If you had a Hall-of-Fame vote, would off-the-field behavior by a player affect your vote considerably?
Irvin is still a Hall of Fame WR. I guessing that's why you posted this poll. I doubt he gets in this year because the list of canidates are huge. Aikman,White,T. Thomas, D. Thomas, Reed. Art Monk you can argue will get in before him. Irvin will get in but just not this year.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (porky88)</div><div class='quotemain'>Irvin is still a Hall of Fame WR. I guessing that's why you posted this poll. I doubt he gets in this year because the list of canidates are huge. Aikman,White,T. Thomas, D. Thomas, Reed. Art Monk you can argue will get in before him. Irvin will get in but just not this year.</div> I wouldn't vote Irvin in this year either, but the poll was in general, not related to Irvin.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (BearsFan1)</div><div class='quotemain'>Assuming on field includes fixing games/betting on games/etc</div> OK, although eligibility would probably be an issue there.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Cowboy71)</div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (porky88)</div><div class='quotemain'>Irvin is still a Hall of Fame WR. I guessing that's why you posted this poll. I doubt he gets in this year because the list of canidates are huge. Aikman,White,T. Thomas, D. Thomas, Reed. Art Monk you can argue will get in before him. Irvin will get in but just not this year.</div> I wouldn't vote Irvin in this year either, but the poll was in general, not related to Irvin.</div> I don't think it would matter. Really depends on what you do. For what Irvin did, then I think he should be allowed in the Hall. Steroids would be an example of what I think would be enough to bann someon from the Hall.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (porky88)</div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Cowboy71)</div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (porky88)</div><div class='quotemain'>Irvin is still a Hall of Fame WR. I guessing that's why you posted this poll. I doubt he gets in this year because the list of canidates are huge. Aikman,White,T. Thomas, D. Thomas, Reed. Art Monk you can argue will get in before him. Irvin will get in but just not this year.</div> I wouldn't vote Irvin in this year either, but the poll was in general, not related to Irvin.</div> I don't think it would matter. Really depends on what you do. For what Irvin did, then I think he should be allowed in the Hall. Steroids would be an example of what I think would be enough to bann someon from the Hall.</div> You answered the question fine, but not to mislead anyone else, this was not for eligibility / banning. This was for your gut vote on eligible people.
You gotta firstly look at the player, if he is a certainty to make it then it shouldnt be even looked at but if you are on the fence regarding whether he should make it then you gotta look at that stuff and decide whether the player in question deserves it
I disagree my belief that if you bring a guys name up and there is hesitation about your decision to let him in the HOF then he shouldnt get in, i think the HOF should be reserved for those players who are without a doubt the best of their era
The drug thing with Irvin will really hurt his chances, but if there was some off-field issues like a fight with a wife, that would hurt their chances cuz the HOF doesnt want to reflect bad people.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (panthersare#1)</div><div class='quotemain'>The drug thing with Irvin will really hurt his chances, but if there was some off-field issues like a fight with a wife, that would hurt their chances cuz the HOF doesnt want to reflect bad people.</div> So, do you agree with the statement you presented Panthers?
I see merit in several of the points made in this thread. As a Christian, it is hard for me to separate what I think of the person as a whole from their athletic achievements. I do feel like the hall should be based on their "on-field" performance, though. I can see the distinction about the steroid use though. Here is something that enhanced their "on-field" abilities and probably should be considered. It creates an unfair advantage over their peers of a similar talent level. My local sports radio show was talking about this topic the other day and they brought up the opposite angle with Pete Rose. How has what Pete did as a manager lessened what he accomplished as a player on the field. He should be in the hall by my estimation. I think that when Priest Holmes retires, there will be questions about his hall eligibility. While his sheer numbers won't guarantee eligibilty, there is the fact that he broke the single season rushing TD record. Has there ever been a back as automatic on the goaline? I guess in this way, I do look at the "entire" person. These things are however, still based on Priest's on field accomplishments. I guess I am saying that anything I am saying is just my opinion, but this post reflects where I stand.
