Should Roger Clemens be in the Hall of Fame?

The Rocky

Published December 14, 2007 at 12:45 a.m.

Text size

Photo by Mario Tama / Getty Images

A passage on Roger Clemens from the Mitchell Report.

More Colorado Rockies

More stories »

Some voters weigh in

* Tracy Ringolsby, Rocky Mountain News and enshrinee in the writers wing of the Baseball Hall of Fame:

"I would vote for him. I think what this report shows is that baseball, like other sports, went through a period of time that will be forever blemished, but it also shows this was an industrywide situation, not isolated cases. During his career, Clemens was as dominant, if not the most dominant, of any pitcher in the game. Hopefully, lessons will be learned from what happened, in that, we have a tendency in all phases of life to try and find an edge on our competition and often that edge is used without a full understanding of the long-term implications."

* Bernie Lincicome, Rocky Mountain News:

"My vote for Roger Clemens would still be yes, just as it is for Barry Bonds. Both men had substantial careers before steroids. I would not vote for either on the first ballot, maybe not until their third or fourth year of eligibility. A feeble protest, I know, but all I have.

"The Mitchell report, pending proof, does call into doubt every victory for Clemens after his final season in Boston, when he was 10-13. That's 162 suspicious victories, allowing him a generous 192 untainted wins. Not Hall of Fame numbers, never mind the dishonesty."

* Bob Dutton, The Kansas City Star and president of the Baseball Writers Association of America:

"My initial reaction is, yes, but that's all it is - an initial reaction. It's too early, I think, for anything else."

* Bob Elliott, Toronto Sun, who covered Clemens when he played for the Blue Jays:

"He was a first-ballot Hall of Famer five years ago, he's the same today and he'll be the same five years from now."

* George King, New York Post:

"Yes, I would vote for him. I voted for McGwire and will vote for Bonds."

* Mark Gonzales, Chicago Tribune:

"I need more information before making a decision. But I'm leaning strongly on Rule 5 of the Hall of Fame ballot that states a player's candidacy shall be based upon a list that includes 'integrity, sportsmanship and character' as well as contributions."

* Dan Graziano, The (Newark) Star Ledger:

"No, I would not. My personal feeling on this is that the Hall of Fame is a reward, and I don't intend to reward people who cheated in an effort to get there. I did not vote for Mark McGwire last year and have no plans to vote for him in the future. Similarly, I have no plans to vote for Barry Bonds.

"As to the argument that 'he was a Hall of Famer before he took the stuff,' I submit that (a) we don't know that for sure and (b) I don't care. If Clemens or Bonds wasn't satisfied with simply being great and decided he needed to cheat in order to become immortal, my feeling is that I should not reward him for that."

* Rick Hummel, St. Louis Post-Dispatch:

"I'd prefer not to have to worry about that for five years, but, to be consistent, I voted for McGwire, so I probably would."

* Jim Ingraham, Lake County News-Herald (Willoughby, Ohio):

"Still mulling it over, but I don't know how I could vote for Clemens, and not for Bonds, McGwire, Palmeiro and Sosa, which I had already determined I would not do. I think today's events places Clemens in the same sordid group."

* Richard Justice, Houston Chronicle:

"No."

* Kevin Kernan, New York Post:

"No. And I was his biggest supporter."

* Hal McCoy, Dayton Daily News:

"I won't vote for anybody connected to steroids or HGH - McGwire, Bonds, Sosa and now Clemens. They cheated and they weren't playing on a level field with guys who played it straight."

* Bob Nightengale, USA Today:

"Yes, I will vote for Clemens to be in the Hall of Fame. There have been widespread rumors for years on Clemens, and (the) report does not change my view that he is a Hall of Famer."

* Pat Reusse, Minneapolis Star Tribune:

"I've been voting for McGwire, so I suppose I'll vote for Clemens. Baseball wouldn't let us vote for Rose. If they don't want the steroid boys in the Hall, do the same and take them off the ballot."

* Phil Rogers, Chicago Tribune:

"Based on the information in the Mitchell Report, no."

* Susan Slusser, San Francisco Chronicle:

"Not any more."

* Larry Stone, Seattle Times:

"Yes, I will likely vote for Clemens, just as I voted for Mark McGwire and will likely vote for Bonds. I believe that this was the way baseball was played during this era, and in the absence of definitive proof of who used and who didn't, it's impossible to know where to draw the line."

* Marc Topkin, St. Petersburg Times:

"Based on what I know now, Roger Clemens would have my vote for the Hall of Fame. But I reserve the right to change my mind."

* Mark Whicker, The Orange County Register:

"Absolutely. The uncorroborated word of an ex-trainer has no bearing at all."

Subscribe to the Rocky Mountain News