HALL OF FAME Discussion Thread

(11-05-2026 08:34 )Supersteve247 Wrote:  How about this...
Still use the % method,but one combined poll and voters can only choose yes for 3 of the 5 finalists on the ballot.

Every voter would still have voted yes or no for each finalist but this would eliminate the problem that you raised.......I think.

No, it doesn't eliminate the problem. If voters can choose yes for 3 of the 5 finalists, it's still possible for all 5 to be inducted.

(11-05-2026 16:00 )BarrieBF Wrote:  

(11-05-2026 08:34 )Supersteve247 Wrote:  How about this...
Still use the % method,but one combined poll and voters can only choose yes for 3 of the 5 finalists on the ballot.

Every voter would still have voted yes or no for each finalist but this would eliminate the problem that you raised.......I think.

No, it doesn't eliminate the problem. If voters can choose yes for 3 of the 5 finalists, it's still possible for all 5 to be inducted.

Yeah that could be possible, but if you set a high vote threshold it would eliminate babes from scraping in by winning a head to head vote 51 - 49% for example.
I haven't done the math or anything, just floating an idea out there.

Also the problem I was referring to was everyone voting yes for every babe if they had their own individual poll .
Personally I don't have an issue with multiple babes getting inducted, but I know opinion is divided on that.

Thank you everyone for getting involved.
I am carefully rationalizing posts drawing out perceived strengths and weaknesses as I see them from each argument and counter argument. As I'm sure you can understand this is painstaking work but it is needed.
I can see both sides of many of the views expressed on this thread. It is my job to weigh up the overall strength of argument on both sides. This is no easy task. To a degree many instinctive personal opinions of my own have had to be binned precisely because of the principle of me being a 'custodian of the forum' first, foremost and absolutely. I have to apply a series of checks and balances and apply compromise where I feel it is needed.
To do this demands time and effort but I knew that from the start. So I am not fazed by the size of the challenge.

At this point I would like to say the following. I have a duty to everyone to explain my reasoning for whatever I ultimately decide is the right path when the time comes. It may end up in a situation where nobody gets everything they want.
If that happens I can only say the spirit of compromise can have both a logical strand as well as an emotional one. There is room for cold hard logic as well the realisation that feeling in terms of what connects and resonates with the viewer matters too.
I get both sides of it, I really do.
As a custodian of this place I can honestly say I have never felt a higher burden of expectation or burden of desire to get something right as I do with this.
It matters to me precisely because it matters to you.
That is why this discussion is happening a long way out from July 26th.
That is why the pre nomination suggestions thread was created.

We seek perfection in an imperfect world with imperfect parameters and definitions thereof. I seek to get as close as possible to perfect while knowing all too well absolute perfection is impossible.

In that spirit please keep the debate going.
I will keep monitoring before decision time arrives. When it does arrive I will go through the various arguments in detail in explaining what will happen and why.

Thank you all.

(11-05-2026 14:36 )barracuda Wrote:  NASCAR is interesting. An annual competition to determine the inductees. Voters choose two from the Modern Ballot and one from the Pioneer Ballot. A good template for us?

NASCAR seems a good example as they also go round in circles and frequently end with a massive wreck

(10-05-2026 20:17 )Boomerangutangangbang Wrote:  I don't buy into this fear of inducting too many. The babechannels have been in existence for over 23 years we aren't exactly rushing any babes in.

The Premier League's been in existence for over 34 years. This season they inducted TWO PLAYERS.

(10-05-2026 20:17 )Boomerangutangangbang Wrote:  I don't buy into this fear of inducting too many. The babechannels have been in existence for over 23 years we aren't exactly rushing any babes in. If you read clearly what has been suggested the standards will still be kept high as we would induct one outstanding candidate & maybe only one other who came within a close percentage of votes to them.
If you use your recommendation, for example, Kelly Bell was inducted last year, but the other finalist Emma C received a large percentage of votes in the previous rounds & final. By your reckoning Emma C was not of a standard. But if she is inducted this year, she is somehow considered so much better than 12 months prior, that is ridiculous as very little will have change in 12 months..
Inducting Emma C last year along with Kelly Bell would have no way diluted the quality, it would've just made common sense to do so.
I must reiterate, this is not a competition with stand alone annual winners, we view all inductees equally which is why they are & should be referred to as inductees & not winners.

I agree with all your post but particularly this passage I highlighted. Cheers.

(12-05-2026 13:54 )7 stars of the orient Wrote:  

(10-05-2026 20:17 )Boomerangutangangbang Wrote:  I don't buy into this fear of inducting too many. The babechannels have been in existence for over 23 years we aren't exactly rushing any babes in.

The Premier League's been in existence for over 34 years. This season they inducted TWO PLAYERS.

The number of inductees has varied every year and indeed their rules explicitly state this may be the case. Qualification as a nominee is also strictly defined.

(11-05-2026 14:42 )TDK2008 Wrote:  

(11-05-2026 14:36 )barracuda Wrote:  NASCAR is interesting. An annual competition to determine the inductees. Voters choose two from the Modern Ballot and one from the Pioneer Ballot. A good template for us?

I still think it should be two and two. It's not fair on the category that has just the one pick. It's discriminatory. Needs to be equal across the board.

Have you made your views known to NASCAR about their discrimination?

(12-05-2026 13:57 )TDK2008 Wrote:  

(10-05-2026 20:17 )Boomerangutangangbang Wrote:  If you use your recommendation, for example, Kelly Bell was inducted last year, but the other finalist Emma C received a large percentage of votes in the previous rounds & final. By your reckoning Emma C was not of a standard. But if she is inducted this year, she is somehow considered so much better than 12 months prior, that is ridiculous as very little will have change in 12 months..
Inducting Emma C last year along with Kelly Bell would have no way diluted the quality, it would've just made common sense to do so.
I must reiterate, this is not a competition with stand alone annual winners, we view all inductees equally which is why they are & should be referred to as inductees & not winners.

I agree with all your post but particularly this passage I highlighted. Cheers.

I think last year’s experience was slightly conditioned by the fact that it was a head-to-head format with semi-finals and finals, etc.. That definitely had all the trappings of a competition, which further accentuated the “oddness” of Emma C’s exclusion.

BUT…

Suppose one used Supersteve’s format of a simple ballot for Yes/No voting, with an agreed threshold needed for induction into the Hall of Fame. I would favour the principle of “no tiebreakers”. If two girls get the same number of votes, induct them both. I have no problem with that.

I’m a little more skeptical about the notion of using “common sense” to shift the threshold this way and that because a girl came “close enough” or because it is “obvious” that she belongs in the Hall of Fame.

The fact is: it IS a competition. Every HOF is a competition. And that’s because there is no objective, measurable, verifiable standard of who is worthy of induction. You can only evaluate any girl’s worthiness by reference and comparison to all the other girls.

Bear in mind that I voted for Emma C over Kelly Bell. But if there were a ballot system and Emma C came one vote short of the agreed threshold, I’d shrug and say, so be it. Better luck next year. And if year after year she made it onto the ballot and always came up a little short, I would assume that she clearly did enough to captivate me, but she obviously didn’t do enough to win over the forum. And that’s okay too.

(12-05-2026 14:04 )SecretAgent Wrote:  The number of inductees has varied every year and indeed their rules explicitly state this may be the case.

Which is why I said "this season".

(12-05-2026 14:04 )SecretAgent Wrote:  Qualification as a nominee is also strictly defined.

That's not true. Not compared to other sports Halls Of Fame. The Premier League Hall of Fame is genuinely unusual in having eligibility that isn't that strictly defined.

In fact, over 200 players are currently eligible but only 24 have been inducted, so eligibility (strict or otherwise) isn't holding the inducted numbers back at all.