Skip to content

Pete Rose still believes baseball needs him

Oct 4, 2012, 11:33 AM EDT

Pete Rose

The all-time hit leader says stuff like this every six months or so. And it rings a little bit more hollow every time:

“I’m going to tell you something right now, whether you believe it or not,” Rose told WFAN’s Steve Somers on Wednesday. “Baseball is a better game if I’m in it. OK? Because I care about the game and I’m a teacher of the game. And I care about young players.”

By every measure other than market share, baseball is more successful than it has been at any time in its history. And it is played at a higher and better level now than it has been at any time in its history. Amazingly it was able to do this without Pete Rose around “caring” about the game in his own, peculiar way. The only thing that is suffering due to Pete Rose’s ban is Pete Rose’s ego.

I’d put him in the Hall of Fame — history is history — but I wouldn’t let him near a young ballplayer in a million years.

  1. materialman80 - Oct 4, 2012 at 11:39 AM

    Pete is delusional.

    • pinstripecameraman - Oct 4, 2012 at 12:59 PM

      Craig Calcaterra is delusional.

    • onebigloadofcrap - Oct 4, 2012 at 1:35 PM

      a total cancer and a sociopathic personality, cares about pete 1st 2nd and 3rd

      • gloccamorra - Oct 4, 2012 at 11:32 PM

        Heh. That reminds me of his first wife’s explanation for divorcing him. She said, “When I married Pete, I knew I would be second to baseball, but that was okay because I just wanted to be a good wife. “Then, Pete Jr. was born and I dropped to third, but that was okay, because I just wanted to be a good wife and mother. “Then Pete bought a new sports car. “Fourth place is too low in the standings.”

  2. historiophiliac - Oct 4, 2012 at 11:43 AM

    As we are heatedly arguing over AL MVP’s and the value of RBI’s & WAR and play-ins, it’s good to be reminded that no one loves Pete Rose like Pete Rose.

    • stlouis1baseball - Oct 4, 2012 at 2:07 PM

      Absolutely Philiac! As my Father always said…
      “if you want to know how good Pete Rose is just ask him.”

    • florida727 - Oct 4, 2012 at 2:11 PM

      “The only thing that is suffering due to Pete Rose’s ban is Pete Rose’s ego.”

      Best one-liner I’ve seen on a blog post in an awfully long time… mainly because it’s so accurate.

  3. ezthinking - Oct 4, 2012 at 11:45 AM

    Baseball missed its chance to let Pete help teach ballplayers the value of hustle and playing all out. Now it seems he is too bitter to really help.

    • kevinbnyc - Oct 4, 2012 at 1:54 PM

      Pete Rose ruined his chance to teach ballplayers the value of hustle and playing all out. Now it seems he is trying desperately to make people love him again.

  4. El Bravo - Oct 4, 2012 at 11:52 AM

    Is the the O.S.? Original Scrappy?

  5. acdc363 - Oct 4, 2012 at 11:52 AM


  6. cavemanna - Oct 4, 2012 at 11:56 AM

    Rose is right, your wrong. Period. Your opinion of the game is way off. I’m guessing your a young lad, but many elders become polarized as well

    • kevinbnyc - Oct 4, 2012 at 1:58 PM

      Know what else is wrong? Your grammar.

  7. mazblast - Oct 4, 2012 at 12:04 PM

    Pete Rose doesn’t care about anything except Pete Rose, money, and Pete Rose. He blew his career and reputation in a major way and wants back in to make more money and polish his image (Mythbusters having proven that you CAN polish a turd), despite his voluntarily signing the agreement to be banned forever.

  8. cavemanna - Oct 4, 2012 at 12:08 PM

    If every guilty player who had done what Pete did was known, the hall would be half empty

    • pdowdy83 - Oct 4, 2012 at 12:42 PM

      Nice baseless speculation. Put that right up their with anyone who says player X is having a great year he must be on steroids…

  9. pisano - Oct 4, 2012 at 12:12 PM

    As what a numbers runner?

  10. Fink - Oct 4, 2012 at 12:29 PM

    I think Barry Larkin would strongly disagree with you, Craig, and I think he knows a little bit more about the state of baseball than you.

    • thefalcon123 - Oct 4, 2012 at 12:57 PM

      I don’t give Barry Larkin too much credit for knowing much about the state of baseball. Here’s an example:

      On MLB network a few years ago, the commentators were asked to name the best rookie seasons of all time.

      Barry Larkin ranked Benito Santiago’s 1987 at #1. Benito Santiago wasn’t even the best rookie that season…McGwire and Seitzer were both clearly better…and Matt Nokes was probably better too (his OPS was nearly 100 points higher). So Larkin didn’t even manage to name the best rookie catcher of 1987.

      In an effort to make his list impossibly dumber, he ranked Edison Volquez #4…that year Edison Volquez wasn’t a rookie.

      • Fink - Oct 4, 2012 at 6:21 PM

        Santiago was the unanimous selection for the 1987 National League Rookie of the Year Award.[5] Although he struggled defensively, leading the league in errors and passed balls, his hitting performance earned him the 1987 Silver Slugger Award which is awarded annually to the best offensive player at each position.[6][7]

        and for Volquez…

        bam! get yo facts straight before tick tackin away at those keys, falcon :)

      • thefalcon123 - Oct 5, 2012 at 9:43 AM

        Umm, Fink…Volquez *wasn’t* a rookie that year. A lot of ink was spilled on that subject. Including this article from MLB:

        “Volquez’s presence on that list is definitely unique: No longer a rookie, the pitcher was mistakenly placed on the ballot and received three votes for second, thus there was an obligation to include him in the final results.”

        And saying Santiago had the greatest rookie season ever is deeply stupid.

        So, Fink, get your fact straight before idiotically coming in here and saying that mine aren’t. I can only hope you read this to realize what a fucking idiot you are. There is no greater pleasure than a enormous jackoff being dead fucking wrong while feebly attempting to correct other.

  11. sabatimus - Oct 4, 2012 at 12:32 PM

    Pete Rose says baseball needs him, but what he’s really saying is that he needs baseball.

    • slavetothetrafficlight - Oct 4, 2012 at 3:34 PM

      I’m tired of hearing statements like that.

      If Mr. “I’d walk through hell in a gasoline suit just to play baseball” loves the game so much, if he wants to teach young players, why haven’t we seen him managing an independent league team? He could have been in baseball for the past 15 years if he wanted to, regardless of what Bud thought about it. Instead he does appearances in Vegas.

  12. willclarkgameface - Oct 4, 2012 at 12:32 PM

    This is a dumb argument not because Pete Rose is the President and Founder of the Pete Rose Fan Club, but because Bud Selig won’t put a final word on whether or not he is going to reinstate Pete. Sure, Bud is just following what was handed down in 1989 and doesn’t really HAVE to say anything to stay the course, but in 2004 Pete and Bud had a meeting about this matter and all that was spoken about was the fact that Bud would think about it.

    Why was that the answer?

    Why couldn’t Bud just tell Pete to pound sand?

    Pete won’t FULLY go away until he has physically left this Earth, but he would start to disappear if Bud finally made a strong comment on the matter.

  13. beefytrout - Oct 4, 2012 at 12:34 PM

    I was in Vegas a couple of weeks ago, and in a memorabilia shop connected to my hotel was Pete Rose signing autographs. There was absolutely no line to get in (at one point, there were 5 people in the store including myself, my mom, Rose, and his handler). They had a “barker” out front, letting everyone know the “All Time Hit King” was there.

    I didn’t even bother finding out how much it cost.

  14. deadeyedesign23 - Oct 4, 2012 at 1:04 PM

    Got any problem with Mark McGwire around young players?

    • stlouis1baseball - Oct 4, 2012 at 2:09 PM

      I don’t know 23. It depends. Did McGwire gamble on the game of Baseball?

      • deadeyedesign23 - Oct 4, 2012 at 6:08 PM

        Cheating is cheating dude. Though judging from your username I can only imagine you have a totally objective opinion on steroid use in baseball.

    • raysfan1 - Oct 4, 2012 at 10:32 PM

      Not really, no. There’s only one rule for which the consequence of breaking it is banishment. Every player, and manager, knows it. Pete Rose broke it anyway.

      • deadeyedesign23 - Oct 5, 2012 at 9:45 AM

        Well that’s not the issue here. Craig said he wouldn’t want him around young players, which presumably is a moral issue. I imagine his opinion would be the same if Pete Rose were reinstated tomorrow. And if it’s a moral issue then the only thing we’re quibbling about is how long the punishment is…both were against the rules when they did them. The fact that the punishment for steroid use is too light is irrelevant. I imagine if steroid use carried a life time ban (which, if testing were more accurate, I would say it should) then this wouldn’t be a conversation.

    • stlouis1baseball - Oct 5, 2012 at 11:12 AM

      You don’t get it. Of course I am a Cardinals fan. That is’t exactly a newsflash.
      He was found guilty….found guilty…found guilty…of betting on baseball.
      Him. He did it. Pete Rose. Steroids have nothing to do with it.
      Right or wrong…MLB did NOT find Sammy, Barry, Palmeiro, McGwire, etc… guilty of using steroids. Hell…MLB even encouraged it by turning their heads. All in the name of moving turnstiles.
      You are trying to lump a dude who was FOUND GUILTY of betting on Baseball with a bunch of dudes who broke ZERO MLB rules and were NOT found guilty of said usage.

  15. miguel3557 - Oct 4, 2012 at 1:07 PM

    Pete Rose was a great baseball player, someone without a lot of physical gifts who made up for his lack of talent by great hustle. But he lied about betting on baseball games, thereby undermining the integrity of baseball.

    He has never accepted the fact that acknowledgment and contrition, not arrogant self-absorption, is his ticket back to the bigs. It’s actually quite pathetic.

  16. metalhead65 - Oct 4, 2012 at 1:08 PM

    sure Rose has a ego but if you were as good of a player as he was why wouldn’t he? as for not letting him near young players you are so wrong! you don’t think working with Pete Rose in a batting cage for a couple of weeks would not turn a lousy hitter like drew stubbs of the reds around? he would at least know how to put a bunt down by the end of his sessions with Pete. you are saying the guy with the most hits of all time could not teach these young kids who come in with all the talent in the world but without the basic fundamentals of the game could not benefit from his knowledge of the game? oh wait I forgot hits do not mean anything in saber metric world right? ask guys like Barry Larkin or eric davis if they would have enjoyed the success they did without his help. without his help in developing those guys and the other young players on that team the reds do not win the 1990 series. you can think of him want you want as a person but you can’t deny he knows more about the game of baseball than you and all your saber geeks put together. thumbs down me all you want you never change my mind that he was one hell of a ballplayer and got more out of his talent than half the guys today making millions of dollars a year for batting .250 name anybody else who could be an all star at all the positions he could play. they became the best team in baseball when moved to third base without ever having played it before. yes he broke the rules and he has payed more of a price for what he did than any of the junkies who have played the game. I would want someone like him around a young player than somebody like daryl strawberry,hey kids don’t do drugs or you could only get 27 chances to keep playing baseball like me.

    • El Bravo - Oct 4, 2012 at 5:28 PM

      …and I don’t disagree. I really don’t and once he’s in the dirt, I bet the MLB becomes a little more affable about the whole thing.

  17. watchfullhose - Oct 4, 2012 at 1:41 PM

    “By every measure other than market share, baseball is more successful than it has been at any time in its history. And it is played at a higher and better level now than it has been at any time in its history. Amazingly it was able to do this without Pete Rose ”

    What a stupid statement! Just because the game is successful without Pete doesn’t mean it couldn’t/wouldn’t be better with him involved in some capacity. The worst thing to do with the greatest hitter of all time is to ignore the fact that he exists as he embarrasses himself (and to some degree, baseball) all over the county.

    Rose doesn’t deserve audulation, but sooner or later baseball will be forced to acknowledge Rose’s record. Is it better for baseball to wait until he’s dead? I think they’re better served by acknowledging him while he’s alive so they can also point out the mistake he made and have it be apart of his legacy. You don’t wait until someone is dead to talk about the bad things they’ve done.

    I guess it’s just another day in the world of mindless inflammatory drivel produced by Craaaaiiiig.

  18. papichulo55 - Oct 4, 2012 at 2:00 PM

    I predict that baseball will acknowledge Pete, posthumously.

  19. johnnyb1976 - Oct 4, 2012 at 2:58 PM

    Bonds, McGuire, Sosa, among others used steroids to help their game and none of them are looked at like Pete. Pete might be a disputable human being but 4192 hits was never aided by drugs.

    • raysfan1 - Oct 4, 2012 at 10:35 PM

      And your evidence for that is what? Are you certain he never used greenies, AKA amphetamines?

    • stlouis1baseball - Oct 5, 2012 at 1:07 PM

      They didn’t bet on Baseball Johnny. That is solely what this is about.
      Hell…Shoeless Joe was borderline mentally handicapped and really played no role in the Black Sox Scandal. He actually played very well in the WS. Yet…even HE is still banned.
      And you want to compare Pete to Bonds, McGwire, Sammy, etc…?
      What did those dudes do that was against the rules?
      When were those dudes found guilty of anything?

  20. phillyphan93 - Oct 4, 2012 at 3:16 PM

    No St. Louis fan he only tarnished the most sacred of sports records.

    • El Bravo - Oct 4, 2012 at 5:28 PM

      Barry Bonds?

    • raysfan1 - Oct 4, 2012 at 10:39 PM

      Although I love baseball, I don’t equate it to religion, thus who hits the most home runs in a given season is not sacred.

      If they were, the clearly the most sacred would have to be the record for most championships.

  21. jdillydawg - Oct 4, 2012 at 4:16 PM

    Sure Pete has an ego. Sure, he may be delusion. But who cares? I’d let him teach my kid how to play.

    He may not be relevant to today’s game, but he holds two records that many players may be chasing for years to come. Sure, Bud, keep him out of the Hall. That sends a message. By the way, I wonder if today’s rookies even know why Rose isn’t in the Hall. I can just see Mike Trout breaking those records and making the Hall and kids for generations to come thinking, wow, it took until 2022 for someone to actually set that record.

    • metalhead65 - Oct 4, 2012 at 4:31 PM

      trout is good and may someday be one of the all time greats but there is no way he or anyone else will break that record. if he gets 200 hits a year for the next 20 years he still won’t have enough and as good as he can be I do not see him playing the game that long.

  22. denny65 - Oct 4, 2012 at 7:58 PM

    Pete Rose belongs in the Hall of Fame–STAT.

  23. fredverd - Oct 4, 2012 at 9:52 PM

    In my baseball heart I know that Pete Rose belongs in the Hall of Fame as much as -or even more than – most present members. What he accomplished on the field demands that he be enshrined. His off-the-field antics and his present day personality dictate that anyone who needs to feel better about himself/herself ostracise Rose. Here’s what I propose… how about we do background checks on all present Hall of Fame members… anyone who turns up with any dubious off the field actions gets booted, his jerseys revoked, his name forever ridiculed aloud. Or, if we find that most Hall of Famers have at least some flaws in their personal lives, admit Rose and get on with it.

  24. greymares - Oct 4, 2012 at 10:05 PM

    couldn’t careless about his off the field endeavors but i’m 66 yrs. old and a national league fan(they still play baseball) the 2 greatest players of my lifetime Willie Mays and Pete Rose.

  25. raysfan1 - Oct 4, 2012 at 11:01 PM

    There is one thing that truly undermines the integrity of a sport, and that is not being able to trust in the legitimacy of which teams wins or loses. This was the danger posed by the 1919 Black Sox scandal. Baseball could have become a niche sport the way boxing has. This is why betting on baseball is the one act that can get someone banned from MLB.

    Pete Rose bet on baseball. That by itself brings into question whether he tried his absolute best every game or not. Did he always bet on his team to win? If not then the problem there is obvious. Did he bet on every game? If not, it could indicate either a tacit admission his team wasn’t good enough, or could make it appear he was not trying his hardest for the games he did not bet on. It could also be a message to the bookies as to when to favor the opponent. Did he bet the same dollar amount every game? If not, this again would create at least a perception of not trying as had as he should at times.

    I agree that he should be I the Hall of Fame. I’d advocate “unbanning” him in terms of letting him make appearances at old timers games and such. But he should not be allowed to work in MLB again. This was his doing, nobody is picking on him.

Leave Comment

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!

Top 10 MLB Player Searches
  1. D. Wright (3084)
  2. J. Fernandez (2534)
  3. D. Span (2465)
  4. Y. Cespedes (2446)
  5. G. Stanton (2443)
  1. Y. Puig (2179)
  2. F. Rodney (2171)
  3. M. Teixeira (2141)
  4. G. Springer (2082)
  5. H. Olivera (1965)