worthy player here. Period. Vida Blue was a stupendous pitcher, but only for about seven or eight years. I'd still vote for him. And Al Oliver and Ted Simmons were both victimized by playing outside of the media limelight. I would like to see both of them make it. In addition, I'd vote for Billy Martin, because he was a star (if not HOF-worthy) as a player and then a star as a manager. Finally, although he doesn't have a snowball's chance of making it, I'd vote for Marvin Miller. He revolutionized the game, although not in ways that owners liked.

Edited to add: So I would vote for six of these people to get in -- in other words, half of them. That won't happen. But I do think Garvey will make it. Whether the reformed committee will elect anyone else is an open question.

  Remove | Alert Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

Estee 44384 desperate attention whore postings
DAW Level: "Playboy Centerfold"

11-20-10, 06:06 AM (EST)
Click to EMail Estee Click to send private message to Estee Click to view user profile Click to check IP address of the poster
3. "Voters identified."
http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/columns/story?columnist=kurkjian_tim&id=5820675

This definitely changes a few odds.

  Remove | Alert Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

AyaK 8129 desperate attention whore postings
DAW Level: "Playboy Centerfold"

11-20-10, 02:20 PM (EST)
Click to EMail AyaK Click to send private message to AyaK Click to view user profile Click to check IP address of the poster
4. "RE: Voters identified."
If this panel doesn't elect Dave Conception, no panel ever will. Three former Reds plus Ozzie Smith, Ryne Sandburg and Whitey Herzog?
  Remove | Alert Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

AyaK 8129 desperate attention whore postings
DAW Level: "Playboy Centerfold"

12-06-10, 12:30 PM (EST)
Click to EMail AyaK Click to send private message to AyaK Click to view user profile Click to check IP address of the poster
5. "Worthless"
Proving that this committee is as worthless as its immediately preceding incarnations, the panel elected one person: Pat Gillick, with 13 of 16 votes.

Marvin Miller fell one vote short, with 11. Dave Conception had 8. No one else even got to 8.

  Remove | Alert Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

Estee 44384 desperate attention whore postings
DAW Level: "Playboy Centerfold"

12-06-10, 01:41 PM (EST)
Click to EMail Estee Click to send private message to Estee Click to view user profile Click to check IP address of the poster
6. "RE: Worthless"
Are we officially at the point where we should just tear up the current system and start over?

I already know there's no chance of having that happen. I just want to know if it's the only realistic option left.

Pat Gillick?

  Remove | Alert Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top


Lock | Archive | Remove

Lobby | Topics | Previous Topic | Next Topic

p l a c e h o l d e r t e x t g o e s h e r e - p l a c e h o l d e r t e x t g o e s h e r e - p l a c e h o l d e r t e x t g o e s h e r e - p l a c e h o l d e r t e x t g o e s h e r e - p l a c e h o l d e r t e x t g o e s h e r e - p l a c e h o l d e r t e x t g o e s h e r e - p l a c e h o l d e r t e x t g o e s h e r e - p l a c e h o l d e r t e x t g o e s h e r e - p l a c e h o l d e r t e x t g o e s h e r e - p l a c e h o l d e r t e x t g o e s h e r e - p l a c e h o l d e r t e x t g o e s h e r e - p l a c e h o l d e r t e x t g o e s h e r e -
about this site   •   advertise on this site  •   contact us  •   privacy policy   •