and I’m sure I’m going to catch flak for this one but Bonds increased his performance, stats, legacy by cheating that had a direct impact on what happened on the field. Maybe one can argue that Pete’s betting had an impact on what happened on the field but I’m personally not one that thinks so. But yet again cheating is cheating is cheating.

agreed to a lifetime ban voluntarily in a deal with MLB in an attempt to save himself exposure and with the promise that he could apply for reinstatement.

Pete Rose likes to justify his behavior by pointing to other bad behavior. He says stuff like how guys that took drugs or used steroids didn’t get banned from baseball while he did for betting on baseball. To this day, Rose remains unrepentant and without sincere remorse for what he did. The same goes for Barry Bonds. He lied about taking steroids when the circumstantial evidence is overwhelming that he did and he has been accused by others of using PEDs. I was never a fan of Barry Bonds, but at the height of his career in the mid-1990s I think that he was on his way to Cooperstown. Both men knew better. Rose violated the cardinal sin of baseball and Bonds cheated with steroids to artifically enhance his body and statistics to help him break homerun records held by two honorable men (Aaron & Maris) who were the antithesis of men like Rose and Bonds.

why should the current crop of voters continue to make the same dumb mistakes of past voters?

Along the same lines some voters use to justify not voting for certain players because its their first time on the ballot or because nobody should go in with 100% of the vote because not even Babe Ruth or Ted Williams went in with 100%.

Again, why continue trends and traditions just because the people before you did the same?

He may not be going out on a limb, but in the world of SB Nation and even beyond, my guess is that his view is decidedly in the minority. Most fans don’t understand how the selfish behavior of steroid abusers produced crooked results or, if they do understand, they simply don’t care. After all, they were entertained by the whole spectacle, and to some, that’s all that really matters.

Principal beneficiaries of this scam should get the Rose treatment when they come up for the HoF vote. As others have said, players like Sosa and McGwire who never could have produced HoF numbers without the drugs are waiting to sneak in under the coattails of Bonds and Clemens.

One way we’ll see it is when Frank Thomas comes up in a couple of years. Another sure first ballot HOFer who should get 100 percent of the vote but there will be idiot writers who won’t vote for him because he didn’t kiss their patooties. I’m sure he’s getting in first ballot but won’t get the 95 percent Maddux will only get because the idiots who wont vote anyone in first time (both should get 100 percent vote. Maddux will probably get 95 percent. Frank will get probably 90 with the other 5 percent the people that don’t think he smiled enough).

And call it the Hall of Shame. Then the could devote some wall space to Bud Selig for the Wall of Lame.

and move those who cheated and are in from the HOF to this new wing

But my understanding is the museum is separate from the HOF plaques. The game is presented, the good and the bad in the museum. I think they even have Pete roses stuff for holding the all time hits record on display, but that doesn’t mean he is IN the HOF. But I haven’t been, so someone please correct me if I’m wrong.

…and STILL today. Totally agree.

…if you don’t allow McGwire, Sosa, Bonds, Manny, A-Rod and whoever else in the Hall of Fame for "cheating’ nor allow Pete Rose in for gambling, then they need to remove ALL equipment they have on display that is in reference to ANYTHING that marks any of those guys’ achievements. It’s hypocritical in any way you view it.

Are the 1919 Black Sox forgotten? How about Pete Rose? By virtue of Pete’s compelling saga, he’s probably the second-most-famous ballplayer of all time.

Sure it’s a big disappointment to look back at ‘98 – perhaps the most enjoyable Cubs season in our lifetimes – and realize that the Great Home Run Chase and thrilling playoff for the Wild Card could not have occurred without benefit of Sammy’s experiments with PED’s. But keeping Sosa or anyone else from enshrinement won’t “erase a whole generation of baseball.” Very likely it will make the Steroid Era even more famous.

but it’s a mistake to believe that Santo was an obvious choice for voters in the mid or late 1970’s. Back then, few outside Santo’s next of kin thought of Ron as a Hall-of-Famer, as reflected in the miniscule vote he received back then. That lack of support didn’t reflect anti-Santo bias, with the possible exception of a few writers who covered the Mets. He just wasn’t on the radar. Even Eddie Mathews, the Mike Schmidt of his time, spent several years on the HoF waiting list.

Standards for enshrinement have evolved over the years, as have methods of statistical evaluation. Just as voters from the ’70’s look ridiculous in hindsight for overlooking Santo, today’s Stat Pack that suggests overlooking the effects of the Steroid Era may look ridiculous 40 years from now.