A writer going off

I was going to do another trade post tonight. But then I started trying to catch up on all the blog posts I missed tonight while occupied by work. I came across a few Hall of Fame posts, since in a few short hours the 2010 selections -- if any -- will be announced.

I started to comment on one of the posts and then I realized I was babbling for far too long and that it needed to be a post of my own.

So, here it is. Take it for what it's worth.

As a writer for over 20 years, I take offense when people lump all writers together under some sort of derogatory heading that often goes like this: "Writers don't know shit."

OK. Let's dissect that a little. That's what's known as a generalization. Here is something that's a little more accurate:

"SOME writers don't know shit."

And here's the other part of that more accurate statement:

"Some writers know more than you or I will ever know."

When the Hall of Fame selections come out, certain players will be left outside the Hall door. Happens every year. And people will fume and vent and call people names. That happens every year, too. It is the bitching season, after all.

I happen to think that some of the writers who have Hall of Fame ballots are morons. They have proven it. But I also think that other writers who have ballots are brilliant. They have fantastic minds. So you have some people voting for Hall of Famers who don't know what they're doing and some voting who absolutely do.

And that brings up the question: does that mean the voting system is broken?

I don't know. Probably. I think the Veterans Committee might have a few more problems.

But I get irked when people say "throw out the writers, those incompetent ninnies."

OK, throw them out. Who are you going to get to replace them? I hear precious little about a solution to the problem. Tell me: Who is going to vote if the writers can't?

I do know one thing: unless someone comes up with a strict series of voting rules or develops some sort of numerical formula to determine who gets in PEOPLE ARE ALWAYS GOING TO HAVE A PROBLEM WITH WHO IS VOTING. ALWAYS.

And that is because this scenario happens whenever you get a collection of people together to decide something important. The people on the outside -- the excluded -- are going to bitch about the decision.

So, go ahead, dump all the writers. But if you get a bunch of scientists to vote in the Hall of Famers, I guarantee you're eventually going to have a problem with the scientists. If you get a group of politicians to do it, you're going to eventually have a problem with the politicians. Statisticians? You'll grow dissatisfied eventually. Historians? You'll be bitching about some historians' rational for not voting so-and-so in. You could have 20 of your best buddies from the bar voting for the next Hall of Famer and eventually you're going to get pissed off at half of them and want to fight the other half.

That's life my friends. It's the human condition. It's played out on American Idol on a weekly basis from February to May. And every fourth November people rip their idiot neighbor because he voted for the wrong guy to live in a giant white house in Washington.

I do agree that there are players that should be in the Hall by now. Andre Dawson really should be in the Hall. Bert Blyleven probably should be in the Hall. Hell, I think Gil Hodges should have been the Hall long ago.

I think if I was voting today, I probably would pick Dawson and Roberto Alomar.

And you know what? At least a few of you has a problem with who I just picked. Maybe one of you called me an idiot. But do you think I should have my blog taken away from me because of that?

Bitching can be fun. It makes for some great arguments.

But between the endless bitching, I'd like to see a suggestion on how things could be better. And maybe, just every once in awhile, I'd like to see some recognition for the writers who got it right.

I'm waiting.

(P.S.: I'd be stunned if Dawson didn't get in this year).