Bonds at it again - Boycott HoF?

[jaybird2001wi]

Barry Bonds said he will boycott the Baseball Hall of Fame if they brand his record setting home run ball with an asterisk. I just find this hilarious and since any steroid related topics have been buried and I don't want to dig it back up... this is just plain hilarious.

"I will never be in the Hall of Fame. Never," Bonds said. "Barry Bonds will not be there.

[And That]

"I will never be in the Hall of Fame. Never," Bonds said. "Barry Bonds will not be there.

And then America's dreams became realized.

 

[PeaveyFury]

I think the voters might help you out with that, Barry.

[BrewCrewRising]

I think the voters might help you out with that, Barry.

 

I didn't realize members of a grand jury were called 'voters'.

[splitterpfj]

It's everyone else's fault...haven't you people realized that yet?

[Weirdos19]

He'll go if invited. He's just covering in case he doesn't get voted in.

[jlau20]

The ironic part is, people who would have been on the fence in voting for him in the future will probably just not vote for him now since he wouldn't care anyway. If it's me voting, now I'm not going to write his name down just so he doesn't get the opportunity to say no.

[sbrylski]

Shoeless Joe, Pete Rose, and Barry Bonds should all be in the HOF.

[pabrewerfan]

Was the cream a banned substance at the time that Bonds used it? I know he admitted to using HGH but that was not a banned substance when he was using it.

HGH at the time is similar to Creatine today. We know that there are benefits to using the stuff but just how much? If Creatine is banned in a few years do we then look back at baseball from 1995-then and make a blanket statement that all the players using creatine were cheaters? I say no.

Bonds should be in the Hall of Fame. Statistically-speaking, he is one of the 5 best players of all-time.

[RU Rah Rah]

Barry Bonds said he will boycott the Baseball Hall of Fame if they brand his record setting home run ball with an asterisk. I just find this hilarious and since any steroid related topics have been buried and I don't want to dig it back up... this is just plain hilarious.

I think that, technically, Ecko will brand the ball, and then hand it off to the HoF for display (if it hasn't happened already?).

 

Whatever the case, I'm not exactly going to shed a tear if he doesn't get voted in, or gets voted in but then doesn't show up.

 

[JimH5]

I'm with Barry on this one.

 

The only reason that ball has (or will have) an asterisk is because some D-level fashion designer decided to insert himself into the story. Barry didn't put the asterisk there. Nor did the pitcher, or the umpire, or even the fan who caught the ball. Instead, it's a guy who bought the ball from the fan who caught the ball from Bonds, who hit the ball.

 

Marc Ecko used this historical artifact to draw attention to himself, using that ball as a perpetual billboard for himself.

 

Ecko decided to be the judge, jury and executioner himself, permanently besmirching Bonds, his career, and this historic achievement.

[BrewCrewRising]

I'm with Barry on this one.

 

The only reason that ball has (or will have) an asterisk is because some D-level fashion designer decided to insert himself into the story. Barry didn't put the asterisk there. Nor did .........

But why, if like Bonds you think Ecko is an idiot, would you boycott the HOF? The HOF didn't put the asterisk on the ball. They have an artifact from (what some might see as) a seminal moment in the history of baseball. If they display it then they are seen as endorsing the asterisk, and if they don't, then one could argue that they are seen as endorsing Bond's HR record. So really the only choice of the HOF is to decide whether the ball on its own merits is a worthy artifact to go in the HOF.

The other choice the HOF would have is to accept the ball, and place a statement by the ball saying that they didn't put the asterisk there and that they don't endorse it. But either way Barry Bonds didn't address the HOF's role. He just lumped the HOF together with Ecko.

[bbrauch2000]

I 100% agree with Bonds on this one. Unless they can find a way to display that ball where the * cant be seen, every father walking through will have to explain to his kid why it was on there and vilify Barry without ever failing a test. I think its great he's telling the HOF to stick it in their ear unless he can go in like anyone else. They have the choice to display the bat he used and the cleats he wore when he hit it out and keep the ball in storage with thousands of other important baseball memorabilia rather than endorse the idiocy of Ecko. Barry Bonds is the greatest player most of us have ever seen and the HOF would be missing an important piece without him

[JimH5]

Well, for one thing, Bonds doesn't really have many options in this. I don't know how else he can express his displeasure in having the asterisk ball on display. And while stomping his feet and holding his breath (which I kind of put on thie level of what he's doing now) is something you can only go to once in awhile, its his right to defend himself when his legacy and reputation are being attacked.

 

And another thing. . .the Hall has been a little too quiet on this Ecko issue. They have indicated that they would take the ball in any condition, and haven't ever once scolded Ecko for defacing the ball. They could have been stronger in issuing a statement against Ecko's decision--but they didn't do that, and appear to have just shrugged their shoulders on the whole thing.

[Patrick425]

Shoeless Joe, Pete Rose, and Barry Bonds should all be in the HOF.

This is rule 5 of the HOF voting rules:

 

5. Voting - Voting shall be based upon the player's record, playing ability, integrity, sportsmanship, character, and contributions to the team(s) on which the player played.

 

So, it's not just about on field abilities, it's also about character and integrity, as it should be.

 

I don't know enough about the facts against Shoeless Joe. There is a lot of evidence that points to the possibility that he was just lumped in other members of the team that throw the Series, I don't know. However, it's been pretty much proven that Rose bet on baseball. It was made very clear by MLB that gambling on baseball is a big no no, possibly the biggest. To me this shows an incredible lack of integrity and character. I loved the way Pete Rose played the game, and he is one of my all time favorite players. But, he doesn't belong in the HOF. Also, Rose was placed on the ineligilble list by Giamatti and is therefore, under the rules of HOF voting, not eligible to be considered for the HOF.

[davemakovec]

And remember - Ecko held a vote for what to do with the ball. People actually voted for it. It's not just some guy's arbitrary decision.

[BrewCityUnit]

Why would they put on asterik on his record setting ball? I forgot, he was the ONLY player using some sort of performance enhancing drug. I agree with Barry on this one......it sure gets old that he keeps getting singled out because of the fact he is the best baseball player of our generation.

[Fatter than Joey]

They have indicated that they would take the ball in any condition, and haven't ever once scolded Ecko for defacing the ball. They could have been stronger in issuing a statement against Ecko's decision--but they didn't do that, and appear to have just shrugged their shoulders on the whole thing.

 

I agree with a lot of Jim's thoughts -- However, I think that the HOF's job is to archive things, and probably should remain opinionless with regard to memorabilia.

 

The ball with or w/o markings is an historical item -- The HR, the auction, the purchase, the fan's opinion poll and subsequent markings are all part of the story of this

ball and IMO should be presented as such.

 

MLB uses about 100,000 baseballs in a year -- this particular baseball probably has the best story of all of them used in 2007, and I think the story of this ball should

be presented from start to finish. The HOF does not exist for Barry Bonds, it exists for people that want to learn about the history of the game. 30 years from now

baseball fans are going to want to look at the whole steroid issue and perhaps try to understand what the fans perspective was at the time.

 

Now I see HOF memorabilia as being different as enshrinement -- that is to say -- I would love to see 1919 Black Sox uniforms, gloves, etc., or Pete Rose's

record setting balls, 3000 hits, 44 gm hitting streak, (NL), breaking Musial's record, 4000th hit, etc. -- heck I'd even love to see his betting slips -- it's part

of the history of the game -- now should he have a plaque hanging with Stan Musial? -- that is a whole other ball of wax IMO.

 

I guess I see this as an open and shut thing for the HOF -- the ball is important, it needs to be archived, and the story told beginning to end.

[Katuluu]

HGH at the time is similar to Creatine today. We know that there are benefits to using the stuff but just how much? If Creatine is banned in a few years do we then look back at baseball from 1995-then and make a blanket statement that all the players using creatine were cheaters? I say no.

 

Creatine supplements do almost nothing. Multiple studies have shown strength to only marginally increase, and a person is just as likely to gain weight from fat as they are from muscle mass. HGH is a whole different animal. Various GH treatments have been used effectively for decades, with the biggest prohibitive being the cost.

 

[RobertR]

I've been to the Hall. A branded ball has no place in it. It would be like putting Pete Rose's betting slips next to the display commemorating Rose's breaking Ty Cobb's hit record. Or displaying Shoeless Joe's Grand Jury testimony. Or having blood covered spikes in a display for Ty Cobb. Or pictures of Babe Ruth at a Bordello. Or a McGwire locker display with a bottle of Andro prominently displayed. Or a Cap Anson display with quotes about keeping blacks out of baseball. The Hall of Fame is a showcase celebrating baseball. Putting something like that on display is just low class, petty, and at cross purposes to the Hall.

 

Robert

[crewcrazy]

The Hall of Fame is just a museum that archives the history of the game. In my opinion, all of these debates (did he use PEDs to help him break the record, is the record legitimate, what to do with the ball, how it should be displayed) are all a part of the story of Barry Bonds breaking the home run record, and should be archived in the Hall as such. Present all sides of the story and let the people who visit the Hall decide for themselves.

[Fatter than Joey]

This the HOF mission statement.

 

The National Baseball Hall of Fame and Museum is a not-for-profit educational institution dedicated to fostering an appreciation of the historical development of the game and its impact on our culture by collecting, preserving, exhibiting and interpreting its collections for a global audience, as well as honoring those who have made outstanding contributions to our National Pastime.

 

Through its mission, the Museum is committed to:

 

* Collecting, through donation, baseball artifacts, works of art, literature, photographs, memorabilia and related materials which focus on the history of the game over time, its players, and those elected to the Hall of Fame.

*Preserving the collections by adhering to professional museum standards with respect to conservation and maintaining a permanent record of holdings through documentation, study, research, cataloging and publication.

*Exhibiting material in permanent gallery space, organizing on-site changing exhibitions on various themes, with works from the Hall of Fame collections or other sources, working with other individuals or organizations to exhibit loaned material of significance to baseball and providing related research facilities.

* Interpreting artifacts through its exhibition and education programs to enhance awareness, understanding and appreciation of the game for a diverse audience.

 

I interpret this to be an institution that wants to archive the history of baseball -- not necessarily celebrate the game in all instances.

 

Babe Ruth in a bordello, or Ty Cobb's bloody spikes are really not interesting artifacts that are relevant to the history of baseball.

 

Joe Jackson's grand jury testimony is an incredibly important event of the history of baseball, the 1919 WS changed the face of baseball.

 

Steroids and the 756 HR, are unfortunately going to be a chapter in the history of baseball, I am sure 30-50 years from now, people are going to want

to see HR ball #757 and try to understand the public perception at the time.

 

EDIT: -- I put the HOF mission statement up for everyone's reference in this thread, and I realize some will interpret differently than others -- I just thought, it would be a good reference point to see how the HOF defines itself.

[RobertR]

It probably all comes down to what "fostering an appreciation" means.

 

It was pointed out on another board, but it's worth bringing to the debate. In terms of visitors and $$$, Barry Bonds coming to the HoF has a much greater impact than some ball with a publicity seeking brand on it. That may well be the decisive factor.

 

And it's probably worth it not to set the precedent that defacing artifacts of the game is a good thing. Sure, Bonds is a jerk, but I wouldn't want a Yankee fan to get ahold of a record breaking ball by ARod and write "Not a true Yankee" on it, for instance.

 

Robert

[Fatter than Joey]

And it's probably worth it not to set the precedent that defacing artifacts of the game is a good thing.

 

This is a good point and I agree -- however I think the cow left the barn -- when people show up to games hoping to catch a ball and

sell it on Ebay or auction it off. If people weren't buying these 2007 balls for hundreds of thousands of $$$, I doubt people

would be using them for promotion.

[PeaveyFury]

They could have been stronger in issuing a statement against Ecko's decision--but they didn't do that, and appear to have just shrugged their shoulders on the whole thing.

 

He's donating an item that he owns to the HOF for free, at a personal loss of 500,000. The HOF has no right to say a word about what some one has done/is doing to their own property, unless they're actually willing to reject the donation.