HALL OF FAME Discussion Thread

^ This is from the Premier League Hall of Fame website:

Players must have made a minimum of 250 Premier League appearances unless they have achieved any of the following milestones:

- Made a minimum of 200 Premier League appearances for one club

- Been selected in any of the Premier League Team of the Decade or 20-Year Anniversary teams

- Won a Premier League Golden Boot or Golden Glove

- Been voted as Premier League Player of the Season

- Won three Premier League titles

- Scored 100 Premier League goals or recorded 100 Premier League clean sheets (goalkeepers only)

That is a specific set of criteria!

(12-05-2026 16:16 )Goodfella3041 Wrote:  

(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.

Not sure why you would single out last years experience being a head to head, to the best of my knowledge head to heads have ben used every year.

You've misinterpreted my point, I wasn't suggesting we use common sense to move the goalposts. My opinion is that is a babe misses out by a handful of votes they are still worthy if an greed percentage threshold is met.

To your point on being content with for example Emma C hypothetically missing out year after year by the odd vote, I admire your integrity as a fan of hers to be ok with that, but I just disagree, getting close year after year make her more than worthy in my book.

Despite the different fields that have a HOF, & their nuances the definition of such an honour is recognition of individual achievement & not a direct competition.

(12-05-2026 17:59 )SecretAgent Wrote:  
That is a specific set of criteria!

All Halls Of Fame have a specific set of criteria.

The point about the Premier League Hall Of Fame is that it's incredibly exclusive - only 24 players have been induced. Not because of the criteria - which would allow almost ten times that number to be inducted, but because the induction policy.

^ Nobody has suggested flooding our HoF with inductees though. All some of us have suggested is that we could introduce criteria that allowed us to give due credit to a few more deserving candidates through an open & fair process.

Using the Premier League HoF again as an example they only started in 2021 & now have 26 inductees having inducted 8 in 2021 & 2022, 5 in 2023, 3 in 2024 & 2 in 2025. Clearly they have adopted a flexible approach to inductee numbers.

I have absolutely no problem with additional qualifying criteria being applied for nominees & indeed believe it would act as a useful brake on the number of girls who would qualify for nominations. Data quality may well be an issue for this.

I’m sure although there are many different viewpoints we all have the best interests of the HoF at heart. I trust Snooks to sift all the ideas and come up with a solution we should all support.

I have a planned structure and format provisionally in place that has been subjected to rigorous checks. However depending on opinions expressed as the debate continues this could be subject to amendment/change.
So my decision is far from final.

(13-05-2026 17:23 )SecretAgent Wrote:  ^ Nobody has suggested flooding our HoF with inductees though. All some of us have suggested is that we could introduce criteria that allowed us to give due credit to a few more deserving candidates through an open & fair process.

Using the Premier League HoF again as an example they only started in 2021 & now have 26 inductees having inducted 8 in 2021 & 2022, 5 in 2023, 3 in 2024 & 2 in 2025. Clearly they have adopted a flexible approach to inductee numbers.

I have absolutely no problem with additional qualifying criteria being applied for nominees & indeed believe it would act as a useful brake on the number of girls who would qualify for nominations. Data quality may well be an issue for this.

I’m sure although there are many different viewpoints we all have the best interests of the HoF at heart. I trust Snooks to sift all the ideas and come up with a solution we should all support.

That’s interesting and a fair point.

The RnR Hall of Fame is also relatively recent (1986) and it followed a similar — though less pronounced — pattern. In its inaugural year it inducted 13 acts, and has inducted between 5 and 7 per year since then (<<< data by AI … so probably wrong!).

It makes sense: a Hall of Fame with only one person is a lonely place. And the very first inductees are always the least controversial. I mean, Chuck Berry, Elvis Presley and Little Richard were always going to get in, so it wasn’t too much of a stretch to stack that first cohort with the founding “pantheon” of Rock’n’Roll.

On reflection, maybe the very first iteration of our HOF should have been more welcoming.

That’s not a criticism. The very first induction was in 2015 — who could’ve guessed that we’d still be debating it 11 years later!?

But we are where we are now. Just a personal opinion, but my reluctance to speed things up at this point was reinforced when I just checked the current Roll of Honour. No question at all about the first 10. That feels like the founding “pantheon” to me. From about 2022/23, however, I start to see some names that I can barely remember, never called and certainly have no strong feelings about.

So I personally don’t share the confidence of others that speeding things up at this point won’t somehow lessen the honour of it all.

(28-12-2025 20:32 )Goodfella3041 Wrote:  Damn, I was working on a diabolical Trumpian plan…

I was going to volunteer to run it. I would invite suggestions for the next 11 months. And then — abiding by the rule that the organiser gets to choose the format — I was going to abandon all nominations, votes and competitions and just induct two of my favourites.

I have not yet had to resort to adopting this policy myself so we should be ok

Hello. It's me again. Things have moved forward considerably within the last fortnight and most particularly the last 7 days I'm pleased to say.

At this point I feel pretty confident in saying the following. The Pre nomination suggestions thread looks highly likely to be the key to unlock the door to making the Hall of Fame as workable as it ever can be in the guise I now have become comfortable and happy with.
Obviously I am not going to give too much detail away at this stage. Debate can change things around again.
But whatever happens i suspect that the idea from Tumble Drier will ultimately prove to be as close to a silver bullet as this thing is ever going to get. For more reasons than I can possibly explain at this stage his idea has given me both scope and clarity at the same time. In the fullness of time I suspect his contribution may stand the test of time as the one that made the biggest positive impact this comp will ever see.

So may I offer TD my sincerest gratitude.
The key to unlock the most stubborn of ratchety competition doors may just have been located. Well done Sir and thank you.

All the comments have been thoroughly thought provoking and made me think about these topics and possible associated questions.
Eligibility - what criteria a babe needs to meet?
Categories - what format do babes work in other than day & night?
Nominations - how many can we put forward?
Voting - how many rounds?
Inductees - Is it one from each category?

Then I also thought about these things, due to the mention of other HOFs and the popularity/longevity metrics they take into account, and the possible ones that we could use.
External - does non-channel content hold weight?
Socials - is their number of followers important?
Forum - does their number of page views on here matter?
Awards - what if they've won a forum award before?
BabeVidz - Should the number of views be considered?

Regardless of what decisions are made, I'll support them.

(12-05-2026 16:16 )Goodfella3041 Wrote:  The fact is: it IS a competition. Every HOF is a competition.

Very true. Every HOF is a competition. And everyone who gets in to a HOF has to win a vote, either a vote by the public or by a panel of experts. There's no way to make any HOF not a competition. It's just a matter of deciding who gets to vote.