Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

The Harsh

Should Pete Rose be Allowed to Manage?

Should Pete Rose be Allowed to Manage?  

107 members have voted

  1. 1. Should Pete Rose be Allowed to Manage?

    • Yes
      53
    • No
      54


Recommended Posts

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/articl...39c863387ccf5e0

The line that stands out to me is:

"I want to be a manager, that's the only role," said Rose, who turned 70 on April 14. "But I'm running out of time. I want to teach young players."

This man is the all-time hits king. The amount of knowledge he's amassed over the years is probably undisputed. Even if baseball wants to blackball him in terms of the HoF, they should at least let him manage again. Or so that's my view.

I realize others may think differently due to Rose's past: once a gambler always a gambler.

I'd love to hear people's opinions on this.

Mods: This belongs in the FBB forum because of the impact Pete Rose could have on his players in terms of hitting. I view it in a similar fashion to the Matt Kemp thread, with the impact Davey Lopes would have/had on him. The difference is that Rose can impact more than one player, transforming even someone obscure to fantasy relevant.

Edit: Added poll (to counter the vocal minority, if there is one).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the only thing pete rose wants is the spotlight

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/articl...39c863387ccf5e0

The line that stands out to me is:

This man is the all-time hits king. The amount of knowledge he's amassed over the years is probably undisputed. Even if baseball wants to blackball him in terms of the HoF, they should at least let him manage again. Or so that's my view.

I realize others may think differently due to Rose's past: once a gambler always a gambler.

I'd love to hear people's opinions on this.

Mods: This belongs in the FBB forum because of the impact Pete Rose could have on his player in terms of hitting. I view it in a similar fashion to the Matt Kemp thread, with the impact Davey Lopes would have/had on him. The difference is that Rose can impact more than one player, transforming even someone obscure to fantasy relevant.

I'm actually for Pete Rose being in the HOF, because I believe it's what you do as a player, but do not think he should be able to manage. The question about him setting lineups, making pitching changes, and gambling is too great.

In the HOF, but banned from baseball, of course including managing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pete Rose being banned from baseball is silly. If anyone should be banned it should be these cheats that used steroids. Let the guy in put him in the Hall of Fame and let him manage. It would be good for baseball. The "Hit King" has suffered enough......

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm actually for Pete Rose being in the HOF, because I believe it's what you do as a player, but do not think he should be able to manage. The question about him setting lineups, making pitching changes, and gambling is too great.

In the HOF, but banned from baseball, of course including managing.

Right, that's really the dividing line. Rose himself has claimed he never bet on his team to lose, but obviously there are believers and skeptics both.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If he wants to teach young players then he should pitch a new "Baseball Bunch" TV show. Otherwise he is just trying to gamble and put himself in a position to manipulate scores. I think he could get a college or minor league gig if he really just wants to teach. At least the players at that level will try and listen to him unlike the emo primadonnas of MLB

P.S. If you do not know "The Baseball Bunch", then you know nothing about baseball fundamentals

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If he wants to teach young players then he should pitch a new "Baseball Bunch" TV show. Otherwise he is just trying to gamble and put himself in a position to manipulate scores. I think he could get a college or minor league gig if he really just wants to teach. Ay least the players at that level will try and listen to him unlike the emo primadonnas of MLB

P.S. If you do not know "The Baseball Bunch", then you know nothing about baseball fundamentals

Good point. Tony Gwynn's the head at SDU and has produced some quality talent (including Strasburg).

I think Rose wants to have a bigger impact on the game, though, so he wouldn't be content teaching kids that have a very high chance of never panning out as pros.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If he wants to teach young players then he should pitch a new "Baseball Bunch" TV show. Otherwise he is just trying to gamble and put himself in a position to manipulate scores. I think he could get a college or minor league gig if he really just wants to teach. At least the players at that level will try and listen to him unlike the emo primadonnas of MLB

P.S. If you do not know "The Baseball Bunch", then you know nothing about baseball fundamentals

I think Pete has learned his lesson and deserves a second shot..It's not like he was caught gambling against his team.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Pete Rose being banned from baseball is silly. If anyone should be banned it should be these cheats that used steroids. Let the guy in put him in the Hall of Fame and let him manage. It would be good for baseball. The "Hit King" has suffered enough......

He can't suffer enough.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
He can't suffer enough.

I'm in no way trying to change your mind, but I do have a question for you: Do you believe that Pete Rose, by allegedly fixing a few games (something that's NEVER been proven, by the way, but it's obviously highly probable if he's gambling on said games...) and therefore impacting the outcome of a season deserves to be blacklisted, while players like Alex Rodriguez, who've admitted to using steroids - thereby cheating and altering baseball history - remain relatively unscathed?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think Pete has learned his lesson and deserves a second shot..It's not like he was caught gambling against his team.

I really just want a new "baseball bunch" tv show.

I think all pro sports are fixed by the teamsters in Vegas. They did not like Pete cutting in on their action so they exposed him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm in no way trying to change your mind, but I do have a question for you: Do you believe that Pete Rose, by allegedly fixing a few games (something that's NEVER been proven, by the way, but it's obviously highly probable if he's gambling on said games...) and therefore impacting the outcome of a season deserves to be blacklisted, while players like Alex Rodriguez, who've admitted to using steroids - thereby cheating and altering baseball history - remain relatively unscathed?

+1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, he should not be allowed to manage. And the best part about it...he will never be allowed to manage.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm in no way trying to change your mind, but I do have a question for you: Do you believe that Pete Rose, by allegedly fixing a few games (something that's NEVER been proven, by the way, but it's obviously highly probable if he's gambling on said games...) and therefore impacting the outcome of a season deserves to be blacklisted, while players like Alex Rodriguez, who've admitted to using steroids - thereby cheating and altering baseball history - remain relatively unscathed?

While I know you're posing the question to SLV, and I'm also aware that while Rose is officially blacklisted the following names are simply unofficially blacklisted, you can't deny the fact that McGwire, Palmeiro, Bonds, and Sosa are in no way unscathed. Furthermore, ARod has endured more controversy during his career than Rose ever had, and we don't know what happens to him after he retires.

Nor do we know with Papi and Manny B)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm still torn, for a number of reasons that have been mentioned in this thread. I won't regurgitate them here, but suffice it to say that part of me also thinks that there's the potential for a pretty big appearance of impropriety if he's allowed to manage. I doubt, however, that he'd actually gamble on anything related to MLB if allowed to manage again. I just have to hope that he'd be so closely monitored by the media and others that this would serve to deter any inclination to gamble.

That said, I'd really hate to see him be allowed to manage and questions arise about his activities. IMO, baseball really doesn't need to be dealing with another black eye right now - or even questions about the possibility of another black eye. Anything that again calls into question the integrity of the game in the wake of issues surround performance enhancing drugs would be pretty darn problematic...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm in no way trying to change your mind, but I do have a question for you: Do you believe that Pete Rose, by allegedly fixing a few games (something that's NEVER been proven, by the way, but it's obviously highly probable if he's gambling on said games...) and therefore impacting the outcome of a season deserves to be blacklisted, while players like Alex Rodriguez, who've admitted to using steroids - thereby cheating and altering baseball history - remain relatively unscathed?

While I do think that PED users are getting off easy...

They're simply different forms of cheating. As a fan, I need to know that the game is not predetermined before it begins. One gambling manager can impact that much more than any one player sticking themselves with a needle can.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
While I know you're posing the question to SLV, and I'm also aware that while Rose is officially blacklisted the following names are simply unofficially blacklisted, you can't deny the fact that McGwire, Palmeiro, Bonds, and Sosa are in no way unscathed. Furthermore, ARod has endured more controversy during his career than Rose ever had, and we don't know what happens to him after he retires.

Nor do we know with Papi and Manny B)

When I said "relatively unscathed," I really just meant that they all have the options of getting back in to baseball post-(player)retirement. At least they're still able to be around the game. Look at McGwire right now, for example.

A-Rod really only suffered controversy in 2009 after admitting the use of steroids. Sure, he was an insufferable douchebag before that, but I don't think "hate" can be equated with "scandal." I think Bonds would've been a much better example but, even so, he hasn't been blacklisted. I'd say more people hate Bonds than Rose, yet he still has a presence within the game. He also gave baseball a huge black eye after only being indicted on the charge of obstruction of justice.

While I do think that PED users are getting off easy...

They're simply different forms of cheating. As a fan, I need to know that the game is not predetermined before it begins. One gambling manager can impact that much more than any one player sticking themselves with a needle can.

I think a point we both agree on is that each action (taking PEDs or gambling/fixing games) ruins the integrity of baseball. We differ, however, when contending which is more damaging. I think it's impossible to take the side of fixing games. Sure, the outcome of a season may have changed, but how is that more debilitating than setting up historical milestones through cheating?

I'm still torn, for a number of reasons that have been mentioned in this thread. I won't regurgitate them here, but suffice it to say that part of me also thinks that there's the potential for a pretty big appearance of impropriety if he's allowed to manage. I doubt, however, that he'd actually gamble on anything related to MLB if allowed to manage again. I just have to hope that he'd be so closely monitored by the media and others that this would serve to deter any inclination to gamble.

That said, I'd really hate to see him be allowed to manage and questions arise about his activities. IMO, baseball really doesn't need to be dealing with another black eye right now - or even questions about the possibility of another black eye. Anything that again calls into question the integrity of the game in the wake of issues surround performance enhancing drugs would be pretty darn problematic...

Right. It would be extremely foolish of him to even risk such a venture. There's pretty much a 0% chance of it happening again, in my opinion.

I think that this is a polarizing subject but it definitely wouldn't give MLB "a black eye." If anything, the controversy will draw the eye of the casual fan.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If he does manage in the MLB, there would be soo much controversy it wouldn't be funny. I myself think steroids and PEDs are worse then what Rose did...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm in no way trying to change your mind, but I do have a question for you: Do you believe that Pete Rose, by allegedly fixing a few games (something that's NEVER been proven, by the way, but it's obviously highly probable if he's gambling on said games...) and therefore impacting the outcome of a season deserves to be blacklisted, while players like Alex Rodriguez, who've admitted to using steroids - thereby cheating and altering baseball history - remain relatively unscathed?

Players using substances not proven to help in baseball activities (other than being able to recover from injuries quicker) in order to help be a more competitive player (while possibly hurting only themselves, provided they ignore their cholesterol levels instead of having their dosages managed by a physician) versus a guy whose very actions could undermine the competitiveness of the game, turning it into a glorified WWF match? Yeah, I'm good with the latter getting ostracized while the former get off without anything.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He's a self-serving ego maniac. I'd put his jersey, ball, bat, etc in the Hall. I'm not sure about him though. Maybe a disclaimer saying that he is not in because he disgraced the game.

Rose, the person, should never, ever be allowed near MLB. He is a disgrace and even when he was caught, he denied guilt.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pete Rose should replace Bud Selig.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players using substances not proven to help in baseball activities (other than being able to recover from injuries quicker) in order to help be a more competitive player (while possibly hurting only themselves, provided they ignore their cholesterol levels instead of having their dosages managed by a physician) versus a guy whose very actions could undermine the competitiveness of the game, turning it into a glorified WWF match? Yeah, I'm good with the latter getting ostracized while the former get off without anything.

Wait, what? You're not serious with that statement?

One manager (read: 1 out of 30) can't rig the entire sport. He's not Vince McMahon.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Wait, what? You're not serious with that statement?

I'm sorry. Researching it, it appears that the "healing effect" is not proven medically either. My apologies.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If some team out there somewhere wants to extend a spring training invite to him so he can help show young kids a couple things about hitting, I don't have a problem with MLB letting that happen.

But once the regular season and playoffs start, he simply cannot be trusted to be in a position to make decisions... or even influence them.

That said, he belongs in the Hall of Fame.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.