07-28-2016, 05:45 PM
(07-27-2016, 12:40 PM)grampahol Wrote: I feel the same way myself. I'd much rather celebrate the overall team than put any one player up and above everyone else. I don't know that placing numbers around the stadium to 'honor' specific players accomplishes much of anything honestly other than to leave open doors of resentment with other players who might have been just as deserving, but are never recognized. It's kind of like the HOF.. How many truly great players are routinely snubbed and left out only because the team they played for didn't win the super bowl or world series or whatever? Seems more like a popularity contest than anything else.
It certainly is and always will be a popularity contest. That's a natural byproduct of subjective rationalization of worthiness by human voters. That will always create a grey area wherein people will be able to craft legitimate arguments about why someone who is in the Hall of Fame shouldn't be, why someone who isn't should be, and why one person is more deserving than another. It's a flawed system, but that doesn't necessarily mean that the honor and the shrine itself should be non-existent. The risk of those hard feelings among fans and former players is rather minimal compared to the pride that is shared among the players and fans during a celebration of the best the franchise has had to offer. The Reds have done an excellent job celebrating their history - both teams and players - and the fans in general can't get enough of it.
Sports are supposed to be fun. Entities such as a Ring of Honor or a team Hall of Fame and the induction ceremonies related to them are most definitely fun. Hopefully, the Bengals realize this and act in time for the franchise's 50th season.
