Originally Posted by psullivan:
All,
I have resisted really getting into this debate for a range of reasons - but DW's point above is one of the key issues. I get annoyed at the logic that if person A does not get in, then the entire system is bogus. It would be very instructive for many to see the list of people who have been nominated, and even reached a final ballot, and who are yet to get in - it is staggering. Yes, there are a few where you say "there's no way" But in so many cases it is nearly numbing. "Realization" is not the issue - there are a whole lot of people that should be there but only a handful are selected each year. I am a voting member - I sent 11 names this year - 6 of those I chose made it, 5 did not - that's the way it goes - but I'm willing to defend my picks to anyone. I voted for a man in the historical category this year who spent the majority of his career in what may be deemed by some to be class B circuits. I doubt 1 in 10 people who get on this board have ever heard of him. Yet, in my opinion he was a towering figure in those circuits, drove a very famous car, and more than that, he was a leader among his peers. Not everyone got a shot at the big time, some had jobs that precluded it - or in my example above - there really weren't all that many great AAA seats to be had. Sometimes stats alone is not the issue. We inducted someone in the National Midget Hall of Fame this year - I thought it was a solid choice. Then, I heard from people who had raced with him and were fans in this area and era and all they could talk about was how great he was, how smooth etc. A friend of mine of was the the President of IMS and Daytona told me "if he would have come to Indy he could have been a real superstar - but he had a family, a good job ...." What I am saying is this went beyond mere stats. I have even nominated people - had them show up on the final balot and then NOT voted for them because in my estimation others deserved it more within the context. Do I always agree with selections - no -- but on the average when I walk through the hall of fame by far and away the vast majority have earned it. Rahter than denigrate the institution I'm happy that we have it.
Pat, you make an excellent point, as usual, and it has made an impression on me to the point that I realize I was a bit heavy handed in my initial post. Your response was precisely the sort that this board needs more of. One ripe with articulate, thought-provoking dialogue. That's what these message boards are for. The exchange of rational, intelligent discourse. I appreciate your retort, in that it made me understand a little more what goes on in the voting process.
However, the thing that concerns me most about the Hall of Fame voting procedure is this point, made by you:
<< I doubt 1 in 10 people who get on this board have ever heard of him. >>
You see, this is my issue. As you point out, a good number of voting members from the HOF selection committee are, shall we say, perpetually "unaware". They make their selections for the areas they know about, yet don't take the time to really arm themselves with the information necessary to make their picks accordingly. Voting for the Hall of Fame is an honor that should be taken very seriously. I contend that some people who vote quite simply do not care enough to even do their homework. Which makes me wonder why they even are in the position they are in.
It's maddening. Just my opinion...
DM