JediDefender.com Forums

Community => JD Sports Forum! => Topic started by: Scott on January 5, 2004, 12:15 PM

Title: Starring Pete Rose As The Gambler
Post by: Scott on January 5, 2004, 12:15 PM
(http://i.cnn.net/si/2004/baseball/mlb/01/05/pete.rose/tx_rose_cover.jpg)

On a Warms Summers Evening
In a Dugout in Cincinnatah
Met up with Charlie Hustle
We were both too tired to speak
So we took turns a hittin
At Homeplate out yonder
'til we got bored of it
And he began to speak

Finally this idiot admitted he did what he did.  I believe him that he never bet against the Reds and I think he has a  huge point in the fact that he said if he was caight snorting Cocaine he'd get 6-12 months and be in the HOF already.  4192 was huge, I still remember that and I think he does deserve to be in the Hall of Fame, I hope this finally lets it happen
Title: Re: Starring Pete Rose As The Gambler
Post by: Angry Ewok on January 5, 2004, 12:54 PM
I almost had a heart attack, thought the thread said Pete Rose as The Gambit... Jesus he'd make a crappy X-Man...
Title: Re: Starring Pete Rose As The Gambler
Post by: DSJ™ on January 5, 2004, 01:06 PM
I almost had a heart attack, thought the thread said Pete Rose as The Gambit... Jesus he'd make a crappy X-Man...

(http://www.telusplanet.net/public/djustus/rofl.gif)
Title: Re: Starring Pete Rose As The Gambler
Post by: sp00ky on January 5, 2004, 05:27 PM
"I never bet on baseball"
"I never bet on baseball"
"I never bet on baseball"
"I never bet on baseball"
"I never bet on baseball"
"I never bet on baseball"
"I never bet on baseball"
"I never bet on baseball"
"I never bet on baseball"
"I never bet on baseball"
"I never bet on baseball"
"I never bet on baseball"
"I never bet on baseball"
"I never bet on baseball"
"I never bet on baseball"
"I never bet on baseball"

"OK, I did in fact bet on baseball... but I never bet against the Reds"

Uhhhh. Yeah right....
Title: Re: Starring Pete Rose As The Gambler
Post by: Snively Bandar on January 9, 2004, 03:30 PM
It's funny (actually sad) how not remorseful he's appearing.  Seems like he's just saying "hey, I admit it.  I bet on baseball.  There.  Now let me back in!"   ::)

The whole timing coinciding with the HOF announcement was pretty bad too, even if he says he had no control over it.  That's BS.

Pete was definitely an amazing player - one of the best ever.  But at the same time, he's one of the worst guys ever (off the field).  Unfortunately, I think the latter is going to rate heavier than the former when it comes to his future HOF admittance, or lack thereof.  Too bad.

While I'm at it, someone needs to let Ryne Sandberg into the Hall.  Probably the best second baseman ever.  Just because he didn't play a full 20 years to rack up the serious stats, doesn't mean he's not worthy.
Title: Re: Starring Pete Rose As The Gambler
Post by: paploo on January 9, 2004, 06:15 PM
if he were to play today, with todays pitchers, he wouldnt be as good as he was. I would like to see him hit a martinez fastball
Title: Re: Starring Pete Rose As The Gambler
Post by: DarthNader on January 10, 2004, 08:00 PM
What he did on the field as a player has nothing to do with bets he placed as a coach if you ask me, I think he should be allowed to put on the Hall of Fame Ballot and let the writers decide. But he should not be able to coach again.
Title: Re: Starring Pete Rose As The Gambler
Post by: Morgbug on January 13, 2004, 10:58 PM
if he were to play today, with todays pitchers, he wouldnt be as good as he was. I would like to see him hit a martinez fastball
Ooh, I so hate this rationale for judging an athletes ability.  I got in this argument on the spawn board involving basketball.  I had the gall to suggest that were some of the older guys playing today, they might be nearly as good as Jordan was.  Nooo, you're full of it they said.  They were old and slow, today's game was so much better.  

Here's the deal.  You cannot reasonably transplant a guy whose glory days were in the 70's or earlier and take them forward.  Nor can you take one of today's athlete's backwards and say they would have dominated then.

Here's why:
Athlete's prior to the early 80's typically had other jobs, did not make millions of dollars and some even paid attention to their families.  Because they did not make millions upon millions, they actually spent the offseason doing something really wacky.  Working.  At a job.  Selling stuff, or servicing stuff.  Unlike today's pampered millionaire crybabies, they did not spend all their time doing one of three things: playing, training, partying.  No doubt older players partied their ying yangs out too, but that is not the point.  

If you took Rose, in his prime and brought him forward with all the modern training, weight lifting, coaching.  Paid him gazillions of dollars to do nothing but that and he had to measure himself against the current standard, I damn near guarantee he would perform up to par.  Would Martinez blow fastballs by him?  Absolutely, just like he does with other guys today.  Did Martinez ever strike out any other HOFers?  If not, are they not worthy of the hall?

Same can be said for the Jordan comparison.  I think he stands up as one of the all time greats, probably the best ever.  But writing off guys from other eras is nothing more than folly based on ignorance.  Here are some names, you'll know some of them, most you won't:

Elgin Baylor
Larry Bird
Julius Erving
Bob Petit
Kareem Abdul Jabbar
Wilt Chamberlain
George Mikan
Bill Russell
Walt Frazier
John Havlicek
Oscar Robertson
Jerry West

That is the top players prior to Jordan dominating the league.  there have been some pretty spectacular (talent wise, not showmanship) players since as well.  The point being that you cannot compare modern to other era players.  Wait for another 20 years and have this argument with somebody.  Bet they say Who Martinez?

Rose is an idiot.  So was Ruth.  Let him in the hall and slap him upside the head.
Title: Re: Starring Pete Rose As The Gambler
Post by: JediMAC on March 10, 2005, 04:26 PM
I actually sat right next to Pete Rose at a restaurant (Sicily's) here in L.A. yesterday at lucnh.  Man, he's looking old, big, and strange.  Had orange hair too.  Bizarre.

Not sure if he made an appearance on Jim Rome's radio show (which tapes downstairs from us), or if he was just passing through the area.

What a sad waste of an otherwise brilliant baseball career.  I wonder if he'll ever admit to betting on the Reds.  I wonder if he'll ever get into the Hall.  I still think he should, despite all his personal bull****, just based on his on-field merits...
Title: Re: Starring Pete Rose As The Gambler
Post by: Jeff on March 10, 2005, 05:01 PM
I personally think that he WILL eventually get voted into the Baseball Hall of Fame... but it will be posthumously.

Once he dies and is no longer around to enjoy it (or profit off it), the Veteran's committee will vote him in.   

:-X

Jeff
Title: Re: Starring Pete Rose As The Gambler
Post by: Jeff on March 15, 2007, 01:40 PM
Pete Rose's latest confession (http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=2798498)

"I never bet on baseball"
"OK, I did in fact bet on baseball... but I never bet against the Reds"
"OK, I did in fact bet on every Reds game for a while... but I never bet against them"

What's next? 

"OK, not only did I bet on the Reds every night, but sometimes I bet on them to to lose."

I think at this point he'd say anything if he thought it would help him get back into baseball...  ::)
Title: Re: Starring Pete Rose As The Gambler
Post by: Matt_Fury on April 25, 2007, 12:50 AM
I think you're right Jeff....if they let him in the Hall of fame it will be after he's dead.

The one unforgivable sin in baseball is betting on baseball, and he was in a position to bet on the Reds to lose, and make decisions for the team to make it happen.  If he did this, he should never be allowed in the Hall of Fame.
Title: Re: Starring Pete Rose As The Gambler
Post by: Matt on April 25, 2007, 06:54 AM
...if they let him in the Hall of fame it will be after he's dead.

Yep, just like they did with Shoeless Joe.

 :-X