2010HOTTOPIC

This page of the site is dedicated to healthy debate. We at the Hall welcome debate. First of all, we are dealing with sports and we all know that there are no absolutes. If you have a better idea - we want to hear it. We want this Hall to be the very best with the best possible Inductees. We will happily print your email on the topic but there are some guidelines.

1) Emails are to be civil, no swearing or nastiness should be expressed at any time.
2) No personal attacks
3) You may remain anonymous or you may use your name - either way is fine.
4) We will print your email so an on-going debate will take place. Updates to the site take place every Sunday evening at midnight.

This month's Hot Topic is about the '2010 Ballot in which Voters were required to vote for ten nominees from a list of eighteen Living Nominees.' Some have said that they don't think this is fair! What do you think?

Send your email to this address either supporting or defending this position and please explain why! Thanks, the Hall

This is first Hot Topic!"It was reported (to the Hall of Fame committee) that a previous Inducted Member of the Hall (an Inducted Individual from a previous year) refused to vote in 2010 and support the nominees on the ballot, Again, it was reported (and we have no way of confirming this) that the individual reportedly refused to vote for two reasons: First, he said he didn't know any of the nominees. And secondly, he didn't think that it was fair that he had to vote for ten because he didn't know many of them." This is all second hand information as provided to the Hall via nominees and supporters of nominees. These folks were upset because they valued the opinion expressed by the Hall of Famer - and that they question the Halls' process of voting! There were at least two recollections of the same story and there were some indicators who this individual is. However, it is not our intent to identify the mystery Hall of Famer who wouldn't vote - but rather to focus on the process of Hall of Fame induction instead.

The Halls' Position: The Hall has had 12 Induction Classes to present. Each Class has used the same criterion to nominate & elect folks into the Hall all twelve classes. All twelve ballots instructed the voters to clearly mark a specific number of folks by checking boxes of nominees who they were supporting. The only variable since 1993 was whether the Hall would count those ballots who did not vote for a specific number. There was at least one year where the Hall of Fame Board debated the topic of whether or not to count the incomplete ballots.

The Hall creates and writes lengthy athletic biographies on all of the nominees. In 2010, the Times-Observer gave the Hall over three full pages of coverage to provide those detailed biographies to the public complete with pictures. And, those same biographies were available to see (again, complete with even more pictures) at the Warren Mall Display. During the election, this website hosts the entire biography of each nominee to include their story and a large group of pictures to show their worthiness. To top if off, the Hall has been provided a one-hour radio show on Warren Radio which highlighted the Halls' nominees and their accomplishments. This show was featured and presented on two different radio stations in Warren.

Our Opinion - The former Inductee who refused to support the nominees was out-of-line in his assessment that he didn't know the nominees. He is older now and probably doesn't know all of the nominees personally! Who Can? But that is exactly why the Hall provides full and complete athletic biographies. We think that the best way for a voter to get to know the nominees is through a well written biography. Secondly, the Hall has provided ample opportunity for all voters (to include the former Inductee) to read and learn about the nominees. If voters don't take advantage of that information - they are either lazy or unwilling to put in some time getting to know the nominees. This is the exact same process that got the non-voting Hall of Famer inducted into the Hall - and now he opposes it? If he has a better way to do it, a better idea - let him come forward and discuss it with the Hall. Either way - Shame on the Hall of Famer who wouldn't support the new nominees! You let them down!

Email from May 4th "That Hall of Famer should be ashamed of himself. Maybe you folks in the Hall should take away his being in the hall for being a jerk. We know he is from (town) and we have a great reputation of supporting our athletes and coaches. He should be kicked out of the hall." (not identified by request)

Halls Response: Anyone inducted into the Hall is included in the Hall as long as the Hall exists. He has earned the honor through his accomplishments on the athletic field and should not be penalized in any way eventhough he has expressed an opinion the Hall thinks is incorrect. He has a right to his opinion and a right to vote or not. It is discouraging to us in the Hall that this individual is affecting the outcome of elections through his non-support. And, the same system that got him elected into the Hall is not good enough to elect new folks into the Hall?

Email from May 15th. (not identified by request) My husband and I have been following the Hall for the past seventeen years. We really enjoy the website. We have voted in almost every election and are in approval of the process by which the hall inducts it's nominees. As far as that one guy who wouldn't vote, All we can say is that he does not represent the majority of anybodys. We know him and he's a complainer anyway, so don't worry about one guy who wouldn't vote. Keep up the good work! PS by not voting for the right number of folks, that is cheating or loading the ballot box or something.

Halls Response: Thanks!

Wev'e received two emails in the past two weeks - both representing former nominees who were not elected into the Hall. One was a parent of a nominee who took an informal poll and had a list of complaints regarding the Hall and the process which is used to elect folks into the Hall. The other email was from a former nominee who expressed the following "Time sure does fly by and serves to heal wounded egos."

The complaints by the parent of the former nominee range from calling the 'Hall of Fame a gimmick' to a complaint about 'having to pay $10 to vote for someone.' Also listed in the litany of complaints was the comment of 'the way they vote is not fair and has to be changed,' and 'Some nominees who were in several sports lost while some were only in one and won, not fair.' And lastly, the complaint that "It's all about the Money."

Halls Response: When an athlete or a former coach is nominated - there is always the risk that they will not be elected into the Hall. The voters and the voters alone determine exactly who is to be inducted into the Hall. Nominees not elected into the Hall may feel rejected by the voters. It is the Hall who takes the heat for the voters - at least in the eyes of those not elected and their families. The Hall simply provides the venue for the election and the induction process. We don't support any one athlete more than any others.

These two letters, though different, are clear in that they both express the frustration in not being elected into the Hall. The letter referencing that 'Time heals wounded egos' is a mature response by a former athlete who took the time to give the process plenty of thought - and has determined that the process is worth another shot for the next induction year. The other letter is from a wounded parent who believes the athlete was rejected by the Hall - Not True! All of the other complaints are simply a response based upon that emotional situation. We understand that. We at the Hall simply say - 'If you have a better way to Induct folks into the Hall - please provide that information to the Hall.

The Final Word on this Topic: As of the last week in July 2010, the debate continues. The Hall has received two emails - both from relatives of a previous nominee not elected into the Hall. Though one of the emails was pointed and had a vindictive retort towards the Hall - we have decided not to respond to name calling and accusations of impropriety by the Hall. This was one of our guidelines when we set this page in motion. The comments by the emailer do not serve to benefit anyone - especially those making the claims. Unless we have more emails on this topic - this topic has exhaused itself in debate. Though there are a few folks who complain about the process of induction - we have yet to receive anything resembling a solution to their perceived problem or a better way to induct folks into the Hall. - End - the Hall