Don't care what ANYONE says - Pete got screwed.
While I'm at it - so did Shoeless Joe Jackson.
BOTH = HOF today.
Living the life! Go Buckeyes! ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
CPO and CDR, USN (ret)
1942, 1954, 1957, 1961, 1968, 1970, 2002, 2014 NATIONAL CHAMPIONS!
Both were great players, among the best that ever played, but both damaged the game through their actions. Neither belongs in the HOF.
Shoeless Joe, maybe? How did Pete damage the game. Look, I'm a lifelong Reds fan, and I think Pete belongs in the Hall. That said, I also think he's a scumbag for a lot of reasons that have nothing to do with betting on baseball. But it was never proven he bet on the Reds, therefore never affecting the outcome of any game. I'm not of the opinion that he damaged anything.
"We gotta go win this next game and make the State of Ohio proud!"-UFM
If Pete would’ve intentionally threw a game then fine, leave him out of the HOF. That guy played every play like it was his last play, played with his hair on fire every game. Sure, what he did was wrong, but he deserves to be in the HIOF.
Do you know for a fact that on nights when he didn't bet for the Reds to win, he didn't tank the game to pay back a bookie?
No. That is the deep roots of gambling.
"You're welcome for the house I built."
Wrong Brutus, I was a huge Reds and Rose fan. He was my favorite player
But in his own book, he admitted to betting on Reds games.
The problem is that he would change the amount of the bets based on who was playing and sometimes didn't bet at all.
This leaves implications that he bet based on what his potential strategy was for that game.
He also lied about betting while he was a player and Outside the lines back in 2015 proved that was a lie too, even betting on games in which he was playing
Lastly, he was betting thru mod related bookies in NY, all of this hurts the game and it's integrity as he owed these mob bookies money so they had a hold on him
Pete was a great player no doubt. But he did impact the game negatively, and he dragged a dead man's name thru the mud for years when he claimed Bart Giamatti was lying when in fact he was the one lying.
Finally, the only reason he came clean was to hawk the said book mentioned above.
Now add in tax evasion, sex with an underage girl (she was 14 or 15 at the time), cheated on his wife and fathered a child that he denied was his for nearly a decade before a lawsuit forced him to and on and on
I wore #14 while I played in little league and HS etc, but to my mind, Pete should be out forever
A rule is a rule: Don't bet on baseball doesn't mean only if someone gets hurt.
When Rose did not bet, bookies went the other way hard. Do we know Pete didn't put everything into that game, not caring if they lost?
A rule is a rule. Rose knew it and he broke it. He should suffer the consequences.
Rose was a hard core gambler, and no one could ever guarantee that he didn't do things in his managing career to help out bookies to whom he owed money.
Hard core gamblers run up debt. Pete betting on the Reds to win, and losing, creates debt. Debt to bookies is giving the bookies power over your life in one hundred different ways.
Pete is a hard core liar. He lied for decades and when he thought it would benefit him, he eventually told the truth. Had he told the truth at the beginning, he might be in the HOF today. No one is to blame for that other than Pete.
A rule is a rule and facts are stubborn things.
This moral line that baseball writers draw in the sand is comical. Rose, asshole though he was/is, is arguably the greatest hitter in baseball history. I know there are guys on here who love to parse that and say so-and-so was a much better hitter than Rose (Ted Williams, Tony Gwynn, DiMaggio, etc), but Rose holds the hits record, so there is no denying that he's in the conversation every single time, at worst. The guy bet on his team to win... I know, he bet on the Reds to win when certain pitchers were starting, but not when others were starting, so by extrapolation he bet against the Reds. Whatever... Rose not being in the BBHOF would be like Paul Horning not being in the NFLHOF, except Horning is in the NFLHOF because the Hall would be incomplete without him. Same with baseball's Hall... it is incomplete without Pete Rose, and it's ALL for spite. Sad.
When I die, sprinkle my ashes over the 70's
Off-the field antics aside, Rose (who I'm not fond of, despite growing up as a Reds fan) has a much stronger case for enshrinement than Hornung, who basically was a merely a good multi-dimensional player on a great team.
You are cherry picking facts. There are many other issues involved here which gave MLB no choice but to keep him out.
Not spite, but for 1. Breaking a clear rule, 2. Lying about it to sell a book. 3. Being a dishonest degenerate gambler.
What damage? You mean like steroids or making a deal then going back on it at the podium. There has been integrity of the game in a very long time.
People in Cincinnati don’t exactly share your sentiment any more. Everyone still loves Pete b/c of his legacy, but after the revelation of his affairs with underage girls in the 70s, no one wants to bang the drum for the HoF for Pete-that was the straw that broke the camel’s back for many in the community, including the longtime media.
Maybe I'm in the Twilight Zone section of Cincy, but everyone I know still says "Let Pete in."
Tom Brady lost to John Cooper. Never forget.
I actually didn’t realize that until you mentioned it. It kills me to say this, because Pete Rose was a childhood hero of mine and I’m a lifelong Reds fan, but he’s a dirt bag.
Meh, I was more team Johnny Bench. Pete was great but he was a Knucklehead. The tawdry stuff was probably pretty widespread with MLB players at the time. Doesn't look good with the glaring light of the Me Too movement and the SJWs.
Enjoy the wins over *ichigan, ....I still remember the dark days of the 1990's....
I know there was an allegation made a few years ago about Pete and underage girls. I believe Pete came out and denied it. Was there every anything more than the initial allegation?
I read that he admitted to it, but thought she was 16 (which was age of consent in OH). She claimed they crossed state lines, as well, where age of consent would have been 17 or 18, and he denied that, saying it was only locally. He was 34 at the time, with a wife and 2 kids at home.
Thanks for the info. I wasn't defending him, just never heard anything else about it. All-time great baseball player, horrible person!
Yep, agreed. And no worries. Was just offering the info. Never beat my chest about it, but I defended him enough over the years to say that his performance as a player should have been enough to get him in. Knowing he was a bit shady, willing to look past that, with the most important fact, as we know it, was that he never bet against his own team. But the information over the years, with this as the latest piece is sending me in the other direction. I think history shows that this country gives people a 2nd chance. I think if Pete came out years ago and admitted to all this, he'd be in the HOF, and we wouldn't have to hear about all this other crap.
The girl-woman now-was very open and matter of fact about the affair-she wasn’t trying to gain anything financially or retribution wise.
If only Pete took the high rode and took steroids, then he'd be in.
Not sure about that, Bonds, Clemens, McGuire, and Palmeiro aren't in yet.
And hopefully never will. A-Roid too.
Fields of Dreams
Thanks for the assist NHB!
Lovin' those stirrup socks!
I'd rather be an hour early than a minute late.
Charlie Hustle - like him or hate him = he gave it his all.
So did OJ Simpson. Therefore, giving it all on the athletic field doesn’t mean I will honor someone.
I do feel quite strongly that actions after induction to any pro HOF should absolutely impact a player's / coach's ability to remain there. O.J, Ray Lewis, Michael Irvin, etc. should, in my humble opinion, not be there. Joe Jackson did nothing wrong. Pete Rose bet on baseball but never on his own team to lose; that is an important aspect.
Not only did Joe Jackson not do anything wrong, he wasn’t hated. There is a book out about the fallacy and movies like Field of Dreams that perpetuate the myth.
Piss on Pete Rose.
Rose was hated mainly because he could not keep his mouth shut - said a lot of stupid things over the years. On the field, hate or love him, he was a beast. Still deserves to be in the HOF.
Shoeless Joe Jackson's stats for the "thrown" 1919 World Series are:
During the 1919 championship, the slugger made no errors and racked up 12 hits, a World Series record that stood until 1964. His batting average for the series (.375) was the highest on either team. If Jackson did try to throw the championship, his supporters argue, he did a pretty poor job.
I meant Joe Jackson wasn’t hated. Despite Henry Hill saying “We all hated the SOB”
I thought he was talking about Ty Cobb in that scene.
* facepalm *
25 year old memories fade. Joe was talking about Cobb. The book is about Cobb.
Cobb = NOT A RACIST and one of, if not THE, greatest baseball players to ever live.
Great article written about how his story has been taken completely out of context due to one a-hole... http://www.civilwarbummer.com/confederate-racial-heritage-or-baseballs-georgia-peach-2/
This charcoal drawing from a friend of mine hangs over my desk in my home:
Put Pete in the HOF!
I remember the T-shirts with "Pete's Back" on the back. Man, oh man, what could have been. SMDH!
Chiming in I'm a Pete fan. Should be in the HOF. Big Red Machine Fan in the day.
HOF for Pete. Screw Giamatti!
Hey; what did Chuck Rhoades ever do to you?
Oh, not that Giamatti...
I was at that game. I was 10 years old and loved Pete. My dad managed to get free.tickets through his work.
"You win with people" — Woody Hayes
Was also at Riverfront the night before he broke Ty Cobbs record. Rose went 0-4.
Did you know that some baseball historians went back and found that two of Ty Cobb's hits had been recorded twice, so he really had 4,189 hits. That means Pete really broke the record in Chicago, but MLB still recognizes Cobb with 4,191.
Funny story.... Pete made the circuit last month for his book and tells a story about his dad talking to him in the parking lot after a home ballgame (his dad was a salesman and lived 4 miles from Riverfront and went to all the games).
Pete does not “run” to first base on a force out at second early in the game so his father waits for him in the parking lot after the game is over. His father asks Pete, “did you run to first base?”
Pete answers “no”
his Dad puts a finger in his chest and says,,,,“Don’t YOU EVER embarrass me like that again”.
Speaking of records, Aquino just extended his!
I believe he now has 11 home runs in 54 at bats.
I wish more athletes played their sport with the same energy and enthusiasm that Pete did.
Will we ever see another player manager? I doubt it...
And on fourth and one... would you believe?
Pete Rose is a HOF baseball Player and a world class dirtbag.
I understand that some feel one cancels the other out.
I Hate Michigan.
Pete Rose is a massive dirtbag. There are guys in the Hall who are bigger dirtbags than Pete Rose including some of the most idolized figures in the sport. Baseball writers should absolutely not be the judge of moral character.
Did you know that the 1919 White Sox players were all acquitted by a Grand Jury? Yes - despite that - Landis handed them all a lifetime ban including the great, Joe Jackson, to which he remains outside the HOF looking in.
Here is the issue with Pete's gambling that some folks seem to forget
1) He gambled on games he played in - not every game but some of them and the amounts were sometimes different
This signals to the mob bookies he was using that he had more or less confidence on a game by game basis of his effort and the outcome, ie when he did gamble he was advertising more confidence, and when not less confidence. Since he was a player manager at the time this is a double impact of potential conflict of interest
2) the same applies for his gambling as a manager only. since he didn't bet the same amounts each game and in some cases not at all, he again was signalling to bookies a potential change in the odds as he had control of the lineup, substitutions, use of relievers etc and could impact the game based on whether he had money riding on it or not and bookies could read the same thing into it
3) the rule is very clear, bet on a game in which you have a controlling interest and your gone, it was no mystery, he broke the rule, he gets his reward
4) he lied about all of this for years and in the process he bad mouthed perfectly honorable man in Bart Giamatti for 15 years, when the guy couldn't defend himself and only eventually confessed when trying to sell a book and get reinstated
Lastly add in all the other stuff, He has never quit gambling, he was investigated for gambling on games as far back as the early 70's cheated on his wife, fathered an illegitimate child he refused to acknowledge until a law suit forced it. Cheated on his wife including with a girl reported to have been 15 years old
was know to hang out with Mob tied bookies an drug dealers, was convicted and did time for tax evasion.
He has been accused by former associates of corking his bat, purchasing cocaine, etc.
But to me just the implications of gambling is enough for keeping him out
So he's the Jim Brown of baseball...
Did Pete bet on the Reds when he was a player, or just a manager? If it was just during his time as a manager, put him in the hall as a player, keep him out as a manager.
he did both, he bet on the Reds while playing in his last year as a player in 86. Outside the lines had a special on this in 2015.