Baseball for the Thinking Fan

Login | Register | Feedback

You are here > Home > Baseball Newsstand > Discussion
Baseball Primer Newsblog
— The Best News Links from the Baseball Newsstand

Friday, November 20, 2020

Why Curt Schilling Has No Place In Cooperstown

For better or worse, the positioning of the Hall of Fame as purely about on-field merit is part of what makes it meaningful. The mythologies of all American sports are premised on the idea that performance on the field is ultimately the great equalizer, no matter your identity.

But it’s both ludicrous and irresponsible to suggest that Schilling’s exclusion would somehow make the Hall of Fame less legitimate, or damage its legacy. Ryan Fagan can make himself feel better by turning and looking away, but it doesn’t change the fact that Schilling will give his speech all the same, and he will forever be on a literal pedestal among players whose very humanity he would throw dirt on.

What makes this cowardice, apparently shared by the majority of the voting BBWAA, particularly gross is that real, tangible harm is caused by the lies, abuse, and invective that Schilling willingly stands for. Words matter. Documented hate crimes are at a modern-day high. People are dying thanks to the violence incited by Schilling and his allies. For the writers to act as if the imagined sanctity of a museum is somehow more important than the damage done to real, human lives is not only callous and cruel, but an active endorsement of the numerous -isms and phobias Schilling promotes.

RoyalsRetro (AG#1F) Posted: November 20, 2020 at 02:20 PM | 219 comment(s) Login to Bookmark
  Tags: curt schilling, hall of fame

Reader Comments and Retorts

Go to end of page

Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.

Page 3 of 3 pages  < 1 2 3
   201. Tony S Posted: November 27, 2020 at 09:03 AM (#5991300)
I wouldn't want Curt Schilling as a dinner guest.

I wouldn't want Curt Schilling as a business partner.

I wouldn't want Curt Schilling marrying into my family.

If Curt Schilling runs for public office, I'll gladly contribute to his opponent.

But Curt Schilling was a great pitcher, and fully belongs in the Baseball Hall Of Fame.
   202. SoSH U at work Posted: November 27, 2020 at 09:11 AM (#5991302)
Didn’t Schilling wear a shirt advocating for the hanging of journalists? Where does that sit on the “promotion of free speech” scale?

Didn’t he also write/say a bunch of anti-trans stuff when one of his co-workers was a trans woman who happens to be a BBWAA member, and then basically say “I’m sorry if you were offended” when called out on it?

Not sure if these things were mentioned in the article, but as I said, if I were a BBWAA member I could see not voting for Schilling based on the above. The stuff that’s merely politics shouldn’t keep him out.'

Pretty much. I don't think it should be enough to keep him out (and, it won't be, as he's likely to go in this year), but it's not accurate to describe his issues with the voters as based on his "politics", when it's based on him intentionally acting like a dick.

As mentioned previously, Smoltz is probably more conservative than Schillling, but that wasn't held against him when he was up for the vote. Hell, he once compared gay marriage to bestiality in a slippery slope kind of way, though if that's still his opinoin, he's wisely kept that to himself in recent years.
   203. Howie Menckel Posted: November 27, 2020 at 12:49 PM (#5991316)
Didn’t Schilling wear a shirt advocating for the hanging of journalists?

Schilling tweeted his support for a crude, sarcastic, offensive tweet that read "Rope. Tree. Journalist. Some assembly required."

a) I'm fairly sure he doesn't literally advocate for the hanging of journalists.

b) if retweeting a crude, sarcastic, offensive tweet is grounds for disqualification, than surely it would apply to, for example, any athlete who ever RT'd a tweet about hoping that particular public figures that offend them test positive for COVID-19. now we're winnowing the field!

c) not voting for a player simply because the writer is offended that his own particular profession was treated so crudely strikes me as the epitome of narcissism. HOF selections are not about the writers (and his likely election this year will confirm how many BBWAA members - plenty of whom no doubt can't stand Schilling - demonstrates that this is generally recognized in the business).

as with Jack Morris in a different way, once these guys are enshrined, we are almost completely done talking about them anymore.
   204. JJ1986 Posted: November 27, 2020 at 01:08 PM (#5991319)
That's not what 'sarcastic' means.
   205. The Yankee Clapper Posted: November 27, 2020 at 01:45 PM (#5991321)
Didn’t Schilling wear a shirt advocating for the hanging of journalists?
That Schilling’s critics continue to describe the incident this way is quite telling, and misleading. As noted in #203, Schilling retweeted a crude "Rope. Tree. Journalist. Some assembly required“ joke. Hard to see how that is more offensive than the dozens of Lawyer Jokes along the lines of “Q: What do you call 5,000 lawyers at the bottom of the sea? A: A good start.” The main difference seems to be that lawyers aren’t as thin-skinned as journalists, but those attempting to characterize Schilling’s conduct as advocating violence or making an actual threat are either poorly informed, or deliberately mischaracterizing the situation. No one could be arrested for Schilling’s actions, notwithstanding the efforts of the Woke Joke Police.
   206. . Posted: November 27, 2020 at 01:52 PM (#5991323)
The leftist technique of morphing various things and people into Sacred Cows, off limits to any commentary beyond the solemnly positive and "serious,"
is very reminiscent of the way religions handle "blasphemy." That the enterprise would somehow include journalists just further demonstrates the underlying silliness.
   207. rr: cosmopolitan elite Posted: November 27, 2020 at 02:18 PM (#5991327)
The main difference seems to be that lawyers aren’t as thin-skinned as journalists,

Good example of your ignorance, your tone-deafness, your personal biases (as a lawyer) and your deep emotional need to defend anyone on the Right.

1. There is a racial and sociohistorical component to hanging/lynching references that the old lawyer joke does not have. Some folks in Q, which Schilling has promoted, refer to the "Day of the Rope." Feel free to Google. The shirt was apparently designed by a guy in Tennessee and has been monetized pretty successfully--was being sold on amazon and at Wal-Mart until they pulled it in 2017. You can also probably get the lawyer joke on a shirt, but I don't think it went viral during the Trump campaign and in the context of the Trump campaign. Schilling used his platform to knowingly amplify it.
2. The rope/tree thing occurred in an historical moment in which the POTUS Tweets more or less daily about "Fake News" and there are any number of on-line videos showing Trump supporters angrily confronting journalists using the "Fake News" line.

So, it's not the same thing at all.

Again, SoSH's point is the key one, and Hombre's: Schilling is not a regular Righty backing the Pres. He is a smarter, very public, monetized version of Aubrey Huff. But Schilling should still be in the HOF and likely will be this year.
   208. Never Give an Inge (Dave) Posted: November 27, 2020 at 02:37 PM (#5991329)
Like I said, I’d vote for him. But I can understand why a journalist wouldn’t. I don’t think there should be a political test for HOF induction but if you say some of the things Schilling has said, you can’t be shocked when you lose a few votes over it. He made it personal, not political.
   209. Srul Itza At Home Posted: November 27, 2020 at 02:50 PM (#5991331)
No, his free speech rights would absolutely be compromised if an organized punishment campaign formed in order to keep him out of Cooperstown in revenge for exercising said rights

So what you are saying is that the first amendment rights of the people attacking Curt Schilling should be curtailed, so that Curt's rights are protected.
   210. AuntBea odeurs de parfum de distance sociale Posted: November 27, 2020 at 02:55 PM (#5991334)
Also, Trump was repeatedly using the Stalinist "Enemy of the People" to describe journalists at the time.
   211. rr: cosmopolitan elite Posted: November 27, 2020 at 02:55 PM (#5991335)

Good post.
   212. baxter Posted: November 27, 2020 at 03:23 PM (#5991336)
209 Exactly.

Who would one expect to do the curtailing, the government?

Why is Schilling's right to express himself entitled to protection from the government from consequences imposed by private entities. Why are those entities' rights to freedom of expression less entitled to deference than Shilling's? You don't like what's happening to Schilling? Organize a Schilling for HOF committee (assuming you have nothing better to do with your time, like say, file your nails or take a nap).

Schilling has a larger platform because at one point in his life he was quite skillful (indeed hall of fame worthy) at launching a wrapped piece of cork across a dish. So, people should listen to his ideas on, say, politics, because of that? He's free to yap all he wants. Others (non-governmental entities) are also free to react, including boycotting him and any products he pitches.

On the other hand, maybe one wants to be educated by Mr. Schilling and Mr. Huff.

   213. base ball chick Posted: November 27, 2020 at 03:28 PM (#5991337)
it is silly that attorneys, who should know better fer chrissakes, are talking about "freedom of speech"

freedom of speech protects you from the gummint. it is not that you can say anything to anyone and your words have no consequences for you besides you won't be arrested

like i always explain, won't be no fbi coming to drag you to prison if you tell your wife that not only does her ass look fat in that dress, but she looks like she got a baby bump too - and she has had all that stuff taken out. this does not mean that your wife is arresting you, but it does mean you ain't gettin none tonight or any other night until you lick her, uh, feet. nobody denied you the right of free speech, but you sure be gettin ads about - hey, do you need a new brain?

you can tell your coworkers/boss that you don't get why folks got so upset about hitler seeing as how everyone looked so nice in those uniforms and his troops manufactured top notch ovens and soundproof trains. but don't be real too shocked if your coworkers complain to HR and your boss tells HER boss that you aren't making the company look good and you find security to escort you out the next day. ain't nobody arresting you, but you made your own problems by insulting other people who don't want to be around you no mo

schilling crossed the line - WAY crossed the line. he knows it and it is what he likes best about himself. but he wants to have a world where he says whatever he wants and the people he hurts/insults cower in terrified silence - and it is not like that. he knows it but he is, to use the rightys word, a snowflake

that said - he is, unlike andy pettitte, a no doubt about HOFer and should be elected

   214. "bothsidesism" word 57i66135 Posted: November 27, 2020 at 04:33 PM (#5991348)
via wiki:
The paradox of tolerance states that if a society is tolerant without limit, its ability to be tolerant is eventually seized or destroyed by the intolerant. Karl Popper described it as the seemingly paradoxical idea that "In order to maintain a tolerant society, the society must be intolerant of intolerance."
Less well known [than other paradoxes Popper discusses] is the paradox of tolerance: Unlimited tolerance must lead to the disappearance of tolerance. If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them.—In this formulation, I do not imply, for instance, that we should always suppress the utterance of intolerant philosophies; as long as we can counter them by rational argument and keep them in check by public opinion, suppression would certainly be most unwise. But we should claim the right to suppress them if necessary even by force; for it may easily turn out that they are not prepared to meet us on the level of rational argument, but begin by denouncing all argument; they may forbid their followers to listen to rational argument, because it is deceptive, and teach them to answer arguments by the use of their fists or pistols. We should therefore claim, in the name of tolerance, the right not to tolerate the intolerant.

   215. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: November 27, 2020 at 05:31 PM (#5991349)
Robin and Lisa (and others), you should come over to Discord in your spare time. They even let you post pictures that you don't need to click on a link to see!
   216. Mefisto Posted: November 27, 2020 at 06:18 PM (#5991352)
Sure, but the cost of that is that folks as bad as Schilling #### the thread.
   217. MY PAIN IS NOT A HOLIDAY (CoB). Posted: November 27, 2020 at 08:09 PM (#5991358)
You mean the people in *this* thread, right?
   218. Mefisto Posted: November 27, 2020 at 08:47 PM (#5991364)
Yep. Among others.
   219. Zonk Can Sell Culture Posted: November 28, 2020 at 10:45 AM (#5991388)
These are very difficult times for people who like to loudly express their inability to work and play well with others...but ironically, a golden age for people who demand safe spaces from any repercussions of their loud expressions of an inability to work and play well with others.
Page 3 of 3 pages  < 1 2 3

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.



<< Back to main

BBTF Partner

Dynasty League Baseball

Support BBTF


Thanks to
for his generous support.

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Hot Topics

NewsblogCollege baseball pitcher Sang Ho Baek dies after complications from Tommy John surgery
(19 - 1:17am, Jun 22)
Last: Tulo's Fishy Mullet (mrams)

NewsblogSo no one told you OMNICHATTER! was going to be this way, for June 21, 2021
(27 - 12:26am, Jun 22)
Last: Howie Menckel

Sox TherapyAnd Breathe
(28 - 11:34pm, Jun 21)
Last: the Hugh Jorgan returns

NewsblogNBA 2021 Playoffs+ thread
(1856 - 11:03pm, Jun 21)
Last: Dandy Little Glove Man

NewsblogOT Soccer Thread - In Which Euro 2020 Is Played in 2021
(248 - 10:51pm, Jun 21)
Last: AuntBea odeurs de parfum de distance sociale

NewsblogBaseball Reference Adds Negro Leagues Statistics, Rewriting Its Record Book
(162 - 10:32pm, Jun 21)
Last: sunday silence (again)

NewsblogRays call up top prospect Wander Franco
(6 - 9:07pm, Jun 21)
Last: Walt Davis

NewsblogEmpty Stadium Sports Will Be Really Weird
(13254 - 8:48pm, Jun 21)
Last: Never Give an Inge (Dave)

NewsblogThe story of honoring Negro League history and a search for buried treasure
(1 - 8:31pm, Jun 21)
Last: Starring Bradley Scotchman as RMc

NewsblogJuneteenth Weekend OMNICHATTER, for June 18-20, 2021
(137 - 1:08pm, Jun 21)
Last: Edmundo got dem ol' Kozma blues again mama

NewsblogI Am Breaking My Silence About the Baseball Player Who Raped Me
(2 - 7:15am, Jun 21)
Last: Never Give an Inge (Dave)

NewsblogThe Padres Need a First Base Upgrade
(2 - 5:25pm, Jun 20)
Last: Joyful Calculus Instructor

NewsblogOT - Catch-All Pop Culture Extravaganza (June-August 2021)
(3 - 2:46pm, Jun 20)
Last: Ben Broussard Ramjet

NewsblogHow baseball’s response to RFK’s death inspired some players to fight back and sit out
(1 - 8:45am, Jun 20)
Last: willow19

NewsblogFrom the spitball to Spider Tack: A brief history of foreign substance use by pitchers in baseball
(2 - 12:46am, Jun 20)
Last: the Hugh Jorgan returns

Page rendered in 0.3280 seconds
50 querie(s) executed