HHOF -The Committee

[kaiser matias]

Filling it primarily with media members would be even worse than the status quo. The thought of Bruce Garrioch or Damien Cox on the board is nauseating.

I do agree that the committee should be larger, but the current proportional representation of players, coaches, management and media seems about right.

I totally agree. The thought of the media being in charge of the HHOF is a terrible idea. I would find it hard for them to properly understand historical players, and then there are more issues of not nominating candidates for whatever reason. I just wouldn't feel comfortable if the media was allowed to control the HHOF as well as the awards.

 

[vadim sharifijanov]

if one were to expand the committee, more european countries would need a member. who would they be?

you'd have to think the russian would be fetisov or larionov.

there is already a swede, but i would want a player or coach who knows the swedish leagues well, maybe hakan loob or kent forsberg.

no idea who the finn would be, you wouldn't go with the obvious choice of jari kurri because he rarely even got the chance to play in the world championships, let alone the finnish leagues. is there a longtime finnish national team coach?

no idea on the czech either. ivan hlinka would have been ideal, RIP. and he goes far back enough to double for the slovakia expert too. i guess stastny serves the double duty now.

then i think if you add any more NHL players, they either have to be no question first ballot hall of famers, or clear non-hall of famers. too much risk of gartners inducting more gartners. after he gets in, i think a guy like brendan shanahan would be a good choice. he seems to really know the game.

writers/journalists? bob mckenzie is one guy that comes to mind as realistic, not overly emotional, and not a homer.

and i think more longtime ex-refs. they know the game, know the players, they hear what goes on on the benches, they see better than we do who it is that really takes charge when it needs to be taken, and presumably they see all the teams.

 

[SidGenoMario]

The voting panel knows less about hockey history than the average poster on this board. The only method they have of judging players is by looking at 500+ goal scorers and 1100+ point players. They've clearly never heard of judging players based on how they finished against their peers. v_V

 

[MS]

The problem is that with a group this small filled with many like-minded individuals the likelihood of groupthink and massiver errors as a result is enormous.

We have reports this year that one of the reasons Ciccarelli got in was because of a passionate defense by Scotty Bowman, who just happens to be his ex-coach and is more than a little bit biased.

If in that little room, Bowman can sway several members with his argument, all of a sudden his bias creates a HHOF that shouldn't be.

Sucks to be Howe or whoever and not have your ex-coach on the selection committee.

On the other hand, you have situations like Sinden vs. Oates and Quinn vs. Bure where there exists a large degree of animosity between an influential selection committee member and guy who is in HHOF contention.

__________

Two things need to happen :

1) the voting pool needs to be larger. 18 people is simply not enough. Getting 75% of the votes from a 50-man panel is a hell of a lot more representative than getting 75% from an 18-man panel.

2) there needs to be some bloody accountability. In this day and age, the fact that the public (who the HHOF is supposed to be for) don't get any information about the voting process is just absurd. Frankly, it's a joke.

Same as in baseball, there should be a ballot and every member's ballot should be released for public consumption.

 

[begbeee]

And what if comittee would made from members?
Every (living) member of HHOF with one vote.

 

[Canadiens1958]

Scotty Bowman

The problem is that with a group this small filled with many like-minded individuals the likelihood of groupthink and massiver errors as a result is enormous.

We have reports this year that one of the reasons Ciccarelli got in was because of a passionate defense by Scotty Bowman, who just happens to be his ex-coach and is more than a little bit biased.

If in that little room, Bowman can sway several members with his argument, all of a sudden his bias creates a HHOF that shouldn't be.

Sucks to be Howe or whoever and not have your ex-coach on the selection committee.

On the other hand, you have situations like Sinden vs. Oates and Quinn vs. Bure where there exists a large degree of animosity between an influential selection committee member and guy who is in HHOF contention.

__________

Two things need to happen :

1) the voting pool needs to be larger. 18 people is simply not enough. Getting 75% of the votes from a 50-man panel is a hell of a lot more representative than getting 75% from an 18-man panel.

2) there needs to be some bloody accountability. In this day and age, the fact that the public (who the HHOF is supposed to be for) don't get any information about the voting process is just absurd. Frankly, it's a joke.

Same as in baseball, there should be a ballot and every member's ballot should be released for public consumption.

Scotty Bowman did coach Mark Howe in Detroit, 15-20 games. He also was in Buffalo during the Phil Housley, Tom Barrasso, Dave Andreychuk era. Seriously doubt that your allegation of bias would pass given who was not voted in.

Finding another 32 qualified people who would want the responsibility without significant compensation is a challenge. You would get the media types who would use the process for self promotion and as a soapbox but frankly do you want an Al Strachan or a Mike Milbury involved in the process?

 

[Chili]

I notice that there is no ex official on that commitee.

A longtime ref or linesman could probably come up with some interesting input on players.

 

[RabbinsDuck]

I notice that there is no ex official on that commitee.

A longtime ref or linesman could probably come up with some interesting input on players.

Really like that idea -- love reading accounts of players from refs and ex-refs.

Would also love to be detailed a bit more on the proceedings - what players received what votes (doesn't baseball do this?). Same thing with the Conn Smythe and Pearson - drives me nuts not to see the voting results.

 

[Mayor Bee]

Filling it primarily with media members would be even worse than the status quo. The thought of Bruce Garrioch or Damien Cox on the board is nauseating.

I do agree that the committee should be larger, but the current proportional representation of players, coaches, management and media seems about right.

I can't think of much of anything that would be worse than the status quo. I also don't think that the younger media members would automatically defer to what Garrioch or Cox has to say either.

I totally agree. The thought of the media being in charge of the HHOF is a terrible idea. I would find it hard for them to properly understand historical players, and then there are more issues of not nominating candidates for whatever reason. I just wouldn't feel comfortable if the media was allowed to control the HHOF as well as the awards.

How many historical players are left to seriously assess and induct? I'm of the opinion that if a player was active up through about 1960 and still isn't in, move on already. I strongly doubt that there is a very deserving older player that has been inexplicably excluded; a hockey version of George Davis, if you will. (George Davis was a great baseball player around the turn of the century who was never really brought up for induction; Bill James brought up his case in his 1994 book "The Politics of Glory", and Davis was justifiably inducted four years later).

What putting a large media-based committee in charge would do is remove a lot of the inherent biases that are present in a small narrowly-focused committee. It's not like we'd be talking about Wayne Gretzky being excluded or not even being brought up for consideration, but it would be a lot tougher to get 32 of 40 committee members to agree that Clark Gillies or Bernie Federko meets a HOF standard.

 

[seventieslord]

How many historical players are left to seriously assess and induct? I'm of the opinion that if a player was active up through about 1960 and still isn't in, move on already. I strongly doubt that there is a very deserving older player that has been inexplicably excluded; a hockey version of George Davis, if you will. (George Davis was a great baseball player around the turn of the century who was never really brought up for induction; Bill James brought up his case in his 1994 book "The Politics of Glory", and Davis was justifiably inducted four years later).

I can think of a few of those. Based on the standards for players established at that time, Herb Jordan, Bernie Morris and Eddie Oatman would be worthy candidates.

 

[Canadiens1958]

Far From

I can think of a few of those. Based on the standards for players established at that time, Herb Jordan, Bernie Morris and Eddie Oatman would be worthy candidates.

The gap between George Davis and all - time players based on unadjusted raw numbers was very close. Davis was also a regular at three positions - SS/3B/CF

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Davis_(shortstop)

http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/d/davisge01.shtml

Not true for the candidates you submit who were part of the very good.

 

[seventieslord]

The gap between George Davis and all - time players based on unadjusted raw numbers was very close. Davis was also a regular at three positions - SS/3B/CF

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Davis_(shortstop)

http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/d/davisge01.shtml

Not true for the candidates you submit who were part of the very good.

Mmm hmm. And I bet you've done all kinds of research on them and how they compare to other inducted players.

Once again: The committee is always right!!

 

[Canadiens1958]

Short Answers

I can think of a few of those. Based on the standards for players established at that time, Herb Jordan, Bernie Morris and Eddie Oatman would be worthy candidates.

Short answers.

Herb Jordan. From the group of prolific centers CAHL/ECAHA teams. Not as prolific as Russell Bowie 234 goals in 80 games vs Jordan 129 in 60 games. Jordan missed games during his career and as a 25/26 year old quickly left the NHA

Bernie Morris. One standout year 1916-17, height of WWI.Played with two HHOFers Frank Foyston and Harry Oliver.

Ed Oatman. Support player. Hung around for 17 seasons mainly on weak teams,so 200+ goals have to be placed in a context, <.7GPG regular season, weak playoffs.

 

[seventieslord]

Short answers.

Herb Jordan. From the group of prolific centers CAHL/ECAHA teams. Not as prolific as Russell Bowie 234 goals in 80 games vs Jordan 129 in 60 games. Jordan missed games during his career and as a 25/26 year old quickly left the NHA

Bernie Morris. One standout year 1916-17, height of WWI.Played with two HHOFers Frank Foyston and Harry Oliver.

Ed Oatman. Support player. Hung around for 17 seasons mainly on weak teams,so 200+ goals have to be placed in a context, <.7GPG regular season, weak playoffs.

No, Jordan was not as prolific as Russell Bowie, but Bowie is also not the bar for induction. He's often mentioned as perhaps the most talented pre-NHL player. Jordan was a four-time scoring runner-up in the top league in the world. His career was short but no shorter than Hod Stuart, Frank McGee, Marty Walsh, and some others.

You forgot to mention that Morris was also the hero of the SCF, lighting up Georges Vezina. Morris did not have just one standout year. He was top-2 in the PCHA in goals and assists four times each,and is actually the PCHA's all-time leader in GPG and APG aside from Cyclone Taylor. That he played with Foyston is irrelevant, as he posted much higher goals and assists totals over that time. It's funny that you would mention Harry Oliver as though he had anything to do with Morris' prime.

Oatman posted career GPG and APG averages very similar to Frank Foyston and Mickey macKay:

Name | GP | G | A | Pts | GPG | APG | PPG
oatman | 344 | 206 | 102 | 308 | 0.60 | 0.31 | 0.895
mackay | 394 | 242 | 111 | 353 | 0.61 | 0.28 | 0.896
foyston | 361 | 240 | 81 | 321 | 0.66 | 0.22 | 0.889

Newspaper reports indicate his intangible qualities were stronger than theirs as well. He was not considered a support player, he was a bonafide star in his own right. And he actually played with fewer HHOF players than all the other PCHA stars, who all got to play with eachother year after year.

http://hfboards.com/showpost.php?p=24861606&postcount=145

 

[Canadiens1958]

HHOF Quirks

No, Jordan was not as prolific as Russell Bowie, but Bowie is also not the bar for induction. He's often mentioned as perhaps the most talented pre-NHL player. Jordan was a four-time scoring runner-up in the top league in the world. His career was short but no shorter than Hod Stuart, Frank McGee, Marty Walsh, and some others.

You forgot to mention that Morris was also the hero of the SCF, lighting up Georges Vezina. Morris did not have just one standout year. He was top-2 in the PCHA in goals and assists four times each,and is actually the PCHA's all-time leader in GPG and APG aside from Cyclone Taylor. That he played with Foyston is irrelevant, as he posted much higher goals and assists totals over that time. It's funny that you would mention Harry Oliver as though he had anything to do with Morris' prime.

Oatman posted career GPG and APG averages very similar to Frank Foyston and Mickey macKay:

Name | GP | G | A | Pts | GPG | APG | PPG
oatman | 344 | 206 | 102 | 308 | 0.60 | 0.31 | 0.895
mackay | 394 | 242 | 111 | 353 | 0.61 | 0.28 | 0.896
foyston | 361 | 240 | 81 | 321 | 0.66 | 0.22 | 0.889

Newspaper reports indicate his intangible qualities were stronger than theirs as well. He was not considered a support player, he was a bonafide star in his own right. And he actually played with fewer HHOF players than all the other PCHA stars, who all got to play with eachother year after year.

http://hfboards.com/showpost.php?p=24861606&postcount=145

Herb Jordan. Frank McGee was more prolific as was Marty Walsh,pre NHA. Hod Stuart was a defenseman. The HHOF tends to recognize the early greats whose careers were cut short, rightly or wrongly, plus Jordan simply did not cut it in the NHA. So basically you have zero team success, not as prolific as McGee, Walsh and Bowie with a quick exit from the NHA at an age where he should have been in his prime.

Ed Oatman. Difference maker in his situation was attacking a referee, Mickey Ion in 1920.Given the influence Mickey Ion had in hockey and the HHOF, not an easy hurdle to overcome.

Bernie Morris. 1917 playoffs, WWI, his only worthwhile playoffs. Rest were weak. Harry Oliver was mentioned because he had a bit of a bounce back season playing with Oliver in Calgary.Foyston had a more consistent playoff record, longer career with success in the NHA.

 

[Big Phil]

In the hockey world I have no use for Michael Farber and David Branch. Farber wrote that piece a while back on getting rid of overtime for the playoffs and installing the shootout...........yep, we have a guy on the HHOF committee who wants to take the most exciting thing in sports and remove it in favour of a coin flip.

Okay, there are some smart hockey minds in there. Emrick is a guy most of us respect, Bowman as well, and I don't know a lot of people that would talk bad about Dick Irvin Jr. to name a few. That being said, you'd think Bowman would have been a guy against the induction of Ciccarelli, who knows? I mean he wasn't exactly a big fan of his in Detroit. Once Ciccarelli was gone, Detroit started winning

I just can't wrap my head around this though, who in the world is the guy(s) that are keeping Gilmour out of there? Quinn never coached him, Sinden never had him, Savard didn't, McDonald was a teammate of his and would have first hand knowledge of the guy's contributions to his (McDonalds) only Cup win which probably is a big reason why his popularity was so high after he retired. I don't get it. Gartner was a contemporary of him. Lanny a teammate. Stastny a contemporary. How is he staying out?

 

[seventieslord]

Herb Jordan. Frank McGee was more prolific as was Marty Walsh,pre NHA. Hod Stuart was a defenseman. The HHOF tends to recognize the early greats whose careers were cut short, rightly or wrongly, plus Jordan simply did not cut it in the NHA. So basically you have zero team success, not as prolific as McGee, Walsh and Bowie with a quick exit from the NHA at an age where he should have been in his prime.

Ed Oatman. Difference maker in his situation was attacking a referee, Mickey Ion in 1920.Given the influence Mickey Ion had in hockey and the HHOF, not an easy hurdle to overcome.

Bernie Morris. 1917 playoffs, WWI, his only worthwhile playoffs. Rest were weak. Harry Oliver was mentioned because he had a bit of a bounce back season playing with Oliver in Calgary.Foyston had a more consistent playoff record, longer career with success in the NHA.

Re: Jordan, you're assuming he couldn't cut it in the NHA but his 9 goals in 6 games in the 1910 season suggest otherwise. He was dropped to make way for newsy Lalonde, which I'm sure you'll agree was nothing to be ashamed of. He was finished very young but I haven't read any evidence that it was because he "couldn't cut it", and it still doesn't make him any different from a number of HHOF stars.

McGee may or may not have been more prolific but McGee is a highly revered early superstar and is not the benchmark for induction. Besides, when you analyze their careers during the four-year period that McGee played top-level hockey, it's quite debatable who was more prolific.

In 1903, McGee finished 2nd in the CAHL, one point ahead of Jordan, both comfortably behind Bowie.

In 1904, McGee only played 4 games but his per-game average would have given him 19-20 points if he played 6 games like Jordan. Jordan had 25 points. If he had played 8 games like Bowie did, he projected to 33 points, 3 more than Bowie.

In 1905, Ottawa moved to the much less competitive FAHL. McGee tied with Jack Marshall to lead the circuit with 17 points. Jordan was over in the much better CAHL, finishing 3rd behind Bowie and Joe Power.

1906 is the only season in which you could say McGee was clearly more prolific. He finished with 27 points, 3rd in the ECAHA. Jordan was 9th with 19.

Jordan actually had more points during this time and did not take a one-year vacation in an easier league so I wonder why you would say he was not as prolific as McGee. Then of course, after these four seasons I have gone over, Jordan had three more very productive seasons (3rd per game, 4th, 2nd in the EC(A)HA in 1907, 1908, 1909). McGee's regular season career doesn't touch his.

I'll accept your answer about Oatman to say "OK, sure, he might have been a good enough player, but other factors kept him out" - good enough for me.

Re: Morris. 13 points in 18 other playoff games doesn't exactly qualify as "weak". As for 1917, you'll need to show us how WW1 made this less impressive. Who did he avoid playing in the playoffs? Whose absence or presence made it too easy on him to pot all those goals? Harry Oliver was in his prime in 1924, and Morris was well past his. Bounceback year or not, that was not among Morris' best seven seasons. Foyston does have an excellent playoff record, no disputing that.

 

[Canadiens1958]

Keeping it Simple

Re: Jordan, you're assuming he couldn't cut it in the NHA but his 9 goals in 6 games in the 1910 season suggest otherwise. He was dropped to make way for newsy Lalonde, which I'm sure you'll agree was nothing to be ashamed of. He was finished very young but I haven't read any evidence that it was because he "couldn't cut it", and it still doesn't make him any different from a number of HHOF stars.

McGee may or may not have been more prolific but McGee is a highly revered early superstar and is not the benchmark for induction. Besides, when you analyze their careers during the four-year period that McGee played top-level hockey, it's quite debatable who was more prolific.

In 1903, McGee finished 2nd in the CAHL, one point ahead of Jordan, both comfortably behind Bowie.

In 1904, McGee only played 4 games but his per-game average would have given him 19-20 points if he played 6 games like Jordan. Jordan had 25 points. If he had played 8 games like Bowie did, he projected to 33 points, 3 more than Bowie.

In 1905, Ottawa moved to the much less competitive FAHL. McGee tied with Jack Marshall to lead the circuit with 17 points. Jordan was over in the much better CAHL, finishing 3rd behind Bowie and Joe Power.

1906 is the only season in which you could say McGee was clearly more prolific. He finished with 27 points, 3rd in the ECAHA. Jordan was 9th with 19.

Jordan actually had more points during this time and did not take a one-year vacation in an easier league so I wonder why you would say he was not as prolific as McGee. Then of course, after these four seasons I have gone over, Jordan had three more very productive seasons (3rd per game, 4th, 2nd in the EC(A)HA in 1907, 1908, 1909). McGee's regular season career doesn't touch his.

I'll accept your answer about Oatman to say "OK, sure, he might have been a good enough player, but other factors kept him out" - good enough for me.

Re: Morris. 13 points in 18 other playoff games doesn't exactly qualify as "weak". As for 1917, you'll need to show us how WW1 made this less impressive. Who did he avoid playing in the playoffs? Whose absence or presence made it too easy on him to pot all those goals? Harry Oliver was in his prime in 1924, and Morris was well past his. Bounceback year or not, that was not among Morris' best seven seasons. Foyston does have an excellent playoff record, no disputing that.

Herb Jordan played one game the following season after being replaced by Newsy Lalonde. Fact remains no other team acquired him after he was replaced by Lalonde and the gap between Lalonde and the bottom players in the league was such that if Jordan had the skills he should have been able to replace one of them. The other alternatives would be injury - no report of same, or that he was one of the many "gentlemanly" players who had other career and revenue opportunities. Possible since he dropped out of the hockey scene rather quickly. If I have the time in the next few days will check the old Montreal "Lovell" annuals.

McGee was an anomaly - handicap, so comparables are awkward.

1916-17 season - the NHA alone lost 17 players to the Army. The 228th Battalion iced a team but dropped out when deployed in mid - season, while Toronto also dropped out. The 1916 SC Canadiens lost three players and the PCHA did not let them use Reg Noble who they had acquired when Toronto players were dispersed. The PCHA was impacted more the following season when their players enlisted.

The PCHA during the 1916-17 season was two -tiered Seattle 16 -8, Vancouver 14-9, Portland 9 - 15, Spokane 8 - 15. True to form they continued their practice of dropping "meaningless" end of season games. Usually the PCHA had a more balanced league standing.Spokane was dropped after the season - combination of bad attendance with little hope of a turnaround given that the league was losing players to the Army.

Bernie Morris during the 1916-17 season had the benefit of playing on a stacked team, in the SC finals they played a defending champion minus three playres from the 1916 team and not allowed to use Reg Noble a future HHOFer.

So Bernie Morris during his three best seasons in the PCHA: 1915-16, expansion year - league went from 3-4 teams,1916-17, 1917-18 WWI influenced years. He missed the complete 1919-20 regular season, post WWI.

A bit short of HHOF credentials.

 

[seventieslord]

Herb Jordan played one game the following season after being replaced by Newsy Lalonde. Fact remains no other team acquired him after he was replaced by Lalonde and the gap between Lalonde and the bottom players in the league was such that if Jordan had the skills he should have been able to replace one of them. The other alternatives would be injury - no report of same, or that he was one of the many "gentlemanly" players who had other career and revenue opportunities. Possible since he dropped out of the hockey scene rather quickly. If I have the time in the next few days will check the old Montreal "Lowell" annuals.

He is mentioned in an article as being Renfrew's secretary in 1911:

http://news.google.com/newspapers?i...FAAAAIBAJ&pg=6450,975220&dq=herb-jordan&hl=en

Based on this mention in 1910, he did not appear to be losing any effectiveness:

http://news.google.com/newspapers?i...AAAAIBAJ&pg=5810,1177741&dq=herb-jordan&hl=en

Surely not conclusive, but it appears that at this point there is stronger evidence that he just left hockey to pursue other endeavors, as opposed to "not cutting it".

McGee was an anomaly - handicap, so comparables are awkward.

Maybe, but he doesn't get any bonus points for it either. Jordan was more prolific during the same period and had three superb seasons afterwards.

1916-17 season - the NHA alone lost 17 players to the Army. The 228th Battalion iced a team but dropped out when deployed in mid - season, while Toronto also dropped out. The 1916 SC Canadiens lost three players and the PCHA did not let them use Reg Noble who they had acquired when Toronto players were dispersed. The PCHA was impacted more the following season when their players enlisted.

The PCHA during the 1916-17 season was two -tiered Seattle 16 -8, Vancouver 14-9, Portland 9 - 15, Spokane 8 - 15. True to form they continued their practice of dropping "meaningless" end of season games. Usually the PCHA had a more balanced league standing.Spokane was dropped after the season - combination of bad attendance with little hope of a turnaround given that the league was losing players to the Army.

Bernie Morris during the 1916-17 season had the benefit of playing on a stacked team, in the SC finals they played a defending champion minus three playres from the 1916 team and not allowed to use Reg Noble a future HHOFer.

So Bernie Morris during his three best seasons in the PCHA: 1915-16, expansion year - league went from 3-4 teams,1916-17, 1917-18 WWI influenced years. He missed the complete 1919-20 regular season, post WWI.

A bit short of HHOF credentials.

So essentially they were missing Reg Noble. Noble is one of my favourites, but he was not a star at that point.

Morris' playoff history is better than a number of HHOFers from the era, and as I mentioned, he was the second-most prolific PCHA scorer per-game. That is simply unprecedented. There is no other generation of players in history where the second-best offensive player is out of the hall, regardless of what negatives are associated with them.

 

[Canadiens1958]

Bernie Morris

He is mentioned in an article as being Renfrew's secretary in 1911:

http://news.google.com/newspapers?i...FAAAAIBAJ&pg=6450,975220&dq=herb-jordan&hl=en

Based on this mention in 1910, he did not appear to be losing any effectiveness:

http://news.google.com/newspapers?i...AAAAIBAJ&pg=5810,1177741&dq=herb-jordan&hl=en

Surely not conclusive, but it appears that at this point there is stronger evidence that he just left hockey to pursue other endeavors, as opposed to "not cutting it".



Maybe, but he doesn't get any bonus points for it either. Jordan was more prolific during the same period and had three superb seasons afterwards.



So essentially they were missing Reg Noble. Noble is one of my favourites, but he was not a star at that point.

Morris' playoff history is better than a number of HHOFers from the era, and as I mentioned, he was the second-most prolific PCHA scorer per-game. That is simply unprecedented. There is no other generation of players in history where the second-best offensive player is out of the hall, regardless of what negatives are associated with them.

Suspect that we have our answer for Bernie Morris:

http://www.legendsofhockey.net/LegendsOfHockey/jsp/SearchPlayer.jsp?player=13773

The draft evasion allegations. Even if Bernie Morris was eventually cleared, given the HHOF influence of Stafford Smythe, Red Dutton, Clarence Campbell and others with a strong patriotic military leaning, evidenced by the induction Alan Davidson, virtually no chance.

Herb Jordan. Not cutting it or knowing one's limitations or lacking the inclination, question of perspective or semantics.You still have to bridge the gap between interesting and compelling. Do not see how this may be done.

 

[Nalyd Psycho]

Suspect that we have our answer for Bernie Morris:

http://www.legendsofhockey.net/LegendsOfHockey/jsp/SearchPlayer.jsp?player=13773

The draft evasion allegations. Even if Bernie Morris was eventually cleared, given the HHOF influence of Stafford Smythe, Red Dutton, Clarence Campbell and others with a strong patriotic military leaning, evidenced by the induction Alan Davidson, virtually no chance.

It is accepted that that is the most likely reason. But, seeing as he was cleared, it seems silly to hold allegations against him. That's witch hunt logic.

 

[Canadiens1958]

Silly

It is accepted that that is the most likely reason. But, seeing as he was cleared, it seems silly to hold allegations against him. That's witch hunt logic.

The history of hockey and the NHL redefines silly, petty amongst other negative qualities.

Be it the delayed induction of Busher Jackson, the denial of an NHL career to Stan Smrke:

http://www.hockey-reference.com/players/s/smrkest01.html

or other injustices.

 

[seventieslord]

Suspect that we have our answer for Bernie Morris:

http://www.legendsofhockey.net/LegendsOfHockey/jsp/SearchPlayer.jsp?player=13773

The draft evasion allegations. Even if Bernie Morris was eventually cleared, given the HHOF influence of Stafford Smythe, Red Dutton, Clarence Campbell and others with a strong patriotic military leaning, evidenced by the induction Alan Davidson, virtually no chance.

Good enough for me. Morris was a good enough player but was kept out for petty reasons and it's far too late to get in now.

Herb Jordan. Not cutting it or knowing one's limitations or lacking the inclination, question of perspective or semantics.You still have to bridge the gap between interesting and compelling. Do not see how this may be done.

It may not be. Regardless of the reason, his career was not abnormally short. The numbers say he was arguably the 3rd-most dominant scorer of his generation (players born within 4 years of him). A case should be made to keep him out, not get him in.

The history of hockey and the NHL redefines silly, petty amongst other negative qualities.

Be it the delayed induction of Busher Jackson, the denial of an NHL career to Stan Smrke:

http://www.hockey-reference.com/players/s/smrkest01.html

or other injustices.

Don't forget history's portrayal of Eddie Livingstone as a petty and annoying troublemaker.

 

[Canadiens1958]

Theory and Reality

Good enough for me. Morris was a good enough player but was kept out for petty reasons and it's far too late to get in now.



It may not be. Regardless of the reason, his career was not abnormally short. The numbers say he was arguably the 3rd-most dominant scorer of his generation (players born within 4 years of him). A case should be made to keep him out, not get him in.



Don't forget history's portrayal of Eddie Livingstone as a petty and annoying troublemaker.

The best approach would be making a case to get someone in, especially after a period that surpasses five seasons after eligibility.Find something unique outside the usual positives or distinctions.

The way hockey history has portrayed non-players or non-referees has rarely been accurate.

 

[Hardyvan123]

Gartner on the committee? No wonder they love compilers so much

Exactly

I wish hockey would at least publish the voting results like baseball does.

I heard Jim Gregory on the radio a couple of days ago saying that it would be unfair to name guys that where considered but didn't make it into the Hall.

What a load of Bull is what I say to that, guys must have a pretty decent idea on wether they might make the hall or not. Are we really afraid someone's feelings might get hurt and thus keep all proceddings a secret?

One can only hope that the committee sets some standards and becomes accountable to the public, and hockey fans for their decisions.