The HOF has been, and always will be, a flawed piece of ****.
The problem with it is that you have BASEBALL WRITERS - the single biggest group of idiotic nerds ever - deciding who gets in. They're all high and mighty, and they have 0 process as to who gets in the hall of fame. It's all based on a whim.
When things like "suspicion that someone used steroids" and "wasn't very media friendly" are used as things to hold a vote against someone - it doesn't really work out.
I realize there's a huge problem in baseball with steroids and PED abuse and whatnot. I get that. There has to be a solution - but banning people from the HOF (some of whom have better careers than 90% of the people in the hall right now) isn't the answer.
Let's not forget - there's suspicion already that people IN the HOF have used steroids http://www.wezen-ball.com/2010-artic...ilkshakeq.html
I think the only answer is to simply say "If you retired and never tested dirty or admitted to use - you're in". Otherwise, you're leaving too much open to speculation and innuendo.
THere's a ton of HOFs on that list - most won't get on simply because they played baseball in an era where people thought that most people used PEDs. There's no evidence out there that makes Biggio a better candidate than Sosa PED-wise. Sosa's name was on a list and he bulked up to Overeem size midway through his career - but never failed a test. Biggio never failed a test, didn't have the look, but was associated with a teammate who was suspected of using.
The fact that either one of those scenarios prevents someone from getting in is BS and VERY, VERY sad.