>the standards were always lower than what you are presenting
>them to be. go back and look at some of the guys from the 50's
>and 60's who were already in Springfield years ago.

then they pertained more to the teams they played for, if you were on a winning team it enhanced your chances a lot but overall i don't see nearly as many suspect selections as in recent years.


>yeah that's what I said - Howard in his prime was better than
>those guys right today. his accolades wouldn't be any
>different if he was going against them in his prime.

agree to disagree on that, for about three years, sure, for the whole stretch (eight selections, five first team)? eh, i am not as sure.



>
>I already addressed his prime being short. what you are not
>addressing is that his accomplishments in his prime together
>with his continued production after the decline in his
>physical prime due to injury merit HOF induction by any
>historical measure.

like i said, he will get in. i don't doubt it. same with bosh, cwebb, reggie miller and other guys i wouldn't vote for personally.