- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Barry Larkin says no one associated with PEDs will be elected to HOF
Posted on 7/24/13 at 3:44 pm to ballscaster
Posted on 7/24/13 at 3:44 pm to ballscaster
I give zero hypocritical fricks.
Your whole premise in this thread is dumb.
Your whole premise in this thread is dumb.
Posted on 7/24/13 at 3:45 pm to Vicks Kennel Club
quote:
Your whole premise in this thread is dumb.
Fact.
Posted on 7/24/13 at 3:46 pm to reddman
quote:
Take George Brett out. He corked his bat.
Pine tar.
Still cheating, and according to ballstaster, all cheaters should be banned from the HOF.
Posted on 7/24/13 at 3:46 pm to goldennugget
Oh look, another baseball story about PEDs and events of yesteryear.
No wonder why baseball is currently in such a bad state... everything "newsworthy" is an exhausting and redundant discussion about drugs.
No wonder why baseball is currently in such a bad state... everything "newsworthy" is an exhausting and redundant discussion about drugs.
Posted on 7/24/13 at 3:46 pm to Louie T
quote:I'm not even making an argument. That players cheated isn't an argument--it's a fact that we all know. That baseball writers will refrain from voting for players who cheated isn't an argument--it's an inevitability we all know exists. That this cause & effect sequence makes sense isn't an argument--it's a fact we all know to be true. We may all not like it, but whether or we like it isn't the issue.
You're arguments are fricking terrible.
Many cheated, and many won't be in the Hall of Fame because they cheated. What's to bitch about?
Posted on 7/24/13 at 3:46 pm to Sophandros
quote:
Still cheating, and according to ballstaster, all cheaters should be banned from the HOF.
Yeah i know. I just like correcting you.
Posted on 7/24/13 at 3:48 pm to ballscaster
Until you remove all cheaters from the HOF, then it's foolish to select one sort of cheating and single in on it.
Posted on 7/24/13 at 3:50 pm to reddman
I bet Ozzie Smith was on something, doing all those crazy flips.
Posted on 7/24/13 at 3:51 pm to LasVegasTiger
quote:
I bet Ozzie Smith was on something, doing all those crazy flips.
Cocaine. Go look at his nose.
Posted on 7/24/13 at 3:51 pm to Billy Mays
That's mostly because a lot of sportswriters are pretentious idiots. They drive what is talked about
No one besides a small percentage of sports fans who really enjoy getting up on their high horses enjoys the steroids debate
Baseball popularity is on the rise
No one besides a small percentage of sports fans who really enjoy getting up on their high horses enjoys the steroids debate
Baseball popularity is on the rise
Posted on 7/24/13 at 3:51 pm to ballscaster
I don't see anyone questioning whether or not its going to happen. Everyone is pointing out the blatant stupidity behind the reasoning.
Posted on 7/24/13 at 3:52 pm to Sophandros
quote:Until all people who have ever driven faster than the speed limit are cited for their violations, then it's foolish for you to write me this citation, officer.
Until you remove all cheaters from the HOF, then it's foolish to select one sort of cheating and single in on it.
Posted on 7/24/13 at 3:52 pm to reddman
quote:
Cocaine. Go look at his nose.
I Lol'd. Very nice.
Posted on 7/24/13 at 3:53 pm to Louie T
quote:And they're wrong. Not voting for a person who cheated isn't stupid.
I don't see anyone questioning whether or not its going to happen. Everyone is pointing out the blatant stupidity behind the reasoning.
Posted on 7/24/13 at 3:55 pm to ballscaster
And that's exactly why the HOF is such a fraud. Only excluding cheaters after a certain point because you didn't give a shite about cheating or couldn't test for it before that point makes a HOF achievement almost entirely null in my eyes.
This post was edited on 7/24/13 at 4:00 pm
Posted on 7/24/13 at 4:01 pm to Louie T
quote:
And that's exactly why the HOF is such a fraud. Only excluding cheaters after a certain point because you didn't give a shite about cheating or couldn't test for it before that point makes a HOF achievement almost entirely null in my eyes.
This. To keep especially Bonds out is a joke.
Posted on 7/24/13 at 4:04 pm to reddman
quote:
Speaking of Biggio, also a user. No doubt.
Posted on 7/24/13 at 4:06 pm to Louie T
quote:So if you have a vote, vote for whoever you want for whatever reasons you want.
And that's exactly why the HOF is such a fraud. Only excluding cheaters after a certain point because you didn't give a shite about cheating or couldn't test for it before that point makes a HOF achievement almost entirely null in my eyes.
But it isn't stupid, and calling it hypocritical (which I don't believe you did--I'm just illustrating my point that is too intelligent for anyone in this thread to understand :troll: ) assumes that there are current writers who are taking a hard line against 'roids and who have knowingly voted for known cheaters in the past while knowing that they had cheated. Which writers have done so? If you can't name any, then you can't call it hypocritical. Hank Aaron was inducted before Tom Verducci had a vote. The old-timers who were already in have virtually nothing to do with today's voters, so calling today's voters hypocritical is a misuse of the word hypocritical. Taking known cheaters out of the HOF is an entirely different and way more complicated issue for which I have no good answer.
But if there's a guy on your ballot and you know that he cheated, and you don't vote for him, that's perfectly reasonable no matter who else is in the Hall.
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News