With all the talk about steroids and cheating in my opinion this time around Rice gets in !
My opinion, Pete Rose should be put in also !

No chit.... See how his stats stacked up vs. inductees since he's been eligible? In yesterday's Globe. He is deserving. (but he must have been some mean MFer to those reporters in his day) And Manny think he's the baaad man!

With this ballot,he should get in this year
• Brady Anderson
• Harold Baines
• Rod Beck
• Bert Blyleven
• Dave Concepcion
• Andre Dawson
• Shawon Dunston
• Chuck Finley
• Travis Fryman
• Rich "Goose" Gossage
• Tommy John
• David Justice
• Chuck Knoblauch
• Don Mattingly
• Mark McGwire
• Jack Morris
• Dale Murphy
• Robb Nen
• Dave Parker
• Tim Raines
• Jim Rice
• Jose Rijo
• Lee Smith
• Todd Stottlemyre
• Alan Trammell

It's a realatively weak class.I'll say Blyleven and Gossage too.



I don't think Brady Anderson has a chance in hell of ever getting 1 vote.
He's the 1st poster child for steroids !

Tiant belongs in...his numbers are right there with Catfish Hunter! Blyleven...probably a sub .500 winning percentage (have to check his stats and I will come back!)

Rice belonged in after his first couple years of eligibility! Stupid keeping him out because he was a big meanie to the media! He was the most devastating hitter of my youth!
Oh....and Rice numbers are as good if not better than Cepeda and Billy Williams!

A quiet 287-250.......not an exciting career for sure but rock solid for some pretty bad teams and a few good ones...."We Are Family"! He deserves in for sure!

Rice was a black / white issue....................................
He should and will be in
VB

Peter....are you saying race was a factor??? If so I have to laugh and say.....no it was not!

:think: :wall: :smash: Check out Jim Rice's stats against Mickey Mantles, aside from the big difference in HR's, in just about every offensive catogory his numbers are at or better than the Micks. Mantle's numbers were the product of several more seasons. Rice's exemption from the Hall thus far is sad testiment to cedibility of the voters. :lossinit: :realmad:

Rice wasn't just one of the best power hitters of his time.....he was one of the best hitters period! The guy was driving in 120 on 38-40 homers a year, batting .300-.310 and putting 200 hits a season up!!! Only thing that kept his average down was the whiffs?! An injustice is putting it mildly Thom......this guy should have gone in 10 years ago!

i think that this is rices' year.

Go Jim Ed:btu:

Rice wasn't the greatest performer in the clutch that I've ever seen. That's the negative on the field stat. What he was to the press shouldn't matter. Nobody in the history of baseball had a worse relationship with the press than Ted Williams, and the press didn't hold it against him come HOF time. Not that they credibly could. But when you have a borderline case like Rice's, everything seems to matter.

Interesting that Dave Parker is on there. He and Rice were kind of talked about in the same breath back then. Their careers almost paralled each other, and his career stats are right there with Rice's. Roughly the same career average (.290 for Parker to .298 for Rice), they both won MVP once and in fact, in the same year (1978), Rice had more HRs (382 to 279), Parker had more RBI (1493 to 1451), Rice had a better slugging percentage (.502 to .471). However, Rice grounded into 315 DPs over his career, which was another on the field nagative, to Parker's 209.

Also--when you recite Mickey Mantle's stats--bear in mind that he played on one leg for well over half of his career, and like Willie Mays, held on too long.

And the news that came in just a few minutes ago--Rice was passed over again, getting only 72% of the votes.

In regard to the media..Eddie Murray wasn't exactly media friendly..

But he had one of the magic numbers that used to assure a place in the Hall--500+ career HRs.

Not to mention he was a switch hitter Mike!:uhuh:

Wait till next year again..:(

I think we all know that I am not a huge boston fan:devil2:, but it is a travesty that Jim Rice is not in the hall.:smash: He was the most feared hitter in baseball for a decade in the AL, but comparing him to Eddie Murray and Mickey Mantle are you guys serious.

I grew up loving Don Mattingly, but I am not going to compare him to people he shouldn't be compared to in the same sentence.

Mickey Mantle, Eddie Murray and Jim Rice were power hiters. 2 of those power hitters had 500 home runs and that is why they are in the hall, before steroids that was the magic number you made it and your were guaranteed a spot.

Oh yea Mickey Mantle won the triple crown, remember that before you compare anybody to him. Jim Rice and Mickey mantle you guys make me laugh:rotf2:

Wait till next year again..:(

next year is his final year of eligibility and i guarantee you that he gets in.

next year is his final year of eligibility and i guarantee you that he gets in.

Depends on the quality of the first year eligible class. Off the top of my head, I can't think of who they might be, but a powerhouse cast could cost him a shot.

The Veterans' Committee will elect him someday. That's how Mazerowski, probably the least deserving player in there, got in. The guy basically got into Cooperstown on one swing of the bat :rollem:

Peter....are you saying race was a factor??? If so I have to laugh and say.....no it was not!

Not to start a pissing match, But when I was in high school in the 70's they had forced busing in the 70's in Boston, Jim was a great player but Boston was a "white city" ,,,hate to say that :bc:
As I remember he had a huge pissing match when he left baseball and he never showed up or maybe it was never offered ? his fair well game. After that for years he was MIA
Jim lives in my home town and I have all the respect for him and his career .

He should be in the HOF
VB

I remember busing Peter.....Jim Rice was beloved in this town regardless! Not to mention what does busing have to do with the sportswriters votes???:doh:

Is that why we "hated" Bill Russell? Luis Tiant, Reggie Smith, George Scott?

Larry--I'm a little older than you. Boston didn't love Russell. He had a hell of a time finding a home. Read his books sometime. The Celts couldn't sell out a home playoff 7th game in his day, when the Celts were the first NBA team to field an all-black starting 5. After he retired, he only came back to the Garden on a few occasions, as a favor to Red. If Boston loved Reggie Smith so much, why was management so eager to trade him for peanuts? There were some ugly rumors of an affair with a white player's wife (many speculated that it was Yastremski's, although they were just rumors) and they couldn't ship him out of town fast enough. People loved George Scott the way they loved Stepin Fetchit or Jack Benny's Rochester. He was an amiable southern black who, in the parlance of his time, "knew his place" and wasn't "uppity" like Reggie Smith.

Tiant came around later. He had two things going for him--he was Cuban, and he also had more of Scott's personality than Smith's or Rice's. And Rice wasn't as beloved as you might think, even with the fans. I used to go to Fenway in the late 1970s and some of what I heard shouted when he'd hit into one of his signature 6-4-3 DPs was horrible.

I remember busing Peter.....Jim Rice was beloved in this town regardless! Not to mention what does busing have to do with the sportswriters votes???:doh:

Larry, black people were not treated fair back in the 70's ,they had a very hard time in Boston. From kid's in school to pro ball players.
JIm took it to heart and pissed off more then a few people. It was huge, The owners, the sports writers.
He was way ahead of his time :musc: The sad part is in sports it's still
a white city , just in the last few years things have changed for the better:kewl: ...................................

Trust me I know the history of African Americans and sports in Boston...and busing. My point was people hated Russell before busing even happened.....I do not agree that busing or race had anything to do with Rice not getting elected.....like I said....what does it have to do with the nations sportswriters and their votes???

He has now appeared on 14 of the possible 15 BBWAA (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BBWAA) annual ballots, and Rice's current delay in being elected to the Hall of Fame stems in part from more current statistical analysis of player performance. This analysis shows that Rice's HOF credentials may be more questionable than they were considered during his career.[15] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jim_Rice#_note-14) The delay may also be related to his often difficult relationship with the media during his playing career, many of whom are still voting members of the BBWAA.


A clip and past from Wikipedia..............

VB

Gotta agree with Mike P

He pissed more then a few people off................
VB

The delay may also be related to his often difficult relationship with the media during his playing career, many of whom are still voting members of the BBWAA

But what does the vote of the nations sportswriters who vote for those to be inducted have to do with A. Race and B. Busing???

I am gonna bet that most of those who ever dealt with Rice during his career are long since retired! Also gonna go out on a limb and say a good percentage of the sportswriters who vote never saw Rice Play!

Again............... This was wrote TODAY .. not from me

The delay may also be related to his often difficult relationship with the media during his playing career, many of whom are still voting members of the BBWAA

And I will go out on the limb and say that most of the voters have their head up their arse :liquify:

I still have a ball I caught from Rice in 1978

he should be in the hall
he was famous :D

And I will go out on the limb and say that most of the voters have their head up their arse :liquify:

That limb is about to break Peter cause I am coming out there with you!:uhuh:

Either that are they are smoking from the same crack pipe as

Jerkury Morris!!

What is there some sort of unwritten code between the baseball writers of today to 'have the backs' of the writers of Rice's time, simply because he was a shathead to the media back then?

Guess if you haven't played the game on that level you cain't appreciate the "most feared hitter of the day" as ALL of his contemporary pitchers will attest.

Even Gossage knows, and so don't those nincompoops with pens!
What's it gonna take for Jim Ed and Charlie Hustle to get in. Both deserve a spot in Cooperstown.

Oh yea Mickey Mantle won the triple crown, remember that before you compare anybody to him. Jim Rice and Mickey mantle you guys make me laugh:rotf2:

:D First of all, I was speaking strickly about numbers. There is no doubt that MM was a terrific athlete and a great hitter. But I wonder how well he would have held up to the scrutiny under which Rice and later players were placed. Although his baseball credentials are undeniable, he wasn't exactly the ideal role model ( out of respect, there is no need to expound on that). In his era there was an unwritten bond between players and the media as to what was "off the record" and very few crossed that line. He was cannonized by the NY writers of his time but in the last decades of the 1900's, the later band of NY scribes would have ate him alive, surly deminished his legend and loved doing it.

I've been around a while and seen a few innings myself including the highlight film of Teddy Ball Game's last shot to right the day it happened. Not for nuttin'........... :cheers:

:D First of all, I was speaking strickly about numbers. There is no doubt that MM was a terrific athlete and a great hitter. But I wonder how well he would have held up to the scrutiny under which Rice and later players were placed. Although his baseball credentials are undeniable, he wasn't exactly the ideal role model ( out of respect, there is no need to expound on that). In his era there was an unwritten bond between players and the media as to what was "off the record" and very few crossed that line. He was cannonized by the NY writers of his time but in the last decades of the 1900's, the later band of NY scribes would have ate him alive, surly deminished his legend and loved doing it.

I've been around a while and seen a few innings myself including the highlight film of Teddy Ball Game's last shot to right the day it happened. Not for nuttin'........... :cheers:

Thom Cat - My apologies we were not on the same page. You will never know how Mickey Held up under the scrutiny that rice had, but you have a lot less scrutiny when you win championships.

There is a reason that Mickey Mantle is a 1st ballot hall of famer and a reason he is always listed on top 100 athletes of all time by fans and sportswriters. in 1956 mantle was a stud, his numbers during that year are unmatched by anyone as far as dominating the league. He won the ML triple crown not just the Al triple crown. I can't remember anyone even contending for the ML triplecrown since him (could be incorrect - but i don't remember).

With that said Rice definetly deserves to be in the hall:bsod:

I just can't wait to see what happens when some of today's players are eligable.

What's it gonna take for Jim Ed and Charlie Hustle to get in. Both deserve a spot in Cooperstown.

For Rice, being named on 75% of the ballots next year, or being named by the Veterans Committee sometime in the future (and the Veterans Committee WILL vote him in eventually).

Rose has to deal with having his lifetime ban lifted by the Commissioner first. And to do that, he has to finally and unequivocally admit that he bet on baseball games, and act like he's sorry.

And just as an aside---Rose accepted the lifetime ban and disqualification from HOF eligibility knowingly and willingly as part of a deal to keep the evidence of his gambling private.

From the day you sign a ML contract, one rule above all is reinforced--you cannot bet on a baseball game.

While I totally agree with what you've stated, Mike P, to be the facts and the legalisms involved with Pete Rose, my question was more of a rhetorical one and directed to the broader point that the landscape of baseball has undergone the equivalence of a full scale stripmining since Pete's unfortunate set of circumstances.

I DO NOT condone his gambling and am fully aware that he chose one of the worst paths he could have chosen as a person and a player. Just wish that he had not, and really believe that on stats alone he deserves a spot in the hallowed Hall.

:think: :wall: :smash: Check out Jim Rice's stats against Mickey Mantles, aside from the big difference in HR's, in just about every offensive catogory his numbers are at or better than the Micks. Mantle's numbers were the product of several more seasons. Rice's exemption from the Hall thus far is sad testiment to cedibility of the voters. :lossinit: :realmad:

I don't know about that. Rice had more career AB's and wasn't half the ballplayer Mickey was. Rice hit into over 200 more Double Plays then Mickey and scored 200 runs less. Mickey did it all. Rice was good but no HOFer.

And Tony Perez's numbers were worse than Rice yet he's in the hall. What's your point? Perez got in because he hung around way too long. Including getting paraded around like a mascot from the Big Red Machine his last few years with the Reds. And Rice put up his numbers with 1500 less AB's than Perez. And his last 7 years were abysmal.Again..What's your point?


Tell me where I said Tony Perez belongs in the HOF. One thing Perez was that Rice wasn't was a winner.

It's a comparison..Just like you comparing Mantle's numbers to Rice's ..



Mantle and Rice is no comparison. I was just responding to a post that said Rice had the same or better numbers than Mantle.

Kirby Puckett is in the hall?:hihi:

Winning a Championship does not get you in the Hall SK70! If that were the criteria then we would have to throw out guys like Ted Williams, Ernie Banks, etc.

That last line was in regards to your comment about Perez being a winner and that Rice was not! Guess that makes Ted Williams, Ernie Banks and others losers too?

Kirby Puckett is in the hall?:hihi:

Winning a Championship does not get you in the Hall SK70! If that were the criteria then we would have to throw out guys like Ted Williams, Ernie Banks, etc.

That last line was in regards to your comment about Perez being a winner and that Rice was not! Guess that makes Ted Williams, Ernie Banks and others losers too?


Kirby Puckett doesn't deserve to be in the hall. Williams and Banks were 10 times better than Rice or Perez. Maybe Perez is in because he was a winner and Rice never won.

Just had to review Pucketts "Hall of Fame" credentials??? I think he got in on the pity vote!!! His numbers are no where near HOF numbers......yet he is in and Rice is not!!!??? 1085 RBI....2305 Hits.....a .318 BA.....207 Homers???? He never won an MVP award??? Other than playing on a Championship team what did he ever do???? There is the travesty!

Again with the winning?? Is that what you believe a HOF'er is??? They are elected based on their individual career numbers and performance....not whether they won a championship or not!:hs: Nolan Ryan never won a championship.....I think we should rescind his HOF status! Oh sorry.....Ryan did win one...as a member of the 69 Mets....I think he was waterboy or something!

Again with the winning?? Is that what you believe a HOF'er is??? They are elected based on their individual career numbers and performance....not whether they won a championship or not!:hs: Nolan Ryan never won a championship.....I think we should rescind his HOF status! Oh sorry.....Ryan did win one...as a member of the 69 Mets....I think he was waterboy or something!


Again I didn't vote. I think maybe the voters voted for Perez because he was a winner and played on winning teams. I think that if a player is on the bubble they take that into consideration. Mattingly should be in since Puckett is in. You could make a case for alot of players that are in who shouldn't be. I don't think Rice, Perez, Puckett, Dave Parker,Phil Rizzuto, Billy Williams, Richie Ashburn deserve to be in either. I could name more but those are the ones that come to mind.

Again with the winning?? Is that what you believe a HOF'er is??? They are elected based on their individual career numbers and performance....not whether they won a championship or not!:hs: Nolan Ryan never won a championship.....I think we should rescind his HOF status! Oh sorry.....Ryan did win one...as a member of the 69 Mets....I think he was waterboy or something!


Your going to compare Rice to Nolan Ryan:rollem:

Jim Rice does not belong in the same sentence as:

- Mickey Mantle
- Ted Williams
- Ernie Banks

period. full stop. end of story:gorez:

if your a winner, that helps you get into the hall of fame. regardless of its correct or not.

Kirby Puckett doesn't deserve to be in the hall. Williams and Banks were 10 times better than Rice or Perez. Maybe Perez is in because he was a winner and Rice never won.

:hs:Rice did win a few things. One MVP, 3 HR titles, several RBI titles. He did have more hits, 2Bs and 3Bs than the Mick.:bl: He also had 4-200 hit seasons, while Mick never reached that plateau and 7-100 RBI seasons to Mick's 4. Surely no one who has a clue about baseball would consider putting Rice in a class with Mantle. But then again, it's hard to believe that anyone familiar with the game would fail to realize and acknowledge the talent Rice displayed and instead portray him as a slub and a loser. The list of players in the HOF that never got the ring is as long as my arm so that point is moot at best. I'm getting the increasing vibe of a bitter Yank fan/Sox hater in our midst. :love: :btu: :cheers:

ThomCat,

Did you ever think that maybe if Rice had a championship that he would already be in the hof?

I believe that Rice should be in the hall, but people comparing Rice to Mantle and Banks and Williams. :smash:

Do we really need to list the accomplishments of these 3 players vs. Jim Rice?

:hs:Rice did win a few things. One MVP, 3 HR titles, several RBI titles. He did have more hits, 2Bs and 3Bs than the Mick.:bl: He also had 4-200 hit seasons, while Mick never reached that plateau and 7-100 RBI seasons to Mick's 4. Surely no one who has a clue about baseball would consider putting Rice in a class with Mantle. But then again, it's hard to believe that anyone familiar with the game would fail to realize and acknowledge the talent Rice displayed and instead portray him as a slub and a loser. The list of players in the HOF that never got the ring is as long as my arm so that point is moot at best. I'm getting the increasing vibe of a bitter Yank fan/Sox hater in our midst. :love: :btu: :cheers:


You're right Rice had 37 more hits in a 125 more AB's. 150 less Home runs, 400 less runs scored, less RBI's, less stolen bases and a lower slugging percentage. Rice was a very good player , just not a HOFer.

ThomCat,

Did you ever think that maybe if Rice had a championship that he would already be in the hof?

I believe that Rice should be in the hall, but people comparing Rice to Mantle and Banks and Williams. :smash:

Do we really need to list the accomplishments of these 3 players vs. Jim Rice?


If Rice was on a World Series championship team in his career he probably would be in the HOF.

I probably attended 40 or more games a year from 75 to 77 and then not as many but regularly until about 1980 when tickets became hard to get and prices went way up. At that time , Rice was not even one of the biggest stars on the Red Sox. They had Lynn , Fisk , burleson , yastremski , Tiant , so many other guys who were that much better than Rice. Hell IMO even Dwight Evans was a better all around player.

I liked him cause he was a good hitter but just an average fielder and not a clutch hitter IMO. So , I'm not too surprised he is not in and think it could go either way as far as him ever getting in. .

ThomCat,

Did you ever think that maybe if Rice had a championship that he would already be in the hof?

I believe that Rice should be in the hall, but people comparing Rice to Mantle and Banks and Williams. :smash:

Do we really need to list the accomplishments of these 3 players vs. Jim Rice?

:grins: I thought I had clearly expressed that I didn't put Rice in Mantle's class. Somehow I don't get the connection between a team winning a championship and an individual getting into the HOF. TEAMS win championships in baseball. BTW I don't consider Mantle in the same class as Ted Williams by any stretch either. :bshake: :btu:

If Rice was on a World Series championship team in his career he probably would be in the HOF.

That is a most ridiculous statement.....again you do think winning a championship is what merits inclusion in the HOF! I am pretty much done with this conversation.....SK70 and Wrikerjr....you guys are New Yawkers ain't cha?:uhuh:

[QUOTE=BigFish;553923]That is a most ridiculous statement.....again you do think winning a championship is what merits inclusion in the HOF!


It's the only reason Joe Namath is in the football hall of fame !!!
His career stats suck but he had a big mouth with his prediction and his team (Buddy Ryan's defense) won the most important super bowl !

That is a most ridiculous statement.....again you do think winning a championship is what merits inclusion in the HOF! I am pretty much done with this conversation.....SK70 and Wrikerjr....you guys are New Yawkers ain't cha?:uhuh:


It's a fact. If he won a championship or 2 he would probably be in. I am not saying it's right because I don't think he belongs in either way. Championship or not.

[QUOTE=BigFish;553923]That is a most ridiculous statement.....again you do think winning a championship is what merits inclusion in the HOF!


It's the only reason Joe Namath is in the football hall of fame !!!
His career stats suck but he had a big mouth with his prediction and his team (Buddy Ryan's defense) won the most important super bowl !


Exactly! Joe Namath was very overrated. Actually he really wasn't good just avearge.

[QUOTE=BigFish;553923]That is a most ridiculous statement.....again you do think winning a championship is what merits inclusion in the HOF!


It's the only reason Joe Namath is in the football hall of fame !!!
His career stats suck but he had a big mouth with his prediction and his team (Buddy Ryan's defense) won the most important super bowl !


He also gave the AFL instant credibility and put it on an equal footing with the old guard. Without the Jets' win, and that of the Chiefs the next year (and they were almost as big an underdog to the Vikes as the Jets were to the Colts), it's very unlikely that Pete Rozelle would have convinced the Steelers, Colts and Browns to switch over to the new AFC. You would not have the divisional structure you have today.

[QUOTE=Raider Ronnie;553939]


He also gave the AFL instant credibility and put it on an equal footing with the old guard. Without the Jets' win, and that of the Chiefs the next year (and they were almost as big an underdog to the Vikes as the Jets were to the Colts), it's very unlikely that Pete Rozelle would have convinced the Steelers, Colts and Browns to switch over to the new AFC. You would not have the divisional structure you have today.


So that made him a hall of famer???

[QUOTE=Mike P;554009]


So that made him a hall of famer???

His stats are as good as Aikman's. And he had a bigger impact on the game. The merger was agreed upon, but the structuring of the league wasn't settled. If the AFL hadn't shown it could compete with the big boys, the 9 AFL teams would have been scattered around the NFL divisions. The Pats wouldn't be playing in the AFC east--they'd be playing in the eastern division of the NFL, along with the Jets and Bills, joining the Giants, Eagles, Redskins, and whatever other original eastern division NFL team that would be left in that division. He allowed the AFL to retain its basic identity as the new AFC.

Just as an FYI--he threw for roughly the same number of yards, and slightly fewer TDs, as Stabler in a shorter career. Without a Warren Wells, or a Fred Bilitnikoff, or a Dave Casper to throw to. Don Maynard was a good receiver, but his other targets were guys like George Sauer Jr and Richard Caster. He never had a speed merchant WR to throw to. And he missed more than half of 4 seasons due to injuries. Imagine what he could have done with only one good knee, let alone two.

[QUOTE=Raider Ronnie;554025]

His stats are as good as Aikman's. And he had a bigger impact on the game. The merger was agreed upon, but the structuring of the league wasn't settled. If the AFL hadn't shown it could compete with the big boys, the 9 AFL teams would have been scattered around the NFL divisions. The Pats wouldn't be playing in the AFC east--they'd be playing in the eastern division of the NFL, along with the Jets and Bills, joining the Giants, Eagles, Redskins, and whatever other original eastern division NFL team that would be left in that division. He allowed the AFL to retain its basic identity as the new AFC.

Just as an FYI--he threw for roughly the same number of yards, and slightly fewer TDs, as Stabler in a shorter career. Without a Warren Wells, or a Fred Bilitnikoff, or a Dave Casper to throw to. Don Maynard was a good receiver, but his other targets were guys like George Sauer Jr and Richard Caster. He never had a speed merchant WR to throw to. And he missed more than half of 4 seasons due to injuries. Imagine what he could have done with only one good knee, let alone two.


Aikman threw for over 5,000 more yards than Joe on a run oriented team. Aikman was also very accurate completing over 61% of his passes while Joe was around 50%. And I think Namath threw alot more INT's than TD's. Aikman is one of those guys who made the HOF on the fact that he has 3 rings.

SK70....now its a case where a guy has "too many" rings to be in the HOF???? Man o' man. :doh:

So Aikman is in only because he has 3 rings but his stats suck?!??!

Rice would be in if he had won a championship?!?!? Which in turn to you means he has the numbers but no "WIN"?!?!?

I asked are you from NY?:laugha:

If Rice was on a World Series championship team in his career he probably would be in the HOF.

Agreed, unfortunately it really does matter with voters.

That is a most ridiculous statement.....again you do think winning a championship is what merits inclusion in the HOF! I am pretty much done with this conversation.....SK70 and Wrikerjr....you guys are New Yawkers ain't cha?:uhuh:

I am a yankees fan and not afraid to admit it. I do believe that rice deserves to be in the hall, without question. Problem is that you (or others not really sure) compare him to mantle william banks are just crazy or don't really have a clue.

winning championships really does matter in certain instances, it is one of many factors.

If your a power hitter (in the pre-steroid era) and you do not have 500 home runs than you are not automatically in on your numbers, other things weigh in on people's votes. Not saying its correct or fair, just the way it is. Sometimes its championships, sometimes is bieng a clutch player, sometimes if your an ass the voters can be an ass.

[QUOTE=Mike P;554009]


So that made him a hall of famer???

Yes

I am a yankees fan and not afraid to admit it. I do believe that rice deserves to be in the hall, without question. Problem is that you (or others not really sure) compare him to mantle william banks are just crazy or don't really have a clue.

winning championships really does matter in certain instances, it is one of many factors.

If your a power hitter (in the pre-steroid era) and you do not have 500 home runs than you are not automatically in on your numbers, other things weigh in on people's votes. Not saying its correct or fair, just the way it is. Sometimes its championships, sometimes is bieng a clutch player, sometimes if your an ass the voters can be an ass.

Re-read my posts..."I" did not compare Rice to Williams, Banks or especially Mantle.....as I do not think they are comparable stats wise at all! Its apples and watermelons but I do think they all belong in the same fruit stand!:laughs:

My comments on Williams, Banks was strictly in regards to SK70's comments about if they don't win, they don't belong in the HOF!

Re-read my posts..."I" did not compare Rice to Williams, Banks or especially Mantle.....as I do not think they are comparable stats wise at all! Its apples and watermelons but I do think they all belong in the same fruit stand!:laughs:

My comments on Williams, Banks was strictly in regards to SK70's comments about if they don't win, they don't belong in the HOF!

My bad. I agree they all belong in the hall!!!

Re-read my posts..."I" did not compare Rice to Williams, Banks or especially Mantle.....as I do not think they are comparable stats wise at all! Its apples and watermelons but I do think they all belong in the same fruit stand!:laughs:

My comments on Williams, Banks was strictly in regards to SK70's comments about if they don't win, they don't belong in the HOF!



Don't go putting words in my mouth. I said some people are in because they won. That's just the way it is. I stated Rice doesn't belong in whether he won or not. But if he did win he would probably be in. What don't you understand?

SK70....now its a case where a guy has "too many" rings to be in the HOF???? Man o' man. :doh:


Obviously you don't understand. You must be from Bahstan.

[QUOTE=wrikerjr;554184]I am a yankees fan and not afraid to admit it. I do believe that rice deserves to be in the hall, without question. Problem is that you (or others not really sure) compare him to mantle william banks are just crazy or don't really have a clue.



:rotfl:You're a YANKEE FAN, get the farque outta here!!! Being a Sox fan myself, I undestand dissapointment. Not making it year after year will cause a bitterness and resentment that has to manifest itself somewhere. It doesn't make one a bad person!!!:pop: Okay, Last time, I, for one, never compared Rice to Mantle. Mantle was a much better all around ball player without question. I simply stated that a number of the offensive numbers were similar. As for the top of the all-time list of ballplayers there are only four: Ted Williams (lost 4 prime years to defending his country) Lou Gerig (career cut tragically short), Babe Ruth and Henry Aaron. All the rest are looking up and from a looooong way down. Period, end of story. Peace & Love :wid: :grins: :cheers:............ P.S. I love this %$%$%$%$e!!!

:rotfl:You're a YANKEE FAN, get the farque outta here!!!

OK i will leave then.

[QUOTE=Raider Ronnie;554025]

His stats are as good as Aikman's. And he had a bigger impact on the game. The merger was agreed upon, but the structuring of the league wasn't settled. If the AFL hadn't shown it could compete with the big boys, the 9 AFL teams would have been scattered around the NFL divisions. The Pats wouldn't be playing in the AFC east--they'd be playing in the eastern division of the NFL, along with the Jets and Bills, joining the Giants, Eagles, Redskins, and whatever other original eastern division NFL team that would be left in that division. He allowed the AFL to retain its basic identity as the new AFC.

Just as an FYI--he threw for roughly the same number of yards, and slightly fewer TDs, as Stabler in a shorter career. Without a Warren Wells, or a Fred Bilitnikoff, or a Dave Casper to throw to. Don Maynard was a good receiver, but his other targets were guys like George Sauer Jr and Richard Caster. He never had a speed merchant WR to throw to. And he missed more than half of 4 seasons due to injuries. Imagine what he could have done with only one good knee, let alone two.


I don't think Aikman should have gone in also!
He's another one like Bob Griese who is in because of the teams success and a GREAT running game.
Both did more to not loose games and neither had to carry the team on their back!
My opinion,
The hall of fame should be for the greatest players, not pretty good players!

It's not the hall of pretty good as someone has said

we will see how you guys feel when some of your pretty good pats are in the hall of fame, because they were on a dynasty.

OK i will leave then.

:wavey:You don't have to leave, man, I was just floored by the stealth with which you diguised your NY bitterness and Sox hatred. :tooth: It's all good :btu: :walk:

:wavey:You don't have to leave, man, I was just floored by the stealth with which you diguised your NY bitterness and Sox hatred. :tooth: It's all good :btu: :walk:

Funny thing--I'll bet you that Rice gets more support for Cooperstown from the NY media than from Boston's.