The League

Chris Richardson
National Blogger

Chris Richardson

The lead writer for IntentionalFoul.com.

A Cheaters HOF

CLICK TO REACT Facebook

In light of the David Ortiz "bombshell" (is it really a surprise when you look at his production curve?) the question was asked, "Should Canton allow dirty NFL players in?" The short answer, for me, is "no." Granted, the NFL hasn't been tainted by PEDs quite like Major League Baseball has, but there have been incidents and reports worth paying attention to. Besides Shawne Merriman, there haven't been many NFL players of note who tested dirty, but the point remains, should cheaters be allowed to into a Hall of Fame that supposedly celebrates careers and on-field accomplishments?

Absolutely not. Instead, I'm suggesting the creation of a cheaters Hall of Fame. It can encompass more than one sport, allowing those who performed at high level under the influence of PEDs to receive their recognition -- with a slight caveat on their display plaque. Mind you, the idea is not to allow every cheater in. Instead, you can limit inductees to those who actually excelled in their sport, provided their enhancements are discussed as well. Consider this a forced segregation if you will, but perhaps it's a necessary one.

Instead of debating whether or not A-Rod or Merriman or Manny Ramirez should be put in their respective Hall, you have a predetermined place to celebrate these players. That way, the (increasingly) few that did not cheat won't have their accomplishments somehow sullied if a confessed PED user's display is located nearby. Considering the era we are now enjoying -- that is, the "get a leg up by any means necessary" era -- there's not much choice, really. If keeping the non-cheating side of sport pure is a true motivation, separating the spoiled from the not-guilty only makes sense.

And if you need a location for such a Cheater's Hall of Fame, might I suggest Las Vegas? Considering the indirect influence gambling has on sports, not to mention all pressure such large amounts of money produces, directly or not, is there anyplace more fitting?

By Chris Richardson  |  July 31, 2009; 10:31 AM ET  | Category:  Steroids Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati  
Previous: PEDs Don't Taint NFL | Next: Sainthood Not Required

Comments

Please email us to report offensive comments.



And maybe we should also have a Jim Crow hall of fame for those players who greatly benefited by MLB's official and unofficial ban on blacks up to the 1940's. Do you really think some of the Hall of Famers who played between the 1900's and 1940's would be there if they faced the best competitors of their day regardless of race? So if we're going to start segregating Hall of fames lets do it right. Just as segregation was a part of that era steroids is a part of this era. What happens if a player is elected into the 'clean' hall of fame and then later it's found out he used steroids? Kick him out? The truth of the matter is we don't know who used and who didn't. Judge what occured on the field and leave the rest alone.

Posted by: 6thsense79 | July 31, 2009 12:56 PM

Baseball more then football measures greatness by statistics. This is so because of the long history of baseball records and the length of the baseball season visa football or virtually any other of the major sports. When a player hits 40 homeruns in a season a baseball fan instinctevly knows that player had a tremendous season. If he hit 50 homeruns he had a great rarely seen season. It is necessary to know who was using steroids and how long so fans, writers and historians of the game can place the statistics in perspective. We can now look at Mark McGuire's career and clearly see hye was a good player but plagued by injuries. Once he started using steroids his production shot up and began having what on the surface were great seasons. With this knowledge one can now reasonbly infer that without steroids McGuire would not have been a great player and does not deserve inclusion in the HOF. Conversly, Barry Bonds was a great player before he started using steroids. While his statistics clearly indicate an inflation in his production after he began to use steroids, his prodution prior to steroid usage indicates he was great player. Bonds was probably a HOF'er before he began using steroids. But now one must evaluate him knowing he did use steroids. One size answers won't fit all. But knowing who used and when is the prerequisite to being able to decide.

Posted by: kchses1 | July 31, 2009 1:02 PM

6thsense79:

I'm confused. Are you comparing not letting someone play because of skin color to willfully injecting yourself with a product that gives you a performance enhancement? Or are you are saying players who purposely cheated are the same as white players who benefited from segregation?

kchses1:

The thing that separates baseball from football, at least PED-wise, is there hasn't been a big name -- save Merriman -- that's been caught.

Posted by: IFChris | July 31, 2009 3:17 PM

...I think there comes a point where everyone has an intelligent opinion and doesn't have time or method to write it in a public forum...finally finds what it takes, and then confronts the nonsensical babbling of a "professional writer".

And just realizes that it's all pointless and goes back to whatever they were doing before.

Posted by: dubya19391 | August 1, 2009 7:44 PM

You mean the Hall of Fame that Papi will own now that the NY Times and this sight made public some speculation (made by an anonymous source who will be a criminal if he really saw the report) on the results of the MLB's anonymous, records-destroyed test that was seized by the oh-so-truthful congress and protected under court order? I guess you should ask Big Papi who should qualify for the baseball game HOF.

Posted by: halifar59 | August 2, 2009 2:51 PM

"nonsensical babbling"

I apologize for not giving a full dissertation on this subject, but my feelings on cheating are similar to the Olympics. You get caught, you are pretty much done.

Is that naive or wishful thinking with professional sports? Goodness, I hope not.

Posted by: IFChris | August 3, 2009 1:38 PM

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2011 The Washington Post Company