Pete Rose RIP

[chasfh]

1 hour ago, RedRamage said:

Now I'm gonna have to re-read it sometime soon... 

My basic take away was that Cobb was, more or less, about what the average southern man of the era was like... which includes being prejudice/racist to some level. This doesn't make Cobb a saint of course, but the perception that he was MORE aggressive than, or MORE racist than, or MORE sexist than your average baseball player of the era is probably wrong.

I don't think the author was trying to paint Cobb as perfect, but just not the extremist that he's been viewed as via the work of Stump. I believe that his showing of the Freep being racist is showing what culture was like at that time. I think the author pointing how some of the stories were inaccurate (the one example being the fight Cobb got into with an elevator operator and with a watchman at a hotel NOT being black men, but instead being white men) shows how Stump created a false narrative.

All in all Cobb was almost certainly racist/prejudice to some level and simply saying: "Well, so was everyone" isn't really a vindication. I'm repeating myself here, but I'm not saying Cobb was a great morally upstanding man who we should honor and respect and elevate as a wonderful human. I am saying that probably any sports figure from the era had as much questionable about them as Cobb so if someone wants to shy away from being a fan of Cobb because he was [x] or he was [y] then I would expect them to behave the same way about nearly everyone from this era. 

(Just to be 100% clear: I am NOT saying you are acting that way towards Cobb while not towards other players of the era.)

Contemporary newspapers from the time are replete with stories of Cobb get into scrapes of all kinds with all kinds of people. Other players did not get nearly as many stories as he did. Some will maintain that’s playa-hating because the papers probably didn’t write stories about Class D players going ape**** on people.

If nothing else, I do find it interesting that we’ve swung all the way the other way on this. Before Leersehn, the media would report that Cobb was a monster based only on the Stump book and nothing else. Now the media report that Cobb was not the monster everyone thinks he was based only on the Leersehn book and nothing else. If there’s one main takeaway from this whole thing, it might be that It’s fast and easy to source the first thing you see on any topic.

[SoCalTiger]

I just wish Rose would have owned up to his gambling addiction and baseball betting straight away. His bats and balls are in the hall but he isn’t which is strange. Personally all the questionable players should be in the Hall if their play met the standards. Not hard to list and make known the bad facts on their plaque. Bet on baseball, possibly part of the black Sox scandal, known to have used steroids. Ect. the games  top home run and hits players aren’t in the Hall and it’s a Hall of Fame or Hall of no shame. If so I think many slipped in.  Just my two cents. 

[Tenacious D]

To stir the pot some more

 

[Jim Cowan]

14 hours ago, 1776 said:

A former Jacksonville Jaguars employee who embezzled more than $22 million from the team is suing FanDuel, alleging that the betting company fueled his fantasy-sports spending and ignored his gambling addiction. 

Amit Patel, who is serving a six-and-a-half-month federal prison term after pleading guilty to stealing money from the team, claimed in a lawsuit filed Tuesday that a FanDuel VIP host showered him with more than $1 million in betting credits, all-expenses-paid trips and gifts to prey on him. He is seeking $250 million in damages.

I'm thinking 12-to-1 against this lawsuit succeeding.

[Jim Cowan]

I would have kept Rose out of the Hall just for his haircut.  It reminds me of something else for which I have always wanted to hear an explanation...the are 1.8 million Americans in prison, but Ken Burns' barber is not among them.

[Tiger337]

10 hours ago, Tenacious D said:

To stir the pot some more

 

Thanks for the confirmation that Rose was an awful human being.  

[chasfh]

10 hours ago, Tenacious D said:

To stir the pot some more

 

Seeing as how "the price" is permanent ineligibility, I would say that Pete Rose hasn't even come close to paying the price.

[monkeytargets39]

I’d be fine with him and other notoriously blackballed players getting in the HOF posthumously.  Put them in a “disgraced” section if you must.

 

It’s the Baseball Hall of Fame.  To never in eternity acknowledge players like the all-time hits leader, the all-time homerun leaders, etc. for future generations of baseball fans to learn about when they visit the HOF is a disservice to the game.  Obviously you’d include why they were denied enshrinement when they were alive as to reiterate that dishonest behavior is not tolerated or celebrated, but it’s important that those stories still get told so that generations of fans will understand the context.

[Tigeraholic1]

1 hour ago, monkeytargets39 said:

I’d be fine with him and other notoriously blackballed players getting in the HOF posthumously.  Put them in a “disgraced” section if you must.

 

It’s the Baseball Hall of Fame.  To never in eternity acknowledge players like the all-time hits leader, the all-time homerun leaders, etc. for future generations of baseball fans to learn about when they visit the HOF is a disservice to the game.  Obviously you’d include why they were denied enshrinement when they were alive as to reiterate that dishonest behavior is not tolerated or celebrated, but it’s important that those stories still get told so that generations of fans will understand the context.

Exaclty it is all theatre now. His gambling has nothing to do with being top 3 player all time. Stats don't lie. 

[tiger2022]

It's silly David Ortiz is in the HOF, failing multiple PED tests while guys like Bonds, in the conversation for greatest player ever, Roger Clemens, in the conversation for greatest pitcher ever, and Alex Rodriguez, probably the greatest SS or 3B ever, are not in the HOF.

[chasfh]

2 hours ago, monkeytargets39 said:

It’s the Baseball Hall of Fame.  To never in eternity acknowledge players like the all-time hits leader, the all-time homerun leaders, etc. for future generations of baseball fans to learn about when they visit the HOF is a disservice to the game. 

Betting on a game in which a player has a duty to perform, putting him in the position of losing the game in the service of a bet, is a bigger disservice to the game. It is, in fact, the biggest disservice to the game, which is why it is the only infraction that earns anyone who does so a declaration of permanent ineligibility. 

[RedRamage]

2 hours ago, monkeytargets39 said:

I’d be fine with him and other notoriously blackballed players getting in the HOF posthumously.  Put them in a “disgraced” section if you must.

 

It’s the Baseball Hall of Fame.  To never in eternity acknowledge players like the all-time hits leader, the all-time homerun leaders, etc. for future generations of baseball fans to learn about when they visit the HOF is a disservice to the game.  Obviously you’d include why they were denied enshrinement when they were alive as to reiterate that dishonest behavior is not tolerated or celebrated, but it’s important that those stories still get told so that generations of fans will understand the context.

I think this argument would have been much more persuasive 20 years ago. These days with the internet this information is easily available for everyone with just a few clicks and a few google searches. The HOF isn't really a education source... I mean, I'm sure there are plenty of people who learn something new after visiting there, but it's not like the ultimate source for baseball info.

Honestly HOF entry is more of a honoring of a player for what he did in/for baseball. In that regard I have no problem with dis-allowing people that baseball doesn't want associated with them.

[chasfh]

2 minutes ago, RedRamage said:

Honestly HOF entry is more of a honoring of a player for what he did in/for baseball. In that regard I have no problem with dis-allowing people that baseball doesn't want associated with them.

I do’t think it’s anything like someone in Baseball doesn’t care for Pete Rose. Pete committed the gravest sin possible against the game. Regardless of what who in the game personally thinks about whom, it’s simply a matter of following through on the punishment proscribed in Major League Rule 21(d).

[tiger2022]

The "disgraced" wing of the HOF.  That would be awesome.  Maybe have a "douchebag" wing also?  I nominate Jack Morris to be in that wing.

[RedRamage]

23 hours ago, chasfh said:

Contemporary newspapers from the time are replete with stories of Cobb get into scrapes of all kinds with all kinds of people. Other players did not get nearly as many stories as he did. Some will maintain that’s playa-hating because the papers probably didn’t write stories about Class D players going ape**** on people.

If nothing else, I do find it interesting that we’ve swung all the way the other way on this. Before Leersehn, the media would report that Cobb was a monster based only on the Stump book and nothing else. Now the media report that Cobb was not the monster everyone thinks he was based only on the Leersehn book and nothing else. If there’s one main takeaway from this whole thing, it might be that It’s fast and easy to source the first thing you see on any topic.

Personally I think it Leersehn's work is more of a case of undoing the extremism that Stump painted. Like according to Stump: Ty Cobb was a horrible person because he did W and X and Y and Z. Leersehn seemed to be saying: Well actually he didn't do W. He did do X, but the details surrounding it were reported wrong, everyone of the era was doing Y, and Z's only source is another player who had a long standing grudge with Cobb.

Again I'll need to re-read the book sometime because it's been a while. And on that note, I would be curious if you have other books/sources that you'd recommend.

[chasfh]

17 minutes ago, RedRamage said:

Again I'll need to re-read the book sometime because it's been a while. And on that note, I would be curious if you have other books/sources that you'd recommend.

I don’t. I’m not an expert on Ty Cobb, but I did read a lot of contemporary accounts on him on newspapers.com when the Leersehn book came out, on which I based on criticism of his work at the time.

FWIW, he was feted and fawned over at the SABR convention in Chicago that year. A lot of SABR members seemed relieved to see Cobb exonerated. He seemed to be drinking it all in. 

[oblong]

2 hours ago, tiger2022 said:

It's silly David Ortiz is in the HOF, failing multiple PED tests while guys like Bonds, in the conversation for greatest player ever, Roger Clemens, in the conversation for greatest pitcher ever, and Alex Rodriguez, probably the greatest SS or 3B ever, are not in the HOF.

Blame the baseball writers who vote for that.  It’s not baseballs fault.  Those guys technically didn’t break the rules.  But the same knuckleheads that didn’t vote Lou Whitaker in did what you describe.