Pete Rose is a name that stirs up strong feelings in the world of baseball. His records and memorabilia are scattered throughout the National Baseball Hall of Fame and Museum in Cooperstown, New York. However, there is no plaque for him in the gallery. That could change soon. A recent ruling means Rose could be considered for induction in late 2027. This has sparked a lively debate among baseball legends.

Some Hall of Famers believe Rose deserves a spot in the Hall of Fame. Reggie Jackson thinks Rose should be in, pointing out that other players with controversial pasts are already there. He argues that if Rose is eligible, he should be inducted. Jim Palmer, however, has a different view. He thinks Rose missed an opportunity to make amends and show remorse. Palmer is not sure if Rose will make it in, but he acknowledges Rose's incredible talent on the field.

Mike Schmidt sees both sides of the argument. He notes that Rose had many chances to change his path but didn't take them. Schmidt admits that Rose is one of the greatest players in baseball history, but he also points out that Rose never showed true remorse for his actions. Jim Leyland is also unsure. He knows Rose's playing career was Hall of Fame-worthy, but he struggles with the idea of inducting someone with Rose's off-field issues.

Jim Kaat, who played with and coached Rose, has a unique perspective. He thinks baseball missed an opportunity to use Rose as a cautionary tale about the dangers of gambling. Kaat believes that if Rose is considered solely for his on-field achievements, he should be a shoo-in. However, Kaat also points out that the Hall of Fame committee has to consider other deserving players who have never faced similar controversies.

John Smoltz would vote for Rose if given the chance. He argues that the Hall of Fame has already inducted players with serious off-field issues, so why not Rose? Billy Wagner, on the other hand, thinks it's a decision for the older generation of players to make. He remembers Rose as a player he admired growing up.

Bill Mazeroski jokes that he would make Rose wait a bit longer before inducting him. Pat Gillick thinks Rose's on-field achievements are undeniable, but he also questions Rose's character. Andre Dawson, a personal friend of Rose, thinks it's long overdue for Rose to be inducted. He argues that baseball and sports in general have a long history with gambling, and Rose should be recognized for his on-field accomplishments.

Tony La Russa remembers the upset feelings of legendary Hall of Famers when Rose's scandal broke. They were upset not just by the mistake, but also by Rose's lack of honesty and remorse. Tony Perez, a teammate of Rose's, believes that Rose should be in the Hall of Fame for his on-field achievements. He thinks Rose paid the price for his mistake and should be given the chance to be inducted.

Baseball is a game of statistics, but it's also a game of character. Pete Rose's on-field achievements are undeniable, but his off-field actions have left a complicated legacy. As the debate continues, one thing is clear: Pete Rose's story is far from over. The question remains: should his on-field greatness overshadow his off-field mistakes? Only time will tell.

Should Pete Rose Be Celebrated in Cooperstown?

Actions