Of dog shows, HOF, & Julius Henry Marx

[jackrussell]

Of course we're both thrilled and relieved of the inclusion of Bob Hayes into the NFL Hall of Fame. Finally.

Now we've had some other names for the HOF the last few years, and have been fairly critical of the process, the bias, the ineptitude.

Reminds me of several years ago when I first started in the dog business. The first rule of thumb was to listen to the respected veteran breeders, learn what you could from the 'establishment'. What I really found out that to be was to kiss some *** for a few years and maybe, just maybe, I'd be accepted into the click.

Attending a show in Georgia, I was listening to a friend of mine as to what a joke of a judge we had for the day...how he didn't know what he was doing, how he hated her dogs, how he picked his friends dogs all the time. She didn't have a lot of good things to say and even wondered why she even showed up.

Good thing she showed though...incredibly, one of her dogs took home best of show. From an 'inept' judge. A guy that 'didn't have a clue'.

She was thrilled. I was perplexed that she was thrilled.

So my question to her was, "Considering your opinion of this specific judge, why would you consider this such a ringing endorsement?"

I was being serious, trying to learn as it was suggested. She thought I was trying to piss on her parade.

So now Bob Hayes has finally been selected....by inept sportwriters, by the hall of shame, by a joke of an establishment that some have boycotted.

Considering some of our prior opinions, does this not ring a little hollow? Does this one vote suddenly make all things legitimate?

The great philospher Julius Henry Marx once said, "PLEASE ACCEPT MY RESIGNATION. I DON'T WANT TO BELONG TO ANY CLUB THAT WILL ACCEPT PEOPLE LIKE ME AS A MEMBER".

Acceptance and acknowledgement sure seems to make everything right in the world.

 

[Zaxor]

I believe that HOF voters change over time.... so those that did not vote for Bobby in the 80's, 90's or even later may not be the same ones who voted yesterday...so the very premise of your post is a bit confusing

 

[burmafrd]

Actually most if not every one that did not vote for him in 2004 were back this time. And turnover there is not all that much.

 

[jackrussell]

I believe that HOF voters change over time.... so those that did not vote for Bobby in the 80's, 90's or even later may not be the same ones who voted yesterday...so the very premise of your post is a bit confusing

I'm not sure what is so confusing...while electors come and go we've pretty much recognized the same Cowboy bias over the decades. And as burm said, they're pretty much the same people as 5 years ago.

Who will be our next 'snub' that deems the hall a joke? Howley? Harris? Martin? Are they only a joke if they don't put in whom WE think is worthy?

 

[J-DOG]

I'm glad that Bob Hayes got in the Hall but I still believe there is a faction of voters that are inept.
Why would so called moronic voters now choose Hayes???
I believe there is much more scrutiny on these votes then there has ever been.
Peter King should be seen as the leader of the idiot voting faction.
Zimmerman believed in voting for Hayes and left the voting because he was so pissed off about the injustice of Hayes not getting in.
Now this may be my bias about Hayes being in the Hall of Fame, but I think there is something going on behind closed doors to cause a veteran writer who has covered the game for a long time to just leave the process all together.
I have my dislike for King, but like it or not King is seen as an important writer about the NFL and I think he has influenced other voters against Hayes for years.
Just the way I see it.