BleacherCoaches.com

I really think their system is flawed. Before I start, I'll say I love that its so hard to get in. Hall of Fame should mean something, and in that respect, baseball gets it. But while its hard to argue against anyone going in, how the heck is Maury Wills not in Cooperstown? His career achievements destroy half the guys already in there. Veterans committe(guys that got Maz in) need to step up here.

Clemens and Bonds need to be in. Basically we have no idea of who has done what in recent years in regards to PED use. It was part of the game and I think even the suspected users should be in.

You could argue for admission for at least a half dozen more candidates. Deserving are guys like Lee Smith, Curt Shilling, Alan Trammell, Don Mattingly, Mike Piazza, and a few others whose careers I really didn't follow. Strictly by their numbers, a couple more deserve it, whether by PED's or no.

Its flawed because a small group of voters could easily just control the ballot. All you need is 25% and you can probably never allow someone in...

Good article in the local rag today, about how things -could- change. They throw it back to the baseball writers group, who have controlled things the way they are since 1936. THEY are the ones who would have to vote in any changes, such as increasing the number of candidates every year, and reduce the log jam.

One thing I don't understand is the obsession with the notion of only certain guys being first ballot worthy.

If your numbers are good enough to be in the Hall, then why does it matter what ballot you get in on. And if your numbers aren't good enough to get in on the first ballot, then how do they get better (or more worthy) after the first ballot.