Mr. Rose

I suppose I should comment, ever-so-briefly, on Pete Rose. Personally, I think he should be inducted into the Hall of Fame, and he actually should have been inducted there years ago. I see no reason, really, why Hall of Fame eligibility should be tied to MLB eligibility. And I think that if (or when) Rose finally gets in, his plaque should include a reference to the gambling scandals. (I also think that Shoeless Joe Jackson should be in the Hall, with a similar "asterisk" on his plaque.

But, I do not think he should be allowed any participation in MLB itself beyond, say, public-relations appearances, as at the World Series a couple of years back, or even allowing him to play in one of those "Old Timer's Games". He should not be allowed to manage or work in a front office position. Baseball has been just fine without him, and while I'm somewhat glad that he's coming clean now, the impact is somewhat lessened by his refusal over the last fifteen years to do it already. I suppose he could be insincere about the whole thing; this could be a case of "Fine, I'll just say what you want me to say so I'll get what I want", but I don't really care.

So: Hall of Fame, yes. Participation in baseball on any official basis, no.

(BTW: I've seen it said, in a few places, that even if Rose was fully reinstated, he'd still be ostracized by MLB owners and general managers. Maybe I'm too cynical here, but I don't believe that's true: it seems to me that as long as someone believes that Rose has something to offer, can help them "win", that someone will give him a job. It's always this way in sports: Latrell Sprewell continues to play and draw a nice salary after doing something that would have landed, say, a bank teller in jail because he's still a good basketball player. I don't believe for one second that Rose would remain unemployed for long if he were reinstated. Sooner or later, some owner would say, "Well, that gambling business seems to have died down, and the public sure likes controversy, so....")