Cy Young Got How Many Votes?

Seaver: Highest percentage

USA Today showed the highest and lowest baseball Hall of Fame voting percentages this week in its "Snapshots" corner on page one of sports. It blew me away. Voting for the Hall of Fame can be tough, especially now with so many "PED" and "cheating" scandals to wade through. There are certain people, however, who need no thought at all.

Let's look at the top five highest percentages:

1. Tom Seaver (1992) - 98.84%
2. Nolan Ryan (1999) - 98.79%
3. Cal Ripken Jr. (2007) - 98.53%
4. Ty Cobb (1936) - 98.23%
5. George Brett (1999) - 98.19%

All no-doubt Hall of Famers, for sure. But this list (complete list of votes and percentages here) raises so many questions. 

First, why aren't there any receiving 100 percent of the vote? There was really a writer out there with the balls to think Nolan Ryan didn't deserve to be in the Hall? In fact, there were six who didn't include him on their list.

Some people didn't vote for Ruth

Why isn't Babe Ruth at the top with 100 percent of the votes? Ruth received 95.1 percent of votes in 1936, the first year of voting, the same as Honus Wagner but less than Ty Cobb. (Both Cobb and Ruth should have gotten 100 percent.) Eleven of the 226 ballots excluded Ruth that year. He must have pissed a few of the writers off at some point because not voting for him just doesn't make sense. Not only were his 714 career home runs more than some franchises at the time, he also hit .342 for a career, in case you forget. And we shouldn't forget his 94-46 pitching record with a 2.28 ERA in 1,221 innings pitched. 

Let's move to the next year, 1937. Only three players were elected that year, Nap Lajoie, Tris Speaker and Denton True "Cy" Young. You know, the guy who holds unbreakable pitching records like career wins (511), innings pitched (7,355) and games started (815). Well, he barely made it. Young is sixth from the bottom on percentage of votes all-time - 76.12 percent. Ryne Sandberg got a better percentage in 2005. Only 153 of 201 voters thought Cy Young should be in the Hall of Fame. And that was an INCREASE from the first vote the previous year when he got less than 50 percent. 

It's amazing to see the voting of players that are, without question, the greatest players in the history of the game. Joe DiMaggio? Only 88 percent. Maybe the almighty Baseball Writers' Association of America had some sort of grudge against these guys like there is today. I don't know, it was 50, 60, 70 years ago. I also don't care. The only thing I know is what they did on the field and the stories that have been told. 

I can only imagine people in another 50 years who are looking back on, what can only be assumed, ridiculous voting percentages coming up for greats like Barry Bonds and Roger Clemens, two of the best players to ever play. If it took Lefty Grove, a 300-game winner, three tries and then only got 76.4 percent, it's not hard to see voters trying to make a point on Clemens.

It's either yes or no when it comes to the Hall of Fame. The philosophy that seems to fit best is "if you even have to think about it, no." (Thank you, Skip Bayless.) It's just a quick yes or no. No thought, no debate. Ted Williams? Yes! Joe DiMaggio? Yes! Cy Young? Yes! Bert Blyleven? Well, I don't know, let me look at his ---- No! Barry Bonds? Yes!

Maybe it's a lost cause to think people will get the voting "right" during the much-debated "Steroid Era." I mean, 20 voters didn't think Ted Williams should be in the Hall of Fame his first year. And that's unacceptable. So is not letting in the greats of the game. 

*I also feel Joe Jackson should be in the Hall of Fame. Despite what the courts may have said and testimony there may have been, he still performed at a high level during that Black Sox World Series and was an all-time great. 

**And yes, Pete Rose should be in, too. 

Jay Cutler in "The Injury and The Backlash"

We get spoiled by NFL players. We see these modern-day gladiators banging their heads into each other week after week. We see them dragging around broken ankles and legs and playing with a club hand. We're so used to seeing players sacrificing their bodies that when someone doesn't play with an injury, we're all taken aback.

The immediate reaction to Jay Cutler and the Bears coaching and medical staff's decision to sit out the second half of the NFC Championship game due to a knee injury cut deep. Cutler's toughness, mentality, desire, effort and body language were all called into question as soon as he didn't re-enter the game. With no specific play highlighted to account for the injury, it was easy for people to jump down Cutler's throat about not finishing the game.

In the NFL, we expect these guys to do whatever it takes to win the game. Seeing Cutler on the exercise bike for about five minutes and seeing him standing on the bum leg on the sidelines, people questioned what Cutler was all about.

Cutler's reputation took a hit

Lovie Smith confirmed Monday Cutler suffered a sprained MCL during the first half. Can we call Cutler's toughness into question now that we know what the injury he suffered? Should everyone have waited for the MRI before getting on their Twitter accounts and calling him out? The answer is no, to both.

Most would agree Cutler is tough. He's got to be playing QB in the NFL, behind that line, which gave up 57 sacks this year. But he's not "Favre-tough" or "Big Ben-tough." People are going to rush to judgement about Cutler because they know guys like Favre and Roethlisberger would still be out there, dragging that leg around, trying to make a play. That's Cutler's only fault. And no one knows, except Jay Cutler, how much pain was in that knee.

Smith also said it was his decision to pull Cutler. "He was hurt, he couldn't go, so we moved on." That sounds like a "Vince Young" to me. (def: The QB gets dinged after playing awful. He "tries" to give it a go but doesn't really want to go back in. The coach says enough is enough, this guy's not helping us today even if he is healthy. Let's put the next guy in, regardless of how awful he might be.) Maybe effectiveness played a role in the decision to sit him.

Which brings us to the Bears' back-up quarterback situation. Has to be worst in the NFL. Todd Collins has a chance to go legend and instead throws four incomplete passes before being pulled for emergency-QB Caleb Hanie. It would seem Cutler on one leg, having a bad day, would be more effective than Collins. Hanie did better than anyone could have hoped and actually made a game of it. Nice job by him, despite a couple ill-advised throws (B.J. Raji).

While watching the game Sunday, I was critical of Cutler, like so many others. I felt if he could stand, he should be out there. Only a broken leg should keep someone out of a game to go to the Super Bowl. But I've been spoiled watching the NFL. I've seen Phil Rivers play two games on a torn ACL and I said "If he can do it, why can't you?"

Each player and each injury is different, however. The backlash on Cutler went over-the-top but I understand why it happened. I won't label him a quitter but he's reputation will need some recovery. But unlike his sprained knee, it will take longer than three to four weeks.

Packers or Bears? Tough Call

Best game of the year

Bears vs. Packers with a Super Bowl trip on the line is a dream match-up for more than just the great people of NFC North country. This is NFL history. The first playoff meeting for these storied franchise since 1941. Only the fourth time they've made the playoffs in the same year. As great as it will be to watch, it's even tougher to pick the winner.

If you pretend to know who's going to win this game, you're just kidding yourself. There's a laundry list of reasons why each team should win or lose. It's setting up for a memorable NFC Championship game. I can't recall a game I've personally been more intrigued to watch.

Why the Bears Will Win:

• Soldier Field. In a match-up this close, the home team will have an edge. While the Packers have spent much of the week saying the field conditions are the "worst in the NFL," the Bears are used to it. Put on the right cleats.
• Bears Defense. Clearly one of the best in the league, again. The ability to pressure with just the four down linemen will cause problems for Aaron Rodgers, who has exploited teams who must blitz all year. Julius Peppers could be MVP of the game. Briggs, Urlacher and Co. will stop the run and put even more pressure on Rodgers to do it himself in cold, windy conditions. The Packers struggled to move the ball on them both time they played this year, once when the Bears had nothing to play for.
• Jay Cutler and Mike Martz. This combo continues to impress with good play-calling and excellent execution. Chicago's screen game, with Matt Forte, will keep the hard-blitzing Packers' defense off balance. A veteran like Martz will be able to scheme on the Dom Capers' defense better than most.
• Special Teams. Devin Hester is the best return man in the history of the game. The Packers are known to give up big plays on special teams. A lot of pressure falls on the Packers' coverage teams.
• They seem to have the Packers' number. Beat them at home on a late field goal and shut them down in the last game of the season before giving up a late touchdown on the road. The Bears' strengths match up well with against the Packers.
• Underdog. No one outside of Chicago and Bears fans think they can win. Vegas has Packers by 3.5. People haven't given the Bears credit all year (I'm guilty). They proved everyone wrong by making the playoffs, winning the division and being in this position. The masses will be against them again with Green Bay and Rodgers playing at such a high level right now. As we continue to see in the NFL, the team people don't give a chance rise up and shoves it in their face.

Will the stellar play continue?

Why the Packers Will Win:

• Aaron Rodgers. No one is playing at a higher level right now. After the Atlanta beat down, people were saying how it was the greatest game ever by a Packer QB. Rodgers is driven by the need to prove he can do it better than Favre, and Packers fans want that just as bad. He dismissed the foolish rap of not being able to win a playoff game with two huge road wins. The accuracy, athleticism, scrambling and composure are putting Rodgers into the top-tier level of NFL quarterbacks. With a Super Bowl win, or even appearance, no one will doubt he belongs in that category.
• Packers Defense. The blitz will be in Cutler's face all game long. The Bears must account for Clay Matthews on every play because he is coming and he is relentless. Cutler was sacked nine times in the two meetings in the regular season. With less time to throw, Cutler will have to avoid Tramon Williams, who single-handedly crushed the Falcons' hopes with two back-breaking interceptions. The Packers were second in the league in points allowed and the Bears were 21st in points scored.

Green Bay must turn Cutler into "Bad Jay"

Wildcards:

• Cutler. Could be due for a stinker. Consistency has always been the issue. He's only got one playoff game under his belt and it was against a sub-.500 team that shouldn't have been there. It's a feast-or-famine situation with Cutler. It wouldn't surprise anyone if he had three picks, or if he throws three touchdowns. I'll need to see it to believe it with him.
• Mike McCarthy. He's been known to come with a dud in big games too many times. His clock management skills have widely ridiculed. His special teams will give up huge plays and his offense and play-calling have already been shut down by the Bears D twice.
• Motivation. I have to think the Bears have more with everyone picking against them and being at home. But the Packers have plenty in their own right. This is the true wildcard to the game. When everyone is going with one team (Packers), I cringe. Never seems to work out that way, i.e. Seahawks v Saints, Patriots v Jets.

I've debated the winner of this game all week. It seems after that breakdown I would be favoring the Bears. Not necessarily but I know they can win this game for those reasons. I've doubted the Bears and thought the Packers were the better team all year. The Bears had an easy road, but if you look at it, the Packers regular season road wasn't much tougher. However, they've proven themselves in the playoffs. The Bears beat the Seahawks. Despite my doubts, the Bears have proved me wrong time and time again. And they will have to do it one more time. I'm going with my head instead of the feeling that's been creeping into my gut this week. Packers 17 Bears 16. Prove me wrong again, Chicago.

AFC Championship prediction: Steelers 20 Jets 13. I really like the Steelers here. Big Ben, the defense and I don't see the Jets beating them twice at Pittsburgh in the same year. 

Weekend Rundown

1. College is great. I loved it. When you're there, you want to stay forever, avoid the real world, and hit the weekend kegger. We all know how great it is. You know what's even better than the college lifestyle? $50 million guaranteed. Andrew Luck decided to return for his senior year at Stanford instead of being the No. 1 pick in April's draft and cashing a check that would set up the rest of his life.

Good "Luck" with that decision......Hey-O!

Don't get me wrong, Luck can do whatever he wants and make his own decisions that are best for him and his family. But I don't want to hear about "finishing his engineering degree." That can easily be done at any time. If the NFL wants to give you millions and millions and go down in history as a number one pick, you grab that opportunity unless you're scared to take on the challenge. 

Maybe Andrew Luck and his family see a bigger picture that I don't. However, if I'm a starting Division I QB, my ultimate goal is to be a Pro Bowl, championship-winning NFL QB. That's my a childhood dream so when the NFL comes knocking, I answer the door. I don't say, "Maybe next year."

Luck can still be a great NFL QB. Maybe he'll get drafted into a better opportunity than he would have this year, but that's as unknown as if he'll stay healthy until next year's draft. Good luck topping this season, especially without Jim Harbaugh.....

2. Never have I seen a coach blow up on the scene like Harbaugh. Listening to the bidding war over him by NFL teams the past week, it would seem like he's already won multiple Super Bowl rings. He's already built up by the media to be the "next great head coach." The 49ers seem like a good choice, Harbaugh is from the Bay area, and the team isn't that bad. They should have won their division this year. The problem becomes finding a QB, and, in the meantime, getting something out of the Smiths (Alex and Troy) next year. 

Based on what his brother John is doing in Baltimore and the Stanford turnaround, Jim Harbaugh seems like he will be a dynamic coach. Joining the NFC West also helps a first-year coach.

3. The media circus that Rex Ryan likes to create is entertaining, if nothing else. This week he took another unwarranted shot at Tom Brady. Ryan, discussing today's matchup with the Colts, talked about how no one is like Peyton Manning, no one studies like him. Then he said, "I know Brady thinks he does but I think there's probably more help from Belichick with Brady than there is with Peyton Manning." Why does Rex bother firing him up? That's been proven not to work. He goes out of his way to take a shot at the league's soon-to-be MVP when it's a long shot the Jets will even be around to meet up with the Patriots again. The NFL can always use more rivalry, coach-on-opponent smack. With Rex around, there won't be any shortage of it.

4. When this blog started a year ago one of the first posts were NFL Playoff predictions. Here are my Wildcard predictions:

Saints over Seahawks - For obvious reasons.

Colts over Jets - The key for the Jets is Mark Sanchez, it always is. He plays a little better on the road but you won't see me picking against Peyton Manning at home in the first round anytime soon. 

Ravens over Chiefs - I like the experience the Ravens are bringing to this game. A lot of pressure on the young Chiefs to make something of this miraculous division title. The Ravens went into New England last year and smacked Brady and Belichick in the Wildcard round so I don't see them getting knocked out here by the Chiefs.

Eagles over Packers - Tough call. I'll take the Eagles at home, who rested up last week. Aaron Rodgers has a QB rating of 107 against the blitz so there are plenty of concerns for the Eagles. Rodgers needs this win badly for his career but the Eagles are the wrong matchup for him to get it. Mike Vick wants a playoff win even more and I see a big game from of him. When Vick is rolling, the Eagles might be the best team in the league.

NFL Season Prediction Recap

If this season should us anything it's that it hard to predict winners in this league. When I set out to make my first-ever preseason projections, I knew it was an uphill battle. I wanted to get some experience at projecting records, that way I could look back and see just how wrong I was. Gain a different perspective looking at the preseason next year. Some people don't want to bother looking in the past at meaningless prediction, but I think lessons can be learned.

Playoff teams correct: 8 of 12. Not too bad. (Green Bay, Atlanta, New Orleans, New England, New York Jets, Pittsburgh, Baltimore and Indianapolis) However, with a closer look, I correctly predicted only one division winner (Indianapolis). I put the NFC South, AFC North and AFC East in the wrong order of top-2 finishers.

Correct records: Only one: New York Jets 11-5. But, as mentioned, I thought they would win the division. I remember looking at Peter King's from 2009. He only got one record exactly correct that year so maybe that's all you can hope for because no one knows more about football than him. (That was sarcasm. Thank you.) Didn't check his this year.

One game off: Giants, Buffalo, Cleveland, Jacksonville, Seattle - Got one MORE win than I thought. Denver, Baltimore and New Orleans got one LESS than I thought.

If you're keeping track at home, that's 9 of 32 teams within one game of actual record.

Close one: Cincinnati- Picking them to go 6-10 was "edgy" at the time. Should have given them even less credit. Finished 4-12.

UNDERESTIMATED: St. Louis- Sam Bradford made me a believer, produced a playoff shot and the Rams made drastic improvements. 7-9 was way better than I thought (2-14). Kansas City- Sold them short five wins. Chicago- The team that proved me wrong time and time again. Thought they would stumble around in the middle of the pack, but that only came three times. I figured for five or six times. Improved my record by four games. Tampa Bay- The biggest underestimation. I planned for another tough year no such thing. Wish they could've made the playoffs. The seven game discrepancy from my preseason picks was the largest difference. Philadelphia- My mistake was thinking Kevin Kolb would be the starter. Should have known you can't keep Mike Vick on the sidelines for long. Oakland- I hoped for six wins and they easily surpassed that by winning all six division games. Getting to eight wins is big for the Raiders and Cable Guy. New England- Playoff team, yes. Complete domination and 14-2, no. Nothing Belichick and Brady are able to accomplish surprises me.

COMPLETE OVER-ESTIMATION: Minnesota- Just a terrible season. Favre had absolutely nothing in the tank and didn't want to be there. Add a few sex scandals, Randy Moss berating a caterer, Chili being shown the door mid-season and the Metrodome collapsing, this is a season to forget. Dallas- I knew Bum's Son had no control but even I was surprised by a 1-7 start with a roster full of Pro Bowlers. San Francisco- Kudos, Singletary. You were able to fool me into thinking you could actually win a few games. The locker room turned on him fast and I should've seen it coming. San Diego- Norval and Phil Rivers lost too many winnable games while management played chicken with two of its best players. Certainly a disappointment. Tennessee- The demise can be attributed to the Fisher/Young relationship, which could have potentially been spotted. Carolina- I wanted to think they could at least compete. Wrong, not this year.

If you want to see all the predictions, they can be found in the September archives. It's an eye-opener looking back, but hopefully next year's will be better.

Who To Vote For?

The 2011 Hall of Fame voting ended when the ball dropped at midnight. With the new players added to this year's ballot, another debate begins about who should be allowed in the halls of Cooperstown. If I have a vote, Rafael Palmeiro is on my ballot.

3020 hits, 569 HR, 1855 RBI

The "Steroid-Era" now lets voters play judge and jury when it comes to some of the greatest baseball players' legacy. Unfortunately, some of the best players won't get in based on a culture Major League baseball provided, and pretty much encouraged.

Mark McGwire, Juan Gonzalez, Jeff Bagwell are all on the ballot and none of them are getting the votes any time soon. Those three, one admitted user, one caught with syringes and one suspected user, don't have the same on-field credentials as Palmeiro, however.

The case against Palmeiro is his failed drug test in 2005 five months after telling Congress, "Let me start by saying this: I have never used steroids. Period." Based on that alone many will feel he doesn't belong in the Hall of Fame. He played the majority of his career in Texas and Baltimore, two organizations that produced many "steroid users," according to reports, admissions and tests. The failed test, which he still defends as a "tainted B12 shot," was in 2005. Does that mean he used steroids his entire career? Perhaps, but there's not proof of that.

The case for his induction, based on what he did on the field, is even stronger. The numbers speak for themselves. One of only four players (Hank Aaron, Willie Mays, Eddie Murray) in history with 500 home runs and 3000 hits. He's tied for sixth all-time in extra base hits (1192). His 1855 RBI is 15th all-time, his 569 home runs is 12th. A .288 career hitter with more walks than strikeouts over 20 seasons and 2831 games. The numbers say first-ballot Hall of Famer.

I'd vote for him. Period.

Are those numbers "inflated" by steroid use? Probably. But the failed test came in his last year not the heart of his career. It didn't come in the 90s because no one was tested at that time. My point on all "steroid users" is this: The league didn't care prior to 2004. Its head was buried in the sand on steroid use. Why are they trying to punish people 10-15 years after the fact? And the only ones getting punished and ostracized are the BEST players. The players who carried the league for 10-20 years during some tough times. Bonds, Clemens, McGwire, Palmeiro.

It's MLB grasping at straws and trying to cover its own backside. The writers and voters feel "cheated" and "lied to," like they cared when home runs were flying out of the park and people were actually interested in the league. These voters feel like if they don't vote for them they're doing people a favor. I'm tired of people talking about "integrity" and "character." This isn't the Morality Baseball League. For my vote, if you were a Hall of Fame player on the field with Hall of Fame numbers, you go into the Hall of Fame. Period.