The Hall of Fame is where baseball’s greatest belong. But can it really be complete without the all-time hits king? Pete Rose’s 4,256 hits are still untouched, yet Cooperstown keeps its doors shut. His legacy? Unquestionable. But that 1989 gambling scandal? Unforgivable—at least to the voters.

The debate is now once again stirred by the president’s pardon. Should Rose, after all these years, finally be reinstated? That’s exactly what Joel Sherman and Jon Heyman talked about on The Show.

During the show, Sherman clearly didn’t hold back. His stance was firm on the fact that Rose’s gambling wasn’t just a light gamble; it involved criminals.

The debate was heated. Sherman made his stance clear: Pete Rose’s crime wasn’t just gambling—it was gambling with the wrong people. “He’s not betting on FanDuel; he’s betting with criminals,” he said, emphasizing the weight of Rose’s associations. But Heyman wasn’t convinced. “I don’t see a difference between FanDuel and criminals,” he shot back, arguing that the explosion of legal betting has erased the once-clear boundaries.

36 years! That’s how long Pete Rose has been banned.

His supporters still voice that it’s time for baseball to move forward. If MLB is making profits from legal betting, why should Pete Rose be punished for something that is socially accepted now?

Sherman questioned, “If he’s not betting on the Reds one day, is he signaling to his lowlife crew that he doesn’t think they’ll win?” He made it clear that Rose’s decisions could have sent indirect signals that moved the betting odds. Heyman wasn’t swayed. According to him, Rose’s bets had a minimum effect overall. “Nobody thinks he was a good bettor… He was a historic loser.”

The discussion then shifted to Shoeless Joe Jackson, who was banned after the 1919 Black Sox scandal. Unlike Pete Rose, he disputed the charges, and his numbers suggest he played to win. “I think he probably should be reinstated,” Heyman admitted; he acknowledged that the lack of clear testimony against Jackson made his situation different from Rose’s.

With a presidential pardon sparking again, the question remains: Has baseball truly embraced redemption?

Ex-Mets manager astounded by Pete Rose’s Hall of Fame snub

The ongoing debate around Pete Rose’s Hall of Fame snub has divided the baseball community for decades. But for Buck Showalter, the former Mets manager, the answer seems very straightforward.

Showalter questioned, “At what point do we go, ‘OK, forgiven, and let’s move on?’” Then he added, “I mean, it’s hard to believe that our Hall of Fame doesn’t have Pete in it.”

Showalter acknowledged the impact gambling could have on a manager’s decisions, but he didn’t ignore the great force of Rose’s achievements. He holds the record of 4,256 career hits and is a 17-time All-Star and a three-time World Series champion. Let’s be real, his stats should be enough to make him a lock for Cooperstown.

Apparently, the game’s “golden rule” on gambling stood in his way. Showalter revealed how a manager betting on their own team could alter their decision-making. He mentioned that with money at stake, a manager might push top relievers too hard. As a result, it can potentially harm the team’s performance in future games.

He noted the hypocrisy in keeping Rose out while others with more questionable pasts have been preserved. He said, “People that are so negative about it might want to look in their own backyard.” In other words, Showalter meant that those who are harshly judging Rose should once reflect on their own past. No one deserves to be defined by their worst decisions.

The Reds inducted Rose into their Hall of Fame back in 2016, but baseball’s greatest honor still eludes him. For those who have devoted their lives to baseball like Showalter, shutting Rose out makes less sense with every passing year.