Friday, December 10, 2010

Hall Pass


I noticed that Bon Jovi is on the short list of nominees for induction into the Hall of Fame. I hope he gets in, and not because I am a Bon Jovi fan. I’m not. I’m indifferent, really. Contrary to popular stereotypes, it is not a requirement to listen to and love the rock of Bon Jovi if you are from New Jersey, like I am (pretty sure liking Springsteen is a requirement, however).  The idea of eligibility for the Hall did get me thinking, however.  It got me thinking mostly about the hypocrisy of those who vote for inductees, and it cuts to the true meaning of what it means to be a Hall of Famer.
 
I hate the double standard on the use of performance enhancing drugs.

The use of these banned substances has allowed performers to write and play songs whose popularity has lasted generations, and to produce a dizzying array of hits.  Some of the records achieved during the so-called LSD Era may never be broken. Pink Floyd’s Dark Side of the Moon was on the Billboard charts for 736 consecutive weeks. Can anyone with a straight face tell me that setting this iron man record is possible without pharmaceutical help?  Please. Just like the “Steroids Era” record of 73 single season homers from Bonds was Ruthian, Pink Floyd has a record that may never be broken…all because of the performance enhancers.  The difference is, Bonds will never be inducted, and Pink Floyd is already in the Hall.

Mark McGuire has more career hits than the Rolling Stones, yet the Rolling Stones are in the Hall of Fame. McGuire will probably never make it, and his lone black mark is the use of performance enhancing drugs during his career. Is that really fair?  Keith Richards made no secret of his juicing to improve on stage performance.  Did the voters hold that against him?  No way – straight into the Hall he went.
 
It is crystal clear that those who did not use PEDs were at a significant disadvantage to those that flaunted their use. Ted Nugent, for example, had a few big hits in his day, and he is well known for not using any performance boosters while playing. You have to wonder how much better Cat’s Scratch Fever could have been if Nugent was a juicer. Would Ken Griffey hit 800 home runs with PEDs? You’ve seen the swing, you be the judge.  How many Grammy Awards could Ted have won with just one year of chemical help?  You’ve seen his stage antics, you be the judge.
 
How many more hits would the Little River Band have had if their lead guitarist had been on PEDs? Those gentle riffs in their 70’s hit, Reminiscing, might have sounded more like haunting screams from Roger Waters and David Gilmour’s electric guitars, and history could have been made. Instead, the Little River Band is the answer to a trivia question in a bar argument.   Little River Band is not in the Hall of Fame.

It’s not like the voters for Hall of Fame induction can’t see what’s happening.  You could tell who the users were, by the lines on their faces, the giant biceps, and the tracks on their arms. You could see the dramatic physical changes when they stopped using PEDs, too. In many cases, they shriveled up and starting writing acoustic love songs or hitting weak infield singles. How sad for them, but it does prove the powerful effects of the PEDs on their creativity and stagecraft.  Billy Corgan of Smashing Pumpkins cleaned up his act, and he hasn’t written a hit since.  Jason Giambi went off the juice, and quickly became nothing more than a shrunk head with a baseball bat.   The stuff works, but the voters seem to selectively apply the rules.

It is always difficult to compare players and performances across generations, but isn’t the double standard on juicing unfair to bands like Bachmann Turner Overdrive, or players like Larry Bowa? Without drugs, The Who might have been no better than BTO. Or said another way, add Keith Moon to the BTO line up, and Takin’ Care of Business becomes the equivalent of iconic rock classic Won’t Get Fooled Again. Is it realistic to think that a sober drummer could match the intensity that a doped up Keith Moon could create? The answer is obvious - of course not. When PED users are on your team, you generate more hits. It’s that simple.  Larry Bowa could have been Alex Rodriguez, but he played in a different era.  Larry Bowa is not in the Hall, but perhaps with a few injections…
  
Look, I am not naïve enough to think that there has never been cheating over the years.  We know about the spitball and corked bats.  We’ve heard the stories about lip-syncing, sampling, and other computer aided sounds. Heck, Queen would leave the stage while the a cappella part of Bohemian Rhapsody played from a recording! Have they no shame! If that’s not cheating, I don’t know what is. They are Hall of Famers, by the way.  Gaylord Perry wrote a book about cheating, and he’s in, too.  The fact is that sometimes the cheaters are rewarded with a Hall of Fame plaque, and other times, they are banned from what they love.

There is enough blame to go around.  The owners have looked the other way for years. Both players and owners were making money, and the fans were happy and showing up at events. Owners can pretend that they didn’t notice what was going on, but who is kidding who. I’ve seen the videos of Iggy Pop concerts. I’ve seen and heard Jim Morrison on stage, slurring his words. No PEDs? Give me a break! Both, by the way, the voters honored with induction to the Hall of Fame.  Sammy Sosa, however, will never get in.

Sure, you can say, “everyone was doing it at the time.” That may be true, particularly in the record-shattering years from 1968-1972, but I don’t believe that should be the standard for the Hall. Being a Hall of Famer used to mean something, something special. Not ‘everyone’ was doing it. If everyone was doing it, how can you explain Christopher Cross? No one using performance enhancers would write those songs, trust me.

Some have suggested these issues could be resolved with mandatory testing. The competitive spirit of these players is too great, and the financial rewards too large for this to work. The doctors and chemists would stay one step ahead of testing, and we’d never know the truth about who had “assistance” writing killer songs or stealing 150 bases, and who wrote their music or threw a no-hitter without performance enhancers.  It’s completely unworkable.

In conclusion, I believe that players being considered for the Hall of Fame should have their records judged against the period in which they performed. If PEDs are part of the act, then vote ‘em all in, if they have had enough hits.  It’s only fair.

And while I am on the subject of the Hall of Fame, the HOF Committee needs to address gambling once and for all.  The inconsistency is criminal.   I mean, how can Charlie Daniels be in the Hall of Fame after admitting publicly that he bet on music…with the Devil, no less! If Pete Rose can’t get elected to his Hall, why should Mr. Daniels deserve any better treatment? This Hall of Fame had better clean up its’ act, before it loses the public trust forever.  

No comments:

Post a Comment