WHY ARE YOU YELLING?

I don't see why the HOF is less meaningful than a uniform patch, but yeah, sure, let's do that too.

I just wonder how Chass is going to write articles now.

And even though I risk the wrath of BBTF, give Chass credit - he was one of the only sportswriters writing about labor relations issues in the early days. Yes, it may be hard to believe, but he was a progressive at that point and on that topic.

Chass was, in the 1970s, a first rate writer particularly on labor relationsh and well deserved the praise he receives for that work. But forty years later, he has become a parody with his not-a-blog writing full of cheap shots like the one calling Stan Musial a racist and determining Mike Piazza is a steroid user due to backne.

Chass' writing in the seventies and eighties was also decidedly pro player, to the point that there was a running joke that his articles about labor negotiations were actually press releases written by the Players' Association. I'm not saying that Chass was not knowledgeable about labor/management issues--he certainly was--but he was hardly an objective reporter on the issue.

Writers in the 60's, 70's and 80's were not pro-player. Most writers that I know harbor some resentment regarding their subjects, viewing them as unededucated lunks who are underserving of the money that they receive. But, they would cozy up to make what they can off these players.

In the 70's they were more like Dick Young, who said (per Baseball Library and other sources):

Miller was a "Svengali" and accused him of mesmerizing the players. "Ball players," wrote Young, "are no match for him. He runs them through a high-pressure spray the way an auto goes through a car wash, and that's how they come out, brainwashed. With few exceptions, they follow him blindly, like Zombies."

It doesn't matter whether "writers" were pro-player, Chass certainly was. There were also some writers who were sympathetic to player causes--I wouldn't call them pro-player, but I don't think they were pro-owner either--and that would include prestigious writers like Gammons and Leonard Koppett.

Early in his career, Young was definitely pro-player. He didn't really change to pro-owner until the seventies.

Bruce, does the HOF have a procedure in place for declining the honor?

TDA, to the best of my knowledge, there is no procedure for someone who is declining election/induction to the Hall of Fame. The honoree can certainly refuse to attend the ceremony, or demand that no one speak on his behalf, and I believe that wish would be granted. But the Hall of Fame would still have a ceremony and still create a plaque that would honor the person. It would be a little awkward, but there is no stipulation that says an honoree has to agree with his election/induction in order for it to take place.

My prediction? Miller will be elected to the Hall of Fame sometime in the next decade.

Bruce, thanks!