O.J. Simpson could lose Hall of Fame status

[Wassit3]

http://msn.foxsports.com/cfb/story/8...r-now?MSNHPHMA

[200tang]

The College Football Hall of Fame has no written morality or ethics clause, but Hatchell said character is factored in when players are considered for induction.

So apparently if I was a huge jerk every game and trashed talk everyone including my own team but I won the Heisman every year I couldn't be in the hall of fame? :'(

I understand that nobody likes him but it's the COLLEGE FOOTBALL hall of fame, not the good guy hall of fame. Personally I don't think they should take him out no matter how bad of a guy he is. This really doesn't have anything to do with his college career.

[justanewguy]

He deserves to be kicked out.

So apparently if I was a huge jerk every game and trashed talk everyone including my own team but I won the Heisman every year I couldn't be in the hall of fame? :'(

I understand that nobody likes him but it's the COLLEGE FOOTBALL hall of fame, not the good guy hall of fame. Personally I don't think they should take him out no matter how bad of a guy he is. This really doesn't have anything to do with his college career.

It's not just that "nobody likes him." He killed two people, brutally (allegedly, and yeah, that trial enough wasn't enough, in my mind, to kick him out of the Hall, but at this point... come on...), and he went on to commit an armed robbery.

He shouldn't remain in the Hall of Fame. This is one case (possibly the only case I can think of) where a player should be ousted from a Hall of Fame based on their personal life.

[Arctic Blast]

I don't agree. What he did was horrible, but it didn't go back in time in the de Lorean and magically erase his numbers from the books at USC.

[Rongar]

This is Mohamed Ali; Pete Rose; and Bill Clinton, all over again...no matter how despicable they appear to be in private life, what counts with me, it's what they do in their special field, during working hours.

I think that we're mistaken to regard "celebrities" as being role models: that function,, I believe, should be left us average Joes, during our daily rounds, performing our common tasks.

[justanewguy]

This is Mohamed Ali; Pete Rose; and Bill Clinton, all over again...no matter how despicable they appear to be in private life, what counts with me, it's what they do in their special field, during working hours.

I think that we're mistaken to regard "celebrities" as being role models: that function,, I believe, should be left us average Joes, during our daily rounds, performing our common tasks.

NONE of those people come anywhere close to OJ Simpson. There's simply no way to compare Pete Rose and OJ Simpson. Gambling and murder aren't really on the same level in terms of wrongdoing.

This isn't like Ty Cobb being a racist a$$hole or Barry Bonds being a jerk to the media, or Jose Canseco shooting roids into Mark McGwire's ass or Michael Irvin snorting lines of coke. This isn't a case of needing to be a role model or anything like that. AT ALL. It's a case of a guy who slashed 2 people to death, managed to avoid prison, and was stupid enough to commit ARMED ROBBERY afterwards. Not to mention all the crap he did in between those things.

The statistics shouldn't be "erased," but if I ran the Hall of Fame, there's no way his name or memorabilia would be anywhere NEAR my Hall.

[CatKnight]

ALLEGEDLY killed two people. Yeah, I believe he did it too, but even if you're going to add morality to the HoF, then you need to go by what the findings of the law. You (as HoF Coordinator/whatever) do not get to decide right from wrong.

For that matter you don't get to decide justice. There was a time I wanted Bonds to never go into the baseball HoF, and it still turns my stomach...but Rongar is right.

Unless someone does something that brings lasting harm to the game, then they shouldn't be disqualified. NCAA and NFL football didn't suffer over Simpson's misconduct.

[justanewguy]

ALLEGEDLY killed two people. Yeah, I believe he did it too, but even if you're going to add morality to the HoF, then you need to go by what the findings of the law. You (as HoF Coordinator/whatever) do not get to decide right from wrong.

Actually, he was found responsible for the deaths in a court of law. So yes, I'm going by the findings of the law.

[200tang]

Actually, he was found responsible for the deaths in a court of law. So yes, I'm going by the findings of the law.

Your argument is basically saying he doesn't belong in the hall of fame because he murdered people? Look I understand he murdered 2 people but regardless the hall of fame is about playing football, not what he did off the field.

The statistics shouldn't be "erased," but if I ran the Hall of Fame, there's no way his name or memorabilia would be anywhere NEAR my Hall.

This 'argument' reminds me of the tired argument of what the MVP stands for. Look MVP is who was the best, not who's team made it to the playoffs and who played the best in september. Just like the HOF is who was really good at the sport, nothing else. Especially since the rules to get in to the HOF state nothing about someones 'character'. If it had been then sure, but because its not it seems stupid to go back and take someone out.

[HoustonGM]

Especially since the rules to get in to the HOF state nothing about someones 'character'. If it had been then sure, but because its not it seems stupid to go back and take someone out.

Well, baseball's HOF does include character in the qualifications. What exactly are the qualifications for the football HOF? If they do include any sort of reference to character, than O.J. probably doesn't belong (although I'm never in favor of removing somebody from any Hall), but if they don't, I'd say he absolutely belongs.

[200tang]

Well, baseball's HOF does include character in the qualifications. What exactly are the qualifications for the football HOF? If they do include any sort of reference to character, than O.J. probably doesn't belong (although I'm never in favor of removing somebody from any Hall), but if they don't, I'd say he absolutely belongs.

I think that character is only considered when being inducted though, once the player is in I think that it should stand. As the article says, there is no clause once being inducted, and if there isn't then you shouldn't go back and change it.

The College Football Hall of Fame has no written morality or ethics clause, but Hatchell said character is factored in when players are considered for induction.

"It's sort of an unwritten rule that if there's issues, steer away from them," he said.

I mean it pretty much says right there that there is no rule, and personally I don't buy in to an 'unwritten rule'.

[justanewguy]

Your argument is basically saying he doesn't belong in the hall of fame because he murdered people? Look I understand he murdered 2 people but regardless the hall of fame is about playing football, not what he did off the field.

From the Pro Football Hall of Fame's website:

The Mission of the Pro Football Hall of Fame is:
To honor, preserve, educate and promote. . .

To honor individuals who have made outstanding contributions to professional football

To preserve professional football’s historic documents and artifacts

To educate the public regarding the origin, development and growth of professional football as an important part of American culture

To promote the positive values of the sport

So, sorry, but you're totally wrong.

This 'argument' reminds me of the tired argument of what the MVP stands for. Look MVP is who was the best, not who's team made it to the playoffs and who played the best in september.

Not the same argument at all. I don't get how you can relate the "played best in September" argument to an argument that a murderer shouldn't be in the Hall of Fame, which has a mission statement that leaves room for judgment of character.

Just like the HOF is who was really good at the sport, nothing else.

Especially since the rules to get in to the HOF state nothing about someones 'character'. If it had been then sure, but because its not it seems stupid to go back and take someone out.

It's not "stupid" at all. Voting for an MVP candidate because he hit a bunch of home runs in September or "willed his team to the playoffs" is stupid because it ignores the definition of "Most Valuable Player for the season." Making an argument that a murderer and complete thug of a person shouldn't be in a Hall of Fame is more a matter of opinion, so it can't really be "stupid."

[Wassit3]

Well, baseball's HOF does include character in the qualifications. What exactly are the qualifications for the football HOF? If they do include any sort of reference to character, than O.J. probably doesn't belong (although I'm never in favor of removing somebody from any Hall), but if they don't, I'd say he absolutely belongs.

http://www.profootballhof.com/hof/Se...ProcessFAQ.jsp

or

http://www.profootballhof.com/hof/selectionprocess.jsp

may asnwer your questions better than i can word it at least.

[HoustonGM]

From the Pro Football Hall of Fame's website:



So, sorry, but you're totally wrong.

2 things:

1) This article was about removal from the COLLEGE Football Hall of Fame.

2) The article says:

The Pro Football Hall of Fame only considers a player's on-field accomplishments, so Simpson is in no danger of being removed from there. The Bills have said they will follow the Hall of Fame's lead and have no plans remove Simpson from its Wall of Fame.

[justanewguy]

College, huh? Even more clearcut then. According to THEIR website:

The NFF (National Football Foundation) seeks to honor those who have excelled both on and off the field and who demonstrate the Foundation's creed of scholarship, citizenship and athletic ability...

Each player nominated must have: (1) received major first-team All-America recognition; (2) played his last intercollegiate game at least 10 years previously; (3) retired from playing professional football; and (4) proven himself worthy as a citizen after his football career, carrying the ideals of football forward into his community.