OT: Tom Brady & Barry Bonds - hall of famers?

hookshot199 · Post #1 » by **hookshot199** » Fri Jul 31, 2015 1:09 am

Since there's not Sixers 'news' except whether young JoJo's going to become a fixture on Keeping up with the Kardashians, I wonder if our moderators would indulge me to raise a non-basketball issue. Should Tom Brady, now that his suspension has been upheld by the NFL, be treated any differently than Barry Bonds, whose conviction after the Feds spent an estimated $100 million to convict him was overturned, be treated any differently?

In other words, should Brady be inducted into the Hall of Fame if Bonds isn't?

Pete Rose, a former Phillie, has been denied admittance to the Hall of Fame for allegedly betting on his team. The commissioner made the decision, not a court. What's the difference?

joyeuxnoel · Post #2 » by **joyeuxnoel** » Fri Jul 31, 2015 1:15 am

stop it

Phila Tough · Post #3 » by **Phila Tough** » Fri Jul 31, 2015 3:46 am

Didn't see much Bonds but Brady is a no brainer HOF

sixerkitty · Post #4 » by **sixerkitty** » Fri Jul 31, 2015 3:55 am

To me, Bonds got caught up in all the steroid mess out of Ego over what he saw of all the attention that Sosa and Mcquire were getting. So in one off-season, Bonds blew up like a Balloon...and then became a HR machine. But before that, Bonds had proven to be a constant All-Star talent. Never broke any rules, even though by all accounts he was sort of a A-Hole.

As where Brady has the SB rings and Stats yes. But it is very clear that his entire career in New England has been a series of either outright Cheating, or at the very least circumventing rules, and acting all smug like the Rules to not apply to him. I personally feel both will get in their respected Hall of Fames. But I also feel that the Media who votes for NFL players might not just Vote Brady in on his first Ballot. And Bonds might take a few times cause the Baseball writers who cast those Votes are the very ones that Bonds treated like a P.O.S.

James40 · Post #5 » by **James40** » Fri Jul 31, 2015 4:25 am

Brady easily, as Andrew Luck said that day of deflate gate " he could of beat us with a bar of soap". Besides being a winner, just the fact he came so far with so little, he wasn't even considered good enough out of college to be a back up in the NFL, look at the scrubs taken ahead of him in that draft, Brady is the guy that makes you wonder how many future greats never got picked.

I blame the NFL for deflate gate just as much as Brady, there is no reason both teams can't play with the same 20 footballs, different footballs for different QBs is a joke. Anyone who thinks the Patriots are the only team cheating is a nit wit, hell, the great Bill Walsh was a cheater. Coaches who act like they didn't know their players were using steroids are lying out of their butts, and cheaters.

Lights off in the Super Bowl, a/c breaking in the finals, please.

As for Bonds, yes, I grew up watching him play and he was so damn good, steroids or not.

machu46 · Post #6 » by **machu46** » Fri Jul 31, 2015 2:40 pm

Personally, I think both should be easy hall of famers. Cheating has become so pervasive in baseball that if you're going to keep the steroids guys out of the hall, you're basically going to have a 20 or so year gap in the Hall of Fame. In a league where so many were cheating, Bonds was still the best of the best; so while his accomplishments might not mean as much as they would if he were clean, he was still an elite player IMO. I think guys like A-Rod should be hall of famers too.

roma258 · Post #7 » by **roma258** » Fri Jul 31, 2015 2:50 pm

Lol, Giants fans are so cute.

hookshot199 · Post #8 » by **hookshot199** » Fri Jul 31, 2015 7:08 pm

roma258 wrote:Lol, Giants fans are so cute.

What's your issue? I'll be first to admit that this post was a bust and can't wait for it to fall to the second, third or fourth screen. On the other hand, it's not a little issue - when a sports icon is caught cheating, when the league investigates the case and determines that he's cheated, when the league hands down a suspension and upholds its punishment following an appeal.

What is the difference between this and the Bonds case? And should the judges, mostly if not entirely journalists, be as hard on Brady as they've been on the steroids era Major Leaguers?

roma258 · Post #9 » by **roma258** » Fri Jul 31, 2015 7:14 pm

hookshot199 wrote:
roma258 wrote:Lol, Giants fans are so cute.

What's your issue? I'll be first to admit that this post was a bust and can't wait for it to fall to the second, third or fourth screen. On the other hand, it's not a little issue - when a sports icon is caught cheating, when the league investigates the case and determines that he's cheated, when the league hands down a suspension and upholds its punishment following an appeal.

What is the difference between this and the Bonds case? And should the judges, mostly if not entirely journalists, be as hard on Brady as they've been on the steroids era Major Leaguers?

My issue is sport fans rationalizing the misdeeds of the athletic icons that played/represented their squads. Plenty of Pats fans rationalizing their org and Brady as well. Bonds is one of the least sympathetic sports characters I can think off. He's up there with Lance Armstrong AFAIK. ****, people in State College rioted when Joe Pa's statue was taken down and will argue the arcana of the Sandusky case till the cows come home. You want to defend him by deflecting attention to someone else, be my guest, wouldn't be the battle I'd choose.

hookshot199 · Post #10 » by **hookshot199** » Fri Jul 31, 2015 8:30 pm

roma258 wrote:
hookshot199 wrote:
roma258 wrote:Lol, Giants fans are so cute.

What's your issue? I'll be first to admit that this post was a bust and can't wait for it to fall to the second, third or fourth screen. On the other hand, it's not a little issue - when a sports icon is caught cheating, when the league investigates the case and determines that he's cheated, when the league hands down a suspension and upholds its punishment following an appeal.

What is the difference between this and the Bonds case? And should the judges, mostly if not entirely journalists, be as hard on Brady as they've been on the steroids era Major Leaguers?

My issue is sport fans rationalizing the misdeeds of the athletic icons that played/represented their squads. Plenty of Pats fans rationalizing their org and Brady as well. Bonds is one of the least sympathetic sports characters I can think off. He's up there with Lance Armstrong AFAIK. ****, people in State College rioted when Joe Pa's statue was taken down and will argue the arcana of the Sandusky case till the cows come home. You want to defend him by deflecting attention to someone else, be my guest, wouldn't be the battle I'd choose.

and upholds its punishment following an appeal.

What is the difference between this and the Bonds case? And should the judges, mostly if not entirely journalists, be as hard on Brady as they've been on the steroids era Major Leaguers?[/quote]
My issue is sport fans rationalizing the misdeeds of the athletic icons that played/represented their squads. Plenty of Pats fans rationalizing their org and Brady as well. Bonds is one of the least sympathetic sports characters I can think off. He's up there with Lance Armstrong AFAIK. ****, people in State College rioted when Joe Pa's statue was taken down and will argue the arcana of the Sandusky case till the cows come home. You want to defend him by deflecting attention to someone else, be my guest, wouldn't be the battle I'd choose.[/quote]

You've got the wrong 'rationalizer'. I don't believe that steroids - Bonds or not - ever met the standard of cheating because the league condoned it. We've got to have those home runs to bring the fans after the strike!

Moreover, not one league executive was implicated for his or her role (they didn't know?) Or not one of our Fourth Estate jackals.

I had the fortune of growing up on a steady diet of Willie Mays, Bonds's godfather and the best player EVER. So while I enjoyed watching Bonds work a pitcher - 200 walks one season - I also have no illusions that the lower mound, no brushback pitches, and T-ball strike zone all contributed to the home run deluge - along with steroids. Not to mention the DH in the American League.

And please, please don't even suggest that his 'crime' rises to the level of closing one's eyes to a pedophile. Which, if you took notice, went all the way up the former governor of my former state and the current attorney general, both of whom knew more than a year before the indictment went down that Sandusky was a risk to children.

Check the timeline: JoePa set the all-time 'wins' record on Oct. 29. The indictment went down on Nov. 5. Coincidence?

I'm sure I'm in a minority - and this has nothing to do with being a Giants fan - but of course Bonds deserves to be in the Hall of Fame. He was the best player of his era, steroids or not. Also keep in mind that this is a sport that sanctioned apartheid for its first 70 years. What record that we all cherish isn't tainted. It wasn't the fault of the players, but it is also a fact that the best didn't necessarily play against the best.

Cheers.

Patsfan1081 · Post #11 » by **Patsfan1081** » Sat Aug 1, 2015 7:16 pm

So are you going to keep all the other qb's like Rogers who actually admitted to having the ball over the legal limit or guys like Rice who admitted to using stickum out also? Your comparing somone who ruined his body with anabolics his whole career to somone who like his footballs one psi under the limit(which isn't even the reason why he's catching so much flack for). Why don't you just start a Brady hate thread instead of trying to use twisted logic to show your hate for your guy?

Patsfan1081 · Post #12 » by **Patsfan1081** » Sat Aug 1, 2015 7:24 pm

hookshot199 wrote:
roma258 wrote:Lol, Giants fans are so cute.

What's your issue? I'll be first to admit that this post was a bust and can't wait for it to fall to the second, third or fourth screen. On the other hand, it's not a little issue - when a sports icon is caught cheating, when the league investigates the case and determines that he's cheated, when the league hands down a suspension and upholds its punishment following an appeal.

What is the difference between this and the Bonds case? And should the judges, mostly if not entirely journalists, be as hard on Brady as they've been on the steroids era Major Leaguers?

I'm a Patriots fan and I'll even admit I believe Brady wanted his footballs below the limit, got caught, and should be punished for it. But if you believe that there should be the same repercussions as for somone that was on steroids his whole career then their most likely isn't an arguement that can be made to sway you the other way. That idea is just crazy and reeks of Giants homerism

hookshot199 · Post #13 » by **hookshot199** » Sun Aug 2, 2015 12:51 am

Patsfan1081 wrote:So are you going to keep all the other qb's like Rogers who actually admitted to having the ball over the legal limit or guys like Rice who admitted to using stickum out also? Your comparing somone who ruined his body with anabolics his whole career to somone who like his footballs one psi under the limit(which isn't even the reason why he's catching so much flack for). Why don't you just start a Brady hate thread instead of trying to use twisted logic to show your hate for your guy?

I don't hate Brady. I'm disappointed in him.

hookshot199 · Post #14 » by **hookshot199** » Sun Aug 2, 2015 1:31 am

Patsfan1081 wrote:
hookshot199 wrote:
roma258 wrote:Lol, Giants fans are so cute.

What's your issue? I'll be first to admit that this post was a bust and can't wait for it to fall to the second, third or fourth screen. On the other hand, it's not a little issue - when a sports icon is caught cheating, when the league investigates the case and determines that he's cheated, when the league hands down a suspension and upholds its punishment following an appeal.

What is the difference between this and the Bonds case? And should the judges, mostly if not entirely journalists, be as hard on Brady as they've been on the steroids era Major Leaguers?

I'm a Patriots fan and I'll even admit I believe Brady wanted his footballs below the limit, got caught, and should be punished for it. But if you believe that there should be the same repercussions as for somone that was on steroids his whole career then their most likely isn't an arguement that can be made to sway you the other way. That idea is just crazy and reeks of Giants homerism

I don't know if Brady should have been punished or not. If it's a common practice, he shouldn't have been punished. What I don't get - and perhaps this is where there's some overlap in the two cases - is that Brady didn't cooperate with the league's investigation. Bonds, for obvious reasons, didn't cooperate with a federal prosecutor.

One guy gets convicted of a felony; subsequently overturned, but his whole life is revealed to the world. The other guy gets suspended and wants to take his appeal before a judge. No, I'm not a Giant 'homer' on this. It's merely a question of proportion and double standards.

Major League Baseball sanctioned steroids. Thus, no harm no foul (mixing metaphors) except to the guy who took them. If you're saying that Aaron Rodgers also tampers with the ball, then that shouldn't be condoned.

roma258 · Post #15 » by **roma258** » Sun Aug 2, 2015 3:32 pm

Patsfan1081 wrote:
hookshot199 wrote:
roma258 wrote:Lol, Giants fans are so cute.

What's your issue? I'll be first to admit that this post was a bust and can't wait for it to fall to the second, third or fourth screen. On the other hand, it's not a little issue - when a sports icon is caught cheating, when the league investigates the case and determines that he's cheated, when the league hands down a suspension and upholds its punishment following an appeal.

What is the difference between this and the Bonds case? And should the judges, mostly if not entirely journalists, be as hard on Brady as they've been on the steroids era Major Leaguers?

I'm a Patriots fan and I'll even admit I believe Brady wanted his footballs below the limit, got caught, and should be punished for it. But if you believe that there should be the same repercussions as for somone that was on steroids his whole career then their most likely isn't an arguement that can be made to sway you the other way. That idea is just crazy and reeks of Giants homerism

It's classic "whataboutism". Not even an argument worth entertaining imo. Like the adult version of a child saying "well Johny did it too!"

hookshot199 · Post #16 » by **hookshot199** » Sun Aug 2, 2015 5:32 pm

roma258 wrote:
Patsfan1081 wrote:
hookshot199 wrote:
What's your issue? I'll be first to admit that this post was a bust and can't wait for it to fall to the second, third or fourth screen. On the other hand, it's not a little issue - when a sports icon is caught cheating, when the league investigates the case and determines that he's cheated, when the league hands down a suspension and upholds its punishment following an appeal.

What is the difference between this and the Bonds case? And should the judges, mostly if not entirely journalists, be as hard on Brady as they've been on the steroids era Major Leaguers?

I'm a Patriots fan and I'll even admit I believe Brady wanted his footballs below the limit, got caught, and should be punished for it. But if you believe that there should be the same repercussions as for somone that was on steroids his whole career then their most likely isn't an arguement that can be made to sway you the other way. That idea is just crazy and reeks of Giants homerism

It's classic "whataboutism". Not even an argument worth entertaining imo. Like the adult version of a child saying "well Johny did it too!"

Hey Roma, the post is a bust, I think we can agree. I do think that your mentioning Bonds in the same context as Sandusky and JoePa was inappropriate hyperbole. I prefer the current era Giants to the Bonds-era Giants. And as far as baseball is concerned, the big news this past week - for me - was that Ichiro Suzuki got his 2,901st Major League hit. It means that he's 99 away from 3,000. Counting his Japan total, he needs 10 more to catch Ty Cobb and 78 to pass Pete Rose. Enjoy your day.

roma258 · Post #17 » by **roma258** » Sun Aug 2, 2015 6:02 pm

hookshot199 wrote:
roma258 wrote:
Patsfan1081 wrote:

I'm a Patriots fan and I'll even admit I believe Brady wanted his footballs below the limit, got caught, and should be punished for it. But if you believe that there should be the same repercussions as for somone that was on steroids his whole career then their most likely isn't an arguement that can be made to sway you the other way. That idea is just crazy and reeks of Giants homerism

It's classic "whataboutism". Not even an argument worth entertaining imo. Like the adult version of a child saying "well Johny did it too!"

Hey Roma, the post is a bust, I think we can agree. I do think that your mentioning Bonds in the same context as Sandusky and JoePa was inappropriate hyperbole. I prefer the current era Giants to the Bonds-era Giants. And as far as baseball is concerned, the big news this past week - for me - was that Ichiro Suzuki got his 2,901st Major League hit. It means that he's 99 away from 3,000. Counting his Japan total, he needs 10 more to catch Ty Cobb and 78 to pass Pete Rose. Enjoy your day.

It's cool, we can move on. Happy for Ichiro, seems like a good dude.

Zeitgeister · Post #18 » by **Zeitgeister** » Tue Aug 18, 2015 8:20 am

If Bonds isn't in the Hall of Fame there shouldn't be a Hall of Fame, I don't really care that he's a jerk. Bonds is a top 5 baseball player all-time, even with the steroids. He played in a league where steroid usage was extreme common place. Obviously his numbers were inflated, but they were inflated to a degree greater than most every player that ever existed. He won 4 MVPs in the steroid era, he won 3 MVPs when he was a skinny kid in Pittsburgh, he's a damned Hall of Famer.

Sixersftw · Post #19 » by **Sixersftw** » Tue Aug 18, 2015 1:06 pm

Isn't the difference habitual cheating vs a single time? Its tainting a single game vs tainting an entire career.

rzzzzz · Post #20 » by **rzzzzz** » Tue Aug 18, 2015 6:33 pm

Bonds and Clemons both would have made the hall easy if they had aged naturally and not blown up records that otherwise maintain a fair gauge from era to era. (let alone their bodies blowing up so that things like caps had to be specially made. freakish.) but they were cruising for a bruising, and nailing them adds more impetus to test for things like human growth hormone, etc. yeah, there's at least one guy i can think of who's career suddenly took off again as he hit 40, after the normal decline, who managed to get into the hall unscathed. probably got away with it. and if they want to add a special section for PED stars, that's fine. but lets get back to relative normalcy, where cheating is more a gimmick than a horror movie.