News Post

Sound Off: Should Steroid Users Get in the HOF?

06:48 PM - January 8, 2014 by RaychelSnr

In case you were hiding under a rock this morning (and some of you might've been like me) another year has passed with known steroid users from the height of the steroid era being denied entry into the Baseball Hall of Fame.

The 2014 Inductees included Gregg Maddux, Tom Glavine, and Frank Thomas. Craig Biggio missed the cut by just two votes, and will likely have a real shot at making it in next season.

In what will be the biggest living HOF class since 1941, the three players above will be joined by managers Tony LaRussa, Joe Torre and Bobby Cox.

However, missing from the HOF at this stage are still Barry Bonds and Roger Clemons, each receiving approximately 35% of the votes. Both players should be shoe-ins for the Hall, but thanks to their ties to PEDs both have been shut out by the Baseball Writers Association of America thus far.

Another PED-linked player, Rafael Palmero, will be dropped off of the ballot after receiving less than 5% of the vote needed to keep a player on.

Should PED players get to be in the Hall of Fame? Let us know your thoughts!

Member Comments

# 41 Money99 @ 01/12/14 12:59 PM

Absolutely not.
I think about the guy who never got a shot because a teammate never got hurt, or over-performed.
Or the money that wasn't dispersed evenly because some roided-up freak got $30M.
Or the legend that hit 500 or 600 HR's cleanly only to get passed by a cheater.

Not only that but it taints the wimzy that is associated with baseball.
It's the one sport where a grown man can transform into a 5 year old just being at the park.
Steroids kill that dream and adulation for these hero's. They're frauds and it can break the heart of fans, regardless of how old or young the fan is.

# 42 Money99 @ 01/12/14 02:04 PM

gsize19, I really enjoyed your post.
But let me ask you this; what if a kid doesn't want to use PEDs due to moral, ethical or medical reasons?
Maybe they don't want any longterm medical problems from using?
So now, if you allow certain PEDs, that kid is already behind the 8-ball. He might never earn an MLB paycheck because he's doing it clean while everyone else looks like a T-Rex on the field.

Not only that, but if one of my kids were on the cusp, I'd hate for them to risk their health in order to make a living at baseball by using drugs.

I too was enthralled by the HR race in 98. But I'll be honest with you, now that I know the truth, I wish it never happened. And if knew about it at that time, I wouldn't have watched one game.

# 43 CoachDavid @ 01/13/14 01:09 AM

I love sports but its just games we play. We play when we are young and grow old. The hall of fame will not change the fact that they cheated to get rich. Now there rich... Oh well.

# 44 mb625 @ 01/13/14 12:34 PM

I think 12 makes a great point. Baseball is purely a product of its era and in this particular era of baseball PED use was widespread and not just limited to the best players.

In terms of baseball being a product of its era, let's look at the spitball. It was outlawed in 1920, however, players like Burleigh Grimes were grandfathered in and they were doing something that was illegal for everyone else and guys like Gaylord Perry did it for their entire careers long after the ban was in effect. Notice the parallel here. PED users were also doing something that was illegal by the laws of the game. Now, is anyone going to sit here and say that Burleigh Grimes or Gaylord Perry is unworthy of being in the hall? Probably not.

So, is PED use right? Absolutely not. It should be banned, gotten rid of and otherwise purged from major league baseball. However, when there is a level playing field, with plenty of players who have been known to use PEDs, you have to recognize the fact that the feats these players achieved are worthy of inclusion in the Hall. I wouldn't be opposed to raising the mythical "standards" of what a Hall of Famer is for these kinds of guys, but guys like Bonds are, to me, impressive enough to merit inclusion in the Hall, because baseball is a product of its era, and this era just so happened to be marked with PED use.

# 45 TripleCrown9 @ 01/13/14 10:51 PM

Personally I could start juicing right now, and never hit a Stephen Strasburg fastball. So for me, yes steroid users should get into the Hall of Fame. Sure it made them faster and hit the ball farther, but so what? That made games more exciting.

# 46 BDKiiing @ 01/14/14 04:35 PM

Bonds and Rocket belong in.

# 47 TripleCrown9 @ 01/14/14 05:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bdolski


	Bonds and Rocket belong in.

Just curious, but why not McGwire?

# 48 dickey1331 @ 01/14/14 07:30 PM

No. If you got caught cheating then you shouldn't be allowed in the HOF.

# 49 Money99 @ 01/17/14 10:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TripleCrown9


	Personally I could start juicing right now, and never hit a Stephen Strasburg fastball. So for me, yes steroid users should get into the Hall of Fame. Sure it made them faster and hit the ball farther, but so what? That made games more exciting.

Explain that to the kid who doesn't want to risk his longterm health, but can't make the big club because juicers edge him out every year.
Or the guy who's on the bench and never gets a chance to play, because the person ahead of him on the depth chart is filled with HGH and never gets injured.

# 50 cdawg44 @ 01/22/14 08:15 PM

These guys should absolutely get in the hall. Most of the old farts whining about it benefited from the steroid Era and absolutely sat on their hands and said nothing for years, but now wanna stand up on principle. The worse part is they, with no hesitation endorsed Torre and LaRussa and other managers in the hall who clearly knew their guys were juicing and won championships and awards off of it, but get a free pass. My feeling is, unless you are going to vacate all the records and championships from the late 80s through 2003, let these guys in.

That's why I think its time to take the vote away from the writers and go to a committee like the NFL. The writers are all attention whores who have made the Hall about them, not the game. The fact you people voting for only Jack Morris is a flat out joke, and they have no business voting for such an important process

# 51 DrJones @ 01/22/14 08:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cdawg44


	These guys should absolutely get in the hall. Most of the old farts whining about it benefited from the steroid Era and absolutely sat on their hands and said nothing for years, but now wanna stand up on principle. The worse part is they, with no hesitation endorsed Torre and LaRussa and other managers in the hall who clearly knew their guys were juicing and won championships and awards off of it, but get a free pass. My feeling is, unless you are going to vacate all the records and championships from the late 80s through 2003, let these guys in. That's why I think its time to take the vote away from the writers and go to a committee like the NFL. The writers are all attention whores who have made the Hall about them, not the game. The fact you people voting for only Jack Morris is a flat out joke, and they have no business voting for such an important process

They're not all attention whores. But the BBWAA should definitely clear out the deadwood. My suggestions:

1. Reduce the time it takes for a BBWAA member to get a HOF vote from 10 years to 5.

2. You only get a HoF vote for 15 years. After 15 years, you need to be still covering MLB on a full-time basis (no national writers or those who've moved onto other sports/jobs/retirement) to get a vote. If you're still a fulltime baseball journalist, you receive an extra 10 years of voting (or until you're no longer fulltime, whatever comes first). Nobody gets a lifetime vote.

This would bring in a lot of fresh blood and get rid of most of the grandstanding cranks.

# 52 BDKiiing @ 01/23/14 04:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TripleCrown9


	Just curious, but why not McGwire?

Mac's success came with the usage, more so than Bonds and Rocket. Bonds and Rocket had HoF credentials before their peak of using. I just don't have Mac or Sammy in HoF talk.

# 53 TripleCrown9 @ 01/24/14 01:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bdolski


	Mac's success came with the usage, more so than Bonds and Rocket. Bonds and Rocket had HoF credentials before their peak of using. I just don't have Mac or Sammy in HoF talk.

Fair enough. I was just wondering what your reason was. To be fair though, McGwire didn't start using until after he won Rookie of the Year, and already had 114 home runs.

# 54 jth1331 @ 01/24/14 09:31 AM

Honestly, I see both points have valid responses.
They cheated and boosted their way to the stats/etc.

But, at the same time, how do we know who did/didn't for sure, and they put up insane numbers throughout their career. It takes more than steroids/PEDs to get that much better than other players, and guys like Bonds and Clemens, Piazza, Bagwell, McGwire, Sosa, those guys should be in the HOF.

# 55 BDKiiing @ 01/25/14 04:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jth1331


	But, at the same time, how do we know who did/didn't for sure, and they put up insane numbers throughout their career. It takes more than steroids/PEDs to get that much better than other players, and guys like Bonds and Clemens, Piazza, Bagwell, McGwire, Sosa, those guys should be in the HOF.

We don't. So the voters need to put players in completely based on statistics. You either put them all in who are worthy, or you put none. And with the latter, it makes the guy who didn't vote for Maddux or Glavine, or Thomas because they played during the steroid era (which is still going on) look like a genius. I agree with him. It's all speculation. My only out is that if you have a positive test or were suspended ever for PEDs, you do not deserve to be in, but if it's only speculation, you have to be judged fairly.

But who am I, I just think that anyone who fails a drug test should get the lifetime ban. One strike, you're out.

# 56 pietasterp @ 01/28/14 05:23 PM

It's inevitable...no matter your opinion, at some point it has to happen, otherwise 2-3 generations and 20+ years worth of players will be excluded, fairly or unfairly. It's getting to that point now in terms of who is elligible; if the baseball writers really want to keep them out, they can all just take a vacation from voting for the next 25 years or so.

Besides, baseball fans have long memories; no matter when you visit the Hall (which, if you haven't been, I highly recommend), there will always be some loudmouth pontificating on this or that detail about a player's career, and so of course if Bonds and Clemens and others eventually get in, there will be constant chatter at their plaques about 'roid use, whether they should be in, etc. In a sense, that is their punishment: to forever have loudmouth baseball geek know-it-alls at their plaques bloviating on the relative merits of their inclusion for the rest of time.

# 57 Madden08PCgmr @ 10/21/20 03:04 AM

They should be in.

MLB knew all about this. Its impossible to say for how long, even. Roids played a HUGE role in saving them after labor armageddon, and I don't think they would have put an end to use if Congress hadn't FORCED them to do so.

So what buisness do pencil pushing, keyboard mashing twits have keeping these guys out? The people that signed the checks didn't care. Let this fall on their shoulders.

# 58 JHodges57 @ 12/17/20 04:35 PM

No they shouldn't. I also think those who gamble on games while active should be banned. People who cheat should not be bought back to manage after a 1 year suspension. They should also be permanently banned.

But to me, it's not what I think that matters. It's what the athletes and managers who didn't cheat think.

# 59 Jolly Roger @ 03/17/21 09:56 AM

I'm in the "put them in with an asterisk" camp. A lot of guys from that era were using, from all-stars to solid utility men to bench sitters. The guys at the top were still the best.

« Previous 1 23Next »

More Links

Sound Off: Should Steroid Users Get in the HOF?