pete rose memes

[Force16X]

http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/mlb-b...obomb-turns-into-internet-meme-160329355.html


View: https://twitter.com/iamHectorDiaz/status/657765623917903872/photo/1



View: https://twitter.com/JanesMike/status/657837514745491457/photo/1

 

[LazyWinker]

I'd like Pete Rose a whole lot more if he would just be happy with his success and didn't need to feel validated by being induced in the Hall of Fame. The people of Cincinnati adore Pete like the folks in St. Louis adored Stan.

 

[Memento]

I'd like Pete Rose a whole lot more if he would just be happy with his success and didn't need to feel validated by being induced in the Hall of Fame. The people of Cincinnati adore Pete like the folks in St. Louis adored Stan.

Stan the Man was the white knight of baseball, a war hero, and an honorable and humble man whom everyone should idolize. Putting Pete the Cheat's name in the same category as his is an insult to Musial's memory.

 

[LazyWinker]

Stan the Man was the white knight of baseball, a war hero, and an honorable and humble man whom everyone should idolize. Putting Pete the Cheat's name in the same category as his is an insult to Musial's memory.

You are correct. I should have never said such things. The fact of the matter is that the people in the Queen City love Pete Rose unconditionally. Rose has tested their love many times but the folks of Cincinnati continue to love him regardless of how he treats them. If I hadn't tried their chili, I'd think the folks of Cincinnati deserve better but you can't fix bad taste.

 

[Force16X]

I'd like Pete Rose a whole lot more if he would just be happy with his success and didn't need to feel validated by being induced in the Hall of Fame. The people of Cincinnati adore Pete like the folks in St. Louis adored Stan.

i was a dodger fan as a young tyke. i didnt like the reds. basically because they were so good. pete rose is one of the best i've ever seen play the game of baseball.

 

[Elmgrovegnome]

Stan the Man was the white knight of baseball, a war hero, and an honorable and humble man whom everyone should idolize. Putting Pete the Cheat's name in the same category as his is an insult to Musial's memory.

How did he cheat? He never bet on his team to lose. Did he fix games so they would win?

Rose was a great player and he had a gambling problem. Hardly deserving of the disdain he gets.

 

[Mackeyser]

Prior to MLB and the NFL investing in parimutuel gambling sites...err, Fantasy sites, FanDuel and Draft Kings, ANY association with gambling was strictly verboten.

Joe Namath had an issue with being associated with it and took the Commish to court, iirc.

That said, the fixing of the 1919 World Series was so traumatic that Shoeless Joe Jackson is STILL not in the HoF even though he played lights out and unless I'm remembering incorrectly, those caught exonerated him. He wasn't involved. Didn't matter. His teammates threw the series, he played his ASS off and just the stench of cheating AROUND him has prevented him from getting in. True story.

As for Pete Rose, he did bet on baseball and his own team. However, SEVERAL different examiners have examined his lineups while he managed the Reds and there was NO difference in how he managed when he bet on his team and when he didn't. It truly seems that in Rose's case, if he thought to bet on himself as a player/manager and his team, then he would. If not, he wouldn't. But, if you ever watched Pete Rose play the game, he played it THE WAY IT SHOULD BE PLAYED.

No one in the history of the game played it with more hustle or grit. No one. Doesn't mean he was the GOAT, but you don't last as long, get 4700+ hits (off the top of my head, is it 4721? I dunno, somethin like that) and make the impact on the game that he did if you don't want to win that much more than everyone else around you.

You know who ELSE wanted to win that much?

Michael Jordan. Also a huge gambler. Now, he didn't bet on himself... that we know of....but it wouldn't surprise me if he did.

And if he did bet on himself? Would that diminish the career of Jordan on teensy, tiny little bit? Nope. Wouldn't change anything for me one iota because all of his focus was on winning and the bet changed nothing, thus the integrity of the game wasn't violated. It wasn't scratched or even smudged.

Same with Rose. Rose may have broke a rule, but he did NOT violate the integrity of the game and that's a HUGE distinction.

Now, is he an idiot for not just taking the 1 year ban along with others? Yeah. Supposedly if he'd just admitted that he gambled on himself/his team, he could have gotten a 1 year ban and it woulda been over with, but he didn't. Now, honestly, I can't and won't try to explain or defend that nonsense. It's not like he was innocent or that he had a prayer of "beating the rap". So, who knows what he was thinking on that score. Even today, he cannot articulate a single coherent thought on that subject of WHY.

All that said, unlike the PED takers... testosterone, HGH, steroids, myelin inhibitors, adderall, etc. who DID violate the integrity of the game via pharmacology (which if one doesn't get it, it really isn't much different than throwing a spitter), Rose's bets never changed the outcome of a game. No bet changed a lineup. Forensic analysis is awfully good at detecting patterns like that ESPECIALLY in a data driven game like baseball and Rose showed ZERO change in pattern in games he bet.

So, Rose was a rule breaker, but he wasn't a cheater. The PED takers were and are cheaters because they change the outcomes of games where we only find out after the fact.

What really stinks is that Mark McGwire and/or Barry Bonds will probably see their HoF ceremonies before Rose and before the Baseball Writers finally make it right by Shoeless Joe Jackson...

It especially irks me in the case of Barry Bonds' case because he looked just like Ken Griffey, Jr for a long, long time... then all of a sudden, he got swole and he's just cranking balls yard when his nut hair turns grey? Wha???

The point of Hank Aaron hitting only 10 HRs his last year and Ken Griffey Jr having NONE his last year is that Father time is a flat bitch and even attempting to defy him is meant to mean something.

Will it mean something if we have some guy with a fantastic baseball mind in a robosuit essentially holding up some 90 year old's limp body like in Weekend at Bernie's and RoboMind cranks 180 HRs at age 91, will that count? Seems silly in one way, the mere suggestion of a guy in a cybernetically augmented exoskeleton be compared to a jacked Barry Bonds on PEDs, but is it really that far off?

What's so stupid about it is that Barry Bonds would have hit over 600, likely over 660 without any chemicals... He already had 8 Gold Gloves and 3 MVPs before the late in life juicing unless he started earlier than the obvious stuff and we just don't know the full extent of it. I tend to think not. The guy was legit. HoF legit. Now, he's a punchline. Worse, we'll NEVER know how many games would have turned out differently if he (and all the others) weren't on those PEDs. We know that after he was caught, the next year, his body broke down so badly he only played in FOURTEEN games the entire next season and the two seasons after that? After putting up HR totals of 73, 46, 45, 45...he put up FIVE HRs in that season he just couldn't get it up and then dropped a PEDestrian 26 and 28 before his Giants contract ran out and no other team would sign him effectively beginning his retirement because he wasn't going to play in Japan.

Now... had he NOT juiced and done that all along... 28 dingers at 42 while still hitting .276? You can bet the Giants would have resigned him in a minute, even though he was kinda a pain.

Sorry for the rant, but it's a sore spot for me. Part of the reason I just don't watch baseball anymore even though it was my first sports love and it's still the sport that I understand best from a fundamental standpoint, even though I haven't played it in thirty years is stuff like this. Baseball used to be overzealous in guarding its integrity. Rose was banned for life not because the integrity of the game was actually violated, but because he bet on a game he was in and it opened up the possibility of a violation. Historically, we know almost for certain that SJJ had nothing to do with the fixing of that 1919 WS, but the stink of that cheating scandal taints him to this day. The Commissioner in baseball was so zealous in guarding the integrity of the game so as to be overzealous. Granted, there were serious integrity issues like the Strike Zone wasn't always empirical and the integration of baseball wasn't a 10 minute montage overlayed with inspirational epic music. But it was the National Pastime for a reason. I don't even recognize the game anymore....bat flips and no hustle and pros who seriously can't field a ground ball...smh.

 

[fearsomefour]

How did he cheat? He never bet on his team to lose. Did he fix games so they would win?

Rose was a great player and he had a gambling problem. Hardly deserving of the disdain he gets.

What he did is worse than putting tar on a pitchers glove or using a juiced bat.
It doesn't matter if he bet on his team to win or lose, betting on games he was involved in directly or indirectly could easily how affect how he used his players and bull pen. It could open him up to being taken advantage of.
There is a reason gambling on the game is the unforgivable sin.

 

[Force16X]

What he did is worse than putting tar on a pitchers glove or using a juiced bat.
It doesn't matter if he bet on his team to win or lose, betting on games he was involved in directly or indirectly could easily how affect how he used his players and bull pen. It could open him up to being taken advantage of.
There is a reason gambling on the game is the unforgivable sin.

it may be worse, but using ANY advantage (tar, ped's , corky bats, etc.) directly affects that games outcome due to improved player performance that otherwise wouldnt be there is cheating as far as i can see.
just looking at barry bonds' stats......................his major stats, batting avg, obp, slugging percentage , walks (73 hr's was an anamoly as he was a 40 hr per year guy anyway) all were above average while he was 34-39 yrs old where most players (reggie jackson example, tailed off.............hank aaron didnt though......40 hr's in 120 games in 73 is outstanding)............but due to this sudden major increase in production from bonds near his career's end would obviously have opposing pitchers changing how they pitch, how opposing managers make decisions (who pitches, where to play defense, intentional walks, etc.) so in that sense, due to his ped usage, he (bonds) changed outcomes of games because of it. and for all we know, maybe he was betting on the giants and that his increased offensive prowess made a difference. 24 extra HR's can change a lot of tie games to 1 run wins.
as for sammy sosa, he was an average player who missed more than 20 games 4 times in his first 6 seasons missed ONLY 21 games from 1997-2002 (his ped years). tell me how that doesnt change a game's outcome when he suddenly is in the lineup an extra 30 or 40 games a year?? on top of corking his bats (which was proven by this lovely picture).
my thoughts are......................if pete rose isnt in the hall for his crimes, then neither should any of these other multitudes of players who have been caught as well. just like a speeding ticket. 1mph over to 50mph over. its still breaking the rules.
anything done that can possibly alter the outcome of a sporting event is cheating. which form of cheating is worse is basically a matter of personal opinion in most cases.

 

[fearsomefour]

it may be worse, but using ANY advantage (tar, ped's , corky bats, etc.) directly affects that games outcome due to improved player performance that otherwise wouldnt be there is cheating as far as i can see.
just looking at barry bonds' stats......................his major stats, batting avg, obp, slugging percentage , walks (73 hr's was an anamoly as he was a 40 hr per year guy anyway) all were above average while he was 34-39 yrs old where most players (reggie jackson example, tailed off.............hank aaron didnt though......40 hr's in 120 games in 73 is outstanding)............but due to this sudden major increase in production from bonds near his career's end would obviously have opposing pitchers changing how they pitch, how opposing managers make decisions (who pitches, where to play defense, intentional walks, etc.) so in that sense, due to his ped usage, he (bonds) changed outcomes of games because of it. and for all we know, maybe he was betting on the giants and that his increased offensive prowess made a difference. 24 extra HR's can change a lot of tie games to 1 run wins.
as for sammy sosa, he was an average player who missed more than 20 games 4 times in his first 6 seasons missed ONLY 21 games from 1997-2002 (his ped years). tell me how that doesnt change a game's outcome when he suddenly is in the lineup an extra 30 or 40 games a year?? on top of corking his bats (which was proven by this lovely picture). View attachment 11209
my thoughts are......................if pete rose isnt in the hall for his crimes, then neither should any of these other multitudes of players who have been caught as well. just like a speeding ticket. 1mph over to 50mph over. its still breaking the rules.
anything done that can possibly alter the outcome of a sporting event is cheating. which form of cheating is worse is basically a matter of personal opinion in most cases.

I guess the problem baseball has....all sports really....cheating is part of the game.
Some are a wink and a nod. Some are debated in front of Congress (amazing waste of time and resources).
To me, what Rose did was on a different level. For pretty obvious reasons. If I was Commish would I put Rose in the Hall? No.
Difference of opinion are understood and appreciated though.

 

[Force16X]

100% agreement on the congress comment. i guess on the cheating aspect, pete rose had more ability to manipulate more situations than say a barry bonds or sammy sosa, etc., however, they all were using ways to change outcomes of games which then makes it a moot point to watch sports if its fixed anyway. its a shame it comes down to that.

 

[Elmgrovegnome]

What he did is worse than putting tar on a pitchers glove or using a juiced bat.
It doesn't matter if he bet on his team to win or lose, betting on games he was involved in directly or indirectly could easily how affect how he used his players and bull pen. It could open him up to being taken advantage of.
There is a reason gambling on the game is the unforgivable sin.

I disagree. If he was betting on his team to win then he would not be doing anything differently in game, because..........he wants to win the game regardless. If he felt his team would win the next game because he liked the pitching matchup or his bull pen was rested then he bet on them. Anyone has access to that info. Now if he bet against his team then that would be cheating.

Should he have bet on sports? No. But Barry Bonds used steroids and that was illegal too. He does not belong in the hall either. Both are cheating, except Rose's cheating had no real outcome on the games. It was just against the rules. It didn't give him more RBI's or Homeruns. Mark McGwire, ARod, Clemens. None of them should go to the Hall IMO because they had an unfair advantage.

 

[fearsomefour]

I disagree. If he was betting on his team to win then he would not be doing anything differently in game, because..........he wants to win the game regardless. If he felt his team would win the next game because he liked the pitching matchup or his bull pen was rested then he bet on them. Anyone has access to that info. Now if he bet against his team then that would be cheating.

Should he have bet on sports? No. But Barry Bonds used steroids and that was illegal too. He does not belong in the hall either. Both are cheating, except Rose's cheating had no real outcome on the games. It was just against the rules. It didn't give him more RBI's or Homeruns. Mark McGwire, ARod, Clemens. None of them should go to the Hall IMO because they had an unfair advantage.

We don't know what impact Rose's betting had on games. It just isn't about betting on his team or against his team....if he was playing a team that he planned on betting for or against in the near future it could for sure affect how he managed his team against that team.
As for Bonds I don't disagree....except, there is that tricky little thing about him never testing positive. Did he do it, of course. Is MLB hypocritical and dumb about the whole thing? Yes.