sneakynito
Verified Member
Not to be a debbie downer, but any concern with running out of names?
Pool is a small community as it is.
The percentage that play one pocket is even smaller.
The number of good 1p players is another fraction,
and the number of HOF worthy should be even smaller than that.
I'm wondering if our numbers can sustain continuing to induct one per year.
That is, if we really want to reserve the HOF title truly for the greats.
I worry about progressively reaching for names, and watering down the accolade.
Hell, the MLB sometimes inducts as little as 2 a year, and that's out of a pool of thousands of professional players.
I know we got started late, and had a short hiatus, but we still have 32 inductees in 15 years.
Even at a rate of 1 per year, I think we'll exhaust the number of truly deserving players relatively quick.
To be inducting at one per year, the game needs to be gaining a future HOF'er at one per year. Maybe i'm pessimistic but I think we may be over-fishing.
ps. vote for Scott!
Pool is a small community as it is.
The percentage that play one pocket is even smaller.
The number of good 1p players is another fraction,
and the number of HOF worthy should be even smaller than that.
I'm wondering if our numbers can sustain continuing to induct one per year.
That is, if we really want to reserve the HOF title truly for the greats.
I worry about progressively reaching for names, and watering down the accolade.
Hell, the MLB sometimes inducts as little as 2 a year, and that's out of a pool of thousands of professional players.
I know we got started late, and had a short hiatus, but we still have 32 inductees in 15 years.
Even at a rate of 1 per year, I think we'll exhaust the number of truly deserving players relatively quick.
To be inducting at one per year, the game needs to be gaining a future HOF'er at one per year. Maybe i'm pessimistic but I think we may be over-fishing.
ps. vote for Scott!