Does the veterans committe make the hall of fame seem kind of overrated?

Question

Does the veterans committe make the hall of fame seem kind of overrated?

Answer 1

No as it was the old Veterans Committee that was accused of favoritism as it was only made up of 15 members and voted every year. New Veterans Committee only votes every 2 years on players and 4 for managers and is a last appeal to look over if anybody was overlooked or snubbed.

Election of Bill Mazeroski 2001 that created an outcry so if your talking about old system then yes it did cheapen the BASEBALL HALL OF FAME.  Bill James other Baseball journalists  has been very critical of how Frankie Fish  prior to his death in 1972 used his position on the veterans committee to get former teamamtes on the NY Giants and Cardinals where put in.

In fact they're allot tougher then some people in journalism or former players would like. There was a campaign to get Gil Hodges and Ron Santo into The Hall of Fame and this was rejected. In fact they rejected any new players in 2003, 05 and 2007.

If anyone is to be blamed it will be public and baseball media who led an outcry over them being too restrictive. I'm afraid in 2009 there will be pressure to let in players that where fan favorites.

You can debate if the HALL OF FAME was intended for baseball executives, writers/broadcasters, umpires and others.

Answer 2

Maybes

Answer 3

a little bit

Answer 4

Huh? How? I don't get it. The writers do a half-way decent job? I don't understand. The vets often pick up people the stupid old lady writers don't. The writers don't like guys to act to black, too self-centered, or too anti-interview. What that has to do with playing baseball confuses me.

But then I might just not understand the question. Lost here.