Voting for this year's Hall of Fame induction has begun. You can vote for your choices (yes I am well aware our votes don't count!) at ESPN.com.

Who Gets Your Votes?

I voted for Bert Blyleven, Andre Dawson, Ryne Sandberg, Paul Molitor, Dale Murphy, Goose Gossage, Dennis Eckersley and Kevin Mitchell. Okay only kidding about the last one!

Here's a column supporting Ryne Sandberg, who got a surprisingly low vote last year.

I voted for Paul Molitor, Andre Dawson, Dennis Eckersley (not that it will influence the voting but how could ESPN only list his career win/loss record and ERA as "criteria" for Eck receiving votes :confused: -- don't they realize the saves he accumulated from his years as a closer are the SOLE reason why he will likely be elected on the first ballot, his no-hitter notwithstanding?) and Dale Murphy, even though I admit the latter is a longshot -- but still very deserving of enshrinement as far as I'm concerned....Gossage, Sandberg, Mattingly and Tommy John all fall just a little bit short IMHO.

[ January 01, 2004, 04:57 PM: Message edited by: gamecock ]

My votes go to:

Eckersley (a phenomenal closer and a pretty good starter too)

Garvey (the best player on many good Dodgers teams, and an iron man before Ripken made it cool)

Hernandez (if Ozzie can get in on defense alone, so should Keith... and he was almost a career .300 hitter to boot)

Molitor (pretty much a shoo-in... 3000 hits and a .300 hitter)

Sandberg (overrated in the big scheme of things... but still the best second baseman of the 1980s)

Sutter (I'm not a big fan of closers in the Hall of Fame... but Sutter was one of the pitchers who revolutionized relief pitching)

Aside from Molitor, this is probably the most unimpressive Hall of Fame group I've seen in awhile. Hernandez's numbers are marginal, and the cocaine-trafficking thing will PROBABLY tarnish him enough not to get in -- at least from the veteran sportswriters.

While Paul Molitor is an obvious choice, one has to look at the numbers Don Mattingly put up on mostly mediocre (at best) Yankee teams. If only he didn't have the chronic back problems, Mattingly would have played a few more seasons and his Hall of Fame legitimacy would not even be questioned. Nevertheless, a career .307 lifetime batting average with 1099 RBI's and 222 home runs during a 14+ year career is nothing to snub.

I agree, what an unimpressive list. I mean, I *LOVE* Steve Garvey and his hairy, Popeye forearms--he was one of my first lust objects--and he was a very good player, but the Hall should be for greatness. He wasn't that good of a fielder, for one thing. His arm was awful--the simple throw from first to second to cut down the lead runner was always an adventure. It could end up in Bill Russell's glove or.....the left fielders, after Garvey threw it 10 feet over Russell's head.

The list is unimpressive in that there isn't the one or two superstars that are usually on the ballot and dominate the vote. This is a year where the voters can make up for some past mistakes. Guys like Sandberg, Dawson, Blyleven and Eckersley get overlooked because they aren't the most glamorous names on the ballot. And with guys like Boggs, Ripken, McGwire coming up, it'll only be tougher. This year Molitor seems to be the closest to a sure thing; that doesn't mean he should be the only thing.

Well, this is Eck's first year of eligibility, so he hasn't been overlooked.... yet, at least, although I expect him to get in.

I don't get Blyleven though. I just looked at his numbers, and I'll admit, they're better than I expected. Maybe it's that I only remember the 1980s old Bert, but I think he still doesn't deserve the Hall. The Hall of Durability maybe, the Hall of Shutouts probably, the Hall of Solid Players definitely, but not the Hall of Fame. Then again, I suppose Don Sutton is no more deserving...

Sutton won over 300 games, but I never found his numbers that impressive.

I'd say Molitor, Eckersley, Sandberg, Smith, and Sutter should go in.

Molitor was a very good, consistent hitter;
Eckersley was a superb relief man in the 2nd part of his career;
Ryne Sandberg was one of the best 2nd basemen during the years he played;
Sutter was one of the first great super relief pitchers.

And why did none of you mention Lee Smith? He was one of the best and most consistent relievers of his generation. 478 saves--THE MOST EVER--with a 3.03 ERA is nothing to sniff at.

Dawson's 438 home runs are nothing to sniff at either. But I don't think he had a Hall of Fame career.

I also have a soft spot in my heart for Jim Rice, who was mistreated at the end of his career by the Red Sox (another reason I loathe that team), but he'll remain on the outside looking in.

The most overhyped of all these guys was DON MATTINGLY! At least the Yankees now have players who live up to the hype the New York media creates!

[ January 02, 2004, 12:23 PM: Message edited by: fantomas ]

I must admit, looking at the list, I had to choose more than I thought. Or leave out more than I thought.

Choose Andre Dawson--why not also choose Dave Parker and Jim Rice because they have similar numbers?

Choose Jack Morris--why not also choose Tommy John and Dennis Martinez?

Choose Ryne Sandberg--but not Alan Trammell?

Choose Bruce Sutter--legitimate arguments can and should be made for Lee Smith and Goose Gossage.

I'm afraid there were so many good players in the 80's, whose numbers don't stack up to what we are seeing today, that they will be forgotten. 80's MLB is near and dear to my heart, seeing many games and collecting cards of these players.

Ultimately, I think that Eck, Molitor, and Sandberg all deserve to be voted in this year. Sutter, Smith, and Gossage are a close runner-up group, but if I had to choose one reliever who deserves it more then Goose should be there. And hopefully, those that don't get voted in this year will not get lost over the next few when Boggs, McGwire, Ripken, etc. become eligible.

MSU, your arguments got me. It is hard to compare the achievements of the 1980s, which were transitional years, to those of MLB players today (but then isn't this always the case); the pitching was stronger until 1987, the expansion of the 1960s had evened out, and the heroic batting exploits of the late 1990s hadn't yet occurred, though Mark McGwire, Jose Canseco, Barry Bonds and other recent stars were all playing--but they weren't the behemoths they became. That is, the steroid era had not yet dawned.

I don't think Andre Dawson deserves it, nor do Parker (who did star on a winning team) or Rice (who, had he gotten to 400 HRs and gained 2 points on his average might have been a more compelling case).

I don't think Jack Morris deserves the Hall of Fame, despite his heroics with the Tigers, since his overall stats aren't glittering, he's distinguished himself in no specific statistical category, he didn't wn 300 games, and his ERA is massive. Tommy John and Dennis Martinez merit praise for hanging in and for their durability, but they're not Hall of Fame material.

Sandberg was one of the leading second basemen in the NL when he retired. Since that time a number of his successors in both leagues hit for more power and field almost as well, though he played at the same time as the likes of Marty Barrett. He also was a league MVP (but then so were Dale Murphy, Parker, Mattingly, etc.). Was Trammell?

I think Smith is the leader in terms of the relief pitchers, solely on the basis of his having compiled the MOST saves. Gossage is compelling because of his Yankee and San Diego years, but he never posted as many saves in a year as Smith (who posted 47 saves in 1991, which I think was up to then the highest ever) or Sutter, who won the Cy Young in 1979 and 4 Rolaids Relief Awards. Smith and Sutter should go in first. Sutter had the shortest career of the three.

[ January 02, 2004, 05:37 PM: Message edited by: fantomas ]

Trammell was never an MVP. But he did win the World Series MVP in 1984, 4 Gold Gloves, and was a 6-time All-Star. For me, Ozzie Smith and Alan Trammell define what a shortstop was in the 80's. On some level, I think it would be a shame if Trammell is not voted in eventually.

There again, think of what saves meant in the late 70's and 80's. They have been a recognized stats for years, but the specialty closer for 3-4 outs is a 90's invention. Most relievers such as Gossage came on in the 7th inning, and were just as likely to finish the game with a win as a save. 124 wins for a reliever over 22 seasons is pretty incredible, if you stop and think about it. Plus 304 saves! In contrast, Smith had 71 wins and 478 saves in his 18 seasons; Sutter had 68 wins and 300 saves in 12 seasons, which are incredible numbers as well. I think that Sutter's career only being 12 seasons hurts him though. So I'm having trouble figuring out why you argued for Sutter over Gossage.

[ January 02, 2004, 08:25 PM: Message edited by: MSUBulldog ]

I don't think that either Morris or Dawson deserve to be in the HoF either, but then again, if I had my way, somebody would be going through Cooperstown doing a major housecleaning with a lot of those guys.

In fairness to Morris and Dawson, consider the following:

1. Morris spent his entire career in the AL, with the DH, which is going to raise his ERA. Also, Morris spent many years with the Tigers. Tiger Stadium was basically the AL's equivalent of Coors Field before Coors Field was built. I saw him as an above average pitcher. I don't believe above average should make the Hall of Fame.

2. Dawson spent the MAJORITY of his years in MLB with some seriously God-awful teams (yes, there were years where he was with some contenders, but not many). Remember, he managed to win the MVP while playing with a LAST PLACED TEAM. He was Barry Bonds without Jeff Kent behind him -- he was pitched around a LOT. So his home run total isn't going to be what it possibly could be.

I agree that the guys on this list are not standouts, many very good players but no studs compared to many other Hall of Famers. That being said, since we are looking to pick someone, I will have to look at some factors other than ERA, batting average. Some of those factors might be longevity, personal awards and post season appearances.

I will pick Jack Morris for his 18 seasons of pitching, winning 3 World Series with 3 teams and winning an MVP of a World Series. He also won 20 or more games 3 times.

My second pick is Andre Dawson who played 21 seasons which is quite an accomplishment in itself. Although he played on a perennial losing team in a bad market he still had better stats than many of the other candidates. He had a .279 BA with 438 home runs many in a domed stadium. He won 8 gold gloves, 1 NL MVP and a Rookie of the Year award. If he played in a place like New York I am sure those numbers would be even better.

I live in Milwaukee, so the Brewers are my team by default, unfortunately. Ever since Molitor left and Robin Yount retired, the Brewers have had absolutely no class at all, and that's been a LONG time ago. It doesn't look like that will change any time soon, either.

Naturally, I hope Molitor gets in. I never saw anyone else who was more concentrated at bat, practically motionless. He led off the order a lot of his career here (16 seasons in Milwaukee), and he got a hit on the first pitch of the game so many times. It was sort of his specialty. He was always a class act, and definitely one of the better looking players I remember so fondly that hitting streak of his in '87. Quite a ride. He said once here a couple of years ago that if he gets voted in, he'll go in as a Brewer. Kind of obvious, I guess, since he spent the majority of his career here, but it was a relief for me to hear him say it. He won a series with Toronto, and had always wanted to be a Twin since he grew up there, and wound up his career there, of course.

I don't know about Hall of Fame status for a lot of those guys, but hell, I miss a lot of them! Some characters on that list. That mean looking Jack Morris, or the scrappy Trammell, or Tommy John. Is it just me, or is baseball just not as fun as it used to be?

I'd say Eckersley will get in. Mattingly probably has a long shot at it, as well as Garvey. Maybe Jim Rice. And eventually, Sandberg will or should get in.

[ January 03, 2004, 05:20 PM: Message edited by: Rickpw ]

Blyleven belongs (Ken Rosenthal, Sporting News); he has better *performance* numbers than several 300-game winners (as we know, win totals are somewhat out of a pitcher's control, certainly when we're talking about 10 or 20 over a career).

I'd also vote for Sandberg AND Trammell, plus Molitor, Eckersley and Gossage.

I don't understand why that's a HOF qualification -- using one award to rack up points for another? He didn't deserve the MVP that year, and like Dale Murphy, he's just not up to Hall standards. (Neither is Don Mattingly, who had 3 great seasons and a couple more very good ones. If he'd played in Cleveland, he wouldn't be in the discussion.) Ditto Garvey, an immobile first baseman with unimpressive power; one of the most overrated players of his era.

[ January 05, 2004, 09:17 AM: Message edited by: Bill W ]

Selections announced:

Hall of Famers

I'm glad Molitor and Eckersley were elected; they were the first two I thought deserved to be there. I agree with Andre Dawson's comment that there could be more elected per year. It'll certainly happen when the next large class of very talented players (Boggs, et. al.) come along.

Two great choices.

Coincidentally, for those who receive NESN on cable or dish, the weekly half-hour \"Red Sox Inside Out\" begins tonight at 10et, with Bob Rodgers and HOPEFULLY, one humble Dennis Eckersley. He's great, I'm real happy for him.

I think that's one reason why Baseball's Hall of Fame seems more "legitimate," if I can use that term. Of all the pro sports Halls of Fame, it is the most difficult into which to get inducted. I love pro football, but it does seem like just about anyone gets in there, and sooner rather than later.

Keith Hernandez, Fernando Valezuela and Joe Carter all fell off next year's ballot because they failed to get at least 5% of the vote. Not that they deserve election, but it's hard to imagine them not getting 5%!

Eckersley certainly is worthy, but how does he sail in and Sutter and Gossage are not even close. And Blyleven doesn't even get 50%?

Dude, read the rest of my post. I was laying out the pros and cons of both Morris and Dawson. I stated specifically in that post that I believe that they did NOT deserve to get in, because they were ABOVE AVERAGE, and not great, players. Please read the whole thing before taking pieces of stuff out of context.

Here's a quote in the press today:

"Eckersley, who played for six teams, wouldn't say which team he preferred for the cap on his plaque, but he added, 'I liked playing for the Oakland A's. As long as my mustache looks good, it's OK,' he said."

What's particularly silly about Keith Hernandez being dropped from the ballot is that he's offensively comparable (overall, not in power) to Don Mattingly, yet got ONE-THIRD support. Yet Hernandez was clearly the best defensive 1B of his generation (or two).

Sandberg's rising vote bodes well for his eventual election. Let's hope Blyleven eventually gets picked by the Vets' Committee.

Dude, I did, and you were clearly citing Dawson's MVP with the Cubs as a PRO item, rather than an irrelevant writers' sentimentality bestowed on him for having a good year in the Wrigley wind tunnel.

I assume Hernandez is not seriously considered by many because of his involvement with drugs- I forget the details, but I recall him testifying in some venue about his and others' drug use. Yeah, he was really a Brooks Robinson of first basemen.

Molitor and Eckersley were just on Letterman to read the Top 10 list! It was fun. Some of them were pretty funny, but the #1, something about marrying Britney Spears, was a total let down. Anyone else see them? Eckersley's looking pretty good, better than in some of his playing days. Honestly, I don't ever remember seeing him smile before.

I just looked up the entire list off the Late Show site. My favorite was number two: "During difficult times in my life I rebroadcast or retransmited games without the express written consent of Major League Baseball"

I tend to doubt "by many." Ferguson Jenkins and Orlando Cepeda have been elected despite drug histories. (The Hernandez issue came up in the "Pittsburgh trial" circa 1985... in fact, it seems the Mets acquired Keith for cheap cuz Whitey Herzog wanted him out of St. Louis due to his coke use.) I think KH's lack of support is due to defense usually being considered only with middle infielders (eg, Mazeroski and Ozzie Smith).

Hey, Doc Ellis pitched a no-hitter while blazing on acid, I think he should be in The Hall.

I saw this in the Los Angeles Times today: Though I think Dan Plesac is gorgeous, these are the only ones that I think are a lock to make it:

2005 —Wade Boggs
2006 —
2007 —Tony Gwynn, Mark McGwire, Cal Ripken Jr.
2008 —
2009 — Roger Clemens

Yes, Bill W., Cal Ripken.

I agree with your HOF predictions as shoe-ins.

I never thought of Plesac as gorgeous, although I always had it bad for Mark Langston.

Maybe we should start a totally different Hall of Fame. Players who deserve to be there totally on looks and sex appeal. Shallow and Silly? Yes. But kinda fun.

Jim, I think your predictions for first-ballot inductees over the next five years are an ironclad lock -- no more, no less....the last time I was in Cooperstown was to see the induction ceremonies when Nolan Ryan, Robin Young and George Brett were added to the list of immortals -- but I intend to try to make it back to upstate New York in 2007 to see Cal, Big Mac and Tony Gwynn deservedly enshrined.

I'm surprised to see you didn't include Mark Langston on your list of inductees, Jim -- after all, he is a former member of your beloved Angels ....and, like Rickpw, I ALWAYS thought Mark was drop-dead gorgeous (much hotter than Plesac, btw) going back to when he broke in with the Mariners in the mid-80s....but what else do you expect from a San Diego native who combined that blond, "surfer boy" look with the perfect pitcher's body? -- *drool*.

[ January 08, 2004, 09:12 PM: Message edited by: gamecock ]

My most vivid memory of Mark Langston with the Angels? Lying on his back on the Kingdome floor as the Angels were getting whacked by the Mariners in the one-game playoff after The Great Collapse of 1995. Langston's a good musician, too.

Nah, Plesac's gorgeous, IMO. Great eyes and love those chimpmunk cheeks.

I've never contested Saint Cal's HOF credentials, merely the worshipful attitude of his acolytes.

Not only do I agree with your "locks," it'd be a joke
if any of the other newly-eligibles through '09 made it... with the exception of Tim Raines, who richly deserves induction yet lacks the glamorous "counting stats" that catch the fancy of conventional minds. (ie, he was at least as good a player as Pete Rose)

The "blank" years bode fairly well for Sandberg or another repeat candidate being making it in those elections.

Gamecock mentioning Nolan Ryan reminded me of how stupid these whole writer-voted things can be sometimes. In 1973, Nolan Ryan had one of the greatest years I've ever seen a pitcher have. He was 21-16 for a truly ghastly Angels team, had a 2.87 ERA, set the record for most K's in a season (383), had a save (!!) and on top of that he threw two no-hitters (against the Royals and Tigers). And I'd forgotten this bit: Freakin' Mark Belanger! The epitome of good field/no hit! So, Nolan Ryan was a lock for the Cy Young that year, right? The writers didn't think so, giving it to the steady but boring Jim Palmer, pitching for a very good O's team. What a ripoff.

Bill W., point taken about The Cal Acolytes.

Jim Allen, I agree with the locks for the coming few years & (on a different subject) with your assessment of Plesac even though I preferred Angel Kirk McCaskill--but just by a little.

~Adam

Steady but boring Jim Palmer?

In addition to being handsome and worthy of praise for parading around in men's underwear ads, Jim Palmer was one of the finest pitchers of his generation. Yes, he played for an excellent Baltimore squad almost his entire career, but let's look at the specifics:

-He won 20 or more games NINE times, which most pitchers even on excellent teams never do, and anchored the Orioles' staff well into his mid 30s;
-Despite pitching in the American league his entire career, including mostly after the advent of the DH, he still compiled a 2.86 lifetime ERA, as against the league ERA of 3.58 for the period in which he pitched, and for most of his winning years had exceptional control;
-In 1975 he went 23-11, threw 10 shutouts, 1 save (!), and compiled a 2.09 ERA, despite the fact that his Baltimore team was led by the likes of...Kenny Singleton, Don Baylor, Brooks Robinson (who only hit .201), Bobby Grich, and Lee May. Palmer's brilliance was the main reason the team finished 2nd in the AL that year.
-He won 3 Cy Young awards during a period when there were some very good pitchers in his league, including Ryan (Catfish Hunter, Gaylord Perry, Vida Blue, Ferguson Jenkins, Luis Tiant, etc.).
-He never surrendered a grand slam his entire career
-and in his early 20s, he had the poise to defeat Sandy Koufax in a World Series (well, this isn't worthy of being in the Hall of Fame--but Palmer was a pro all the way through, even after having to sit out a year-1968 I think--with a sore shoulder).

He certainly did not have the almost nonpareil talent of Nolan Ryan (who often threw too many walks--I mean, if you're giving up 162 walks in a season, you'd better be throwing mostly no-hitters or your team is primed to lose!), Tom Seaver, Sandy Koufax, or Roger Clemens, to name four great pitchers, but he was consistently one of the best, with both great and middling teams, and often made decent teams that much better as the ace of the staff.

[ January 09, 2004, 11:50 AM: Message edited by: fantomas ]

But I think Cooperstown missed the boat with Palmer -- they shouldn't have hung his plaque. I'd have been much happier if they'd used his underwear ad photos instead..... wink

Fantomas, there's no doubt Palmer was a terrific pitcher--but in 1973, Nolan Ryan had an INCREDIBLE year and was gipped out of the Cy Young. I doubt that Palmer was a pitcher that people went "Man! We have to see him pitch", but Ryan sure was--he could either throw a no-hitter or walk 8 guys in 3 innings. Yeah, fine, Nolan walked a lot of people--one of the reasons given by some Hall voters that they weren't going to vote for him--but believe me, that actually worked in his favor at times. Because he threw so damn hard and was so wild, nobody would dig in against him. His walks hurt him at times, but really, playing on truly awful Angels teams didn't help at all. He would get no run support, the defense was often bad and the bullpen was called The Arson Squad for a reason. He was accused of going solely for strikeouts, but at one point he said the equivalent of "I *have* to strike people out because I don't trust my fielders to do their job". I liken his achievement in 1973 to Steve Carlton winning 27 games with a horrid 1972 Phillies team.

Ryan finally had a good team behind him in 1979, and through a variety of circumstances only went 16-14. When Bavasi let him leave after that season, there was his famous quote "We just need to find two 8-7 pitchers". They never did find those guys. In a depressingly long list of bad moves by the Angels, letting Nolan Ryan go is at the very top.

Oh, come on Jim. Bill Singer went 20-14 with a 3.22 ERA the same year for Anaheim, not that much worse than Ryan. The Angels were not that terrible. Carlton accounted for nearly half the Phillies wins in 1971. There's no comparison.

Paul Molitor and Dennis Eckersley were both looking good as they were inducted into the Hall of Fame today.

Time to vote for the 2005 Hall of Fame

This year's candidates (years on ballot):

• Jim Abbott (1)
• Bert Blyleven (8)
• Wade Boggs (1)
• Tom Candiotti (1)
• Dave Concepcion (12)
• Chili Davis (1)
• Andre Dawson (4)
• Steve Garvey (13)
• Rich Gossage (6)
• Tommy John (11)
• Mark Langston (1)
• Don Mattingly (5)
• Jack McDowell (1)
• Willie McGee (1)
• Jeff Montgomery (1)
• Jack Morris (6)
• Dale Murphy (7)
• Otis Nixon (1)
• Dave Parker (9)
• Tony Phillips (1)
• Jim Rice (11)
• Ryne Sandberg (3)
• Lee Smith (3)
• Terry Steinbach (1)
• Darryl Strawberry (1)
• Bruce Sutter (12)
• Alan Trammell (4)

Bert Blyleven, Andre Dawson, Ryne Sandberg, Paul Molitor, Dale Murphy, Goose Gossage, Dennis Eckersley, Wade Boggs and Dave Parker. Mist deserving, IMO, are Blyleven, Boggs, Sandberg and Murphy.

Wade Boggs and Ryne Sandberg are Hall of Famers. Boggs became the 41st player elected in his first year of eligibility while being named on 91.86% of ballots. Sandberg barely eked in by a mere six votes. Bruce Sutter, Jim Rice, Goose Gossage and Andre Dawson finished 3-6.

They have to get Bruce Sutter in there one of these years. His total increased from last year, though, so maybe he will.

Not a single vote for Mark Langston and Otis Nixon. Stunning. wink

Pete Rose got nine write-in votes, six fewer than last year and his lowest total ever. Yeah, that "I bet on baseball" admission really worked!

And since Ryne Sandberg had 6 career at-bats with the Phillies before that ill-fated trade, does that mean there has to be a debate about whether he'll be inducted as a Cub or a Phil? wink

[ January 04, 2005, 05:38 PM: Message edited by: Joe in Philly ]

Isn't next year's roster of newly-eligible rather weak, for lack of a better word? That may be the opportunity for Bruce Sutter, as well as Jim Rice, to finally make the Hall.

~Adam

Sandberg not Hall-worthy

Typical white sox fan, and typical of the Sun -Times which just happens to be the competing(and far inferior) paper to the Tribune which just happens to own the Cubs.

Tribune far superior? Give me a break. It doesn't take a White Sox fan to see that Sandberg wasn't as perfect as Cubs fans think he was.

This article completely focuses on his fielding skills, but not all players are in Cooperstown for their fielding ability.

Ryne Sandberg was the greatest second baseman of his era, period. An era of baseball, the 80's, that is nearly void of Hall of Famers to this point. I'm glad to see him get in! Maybe this will break down the door for a few other greats of the 80's: Andre Dawson, Jim Rice, Dale Murphy. No, they don't stack up as the greatest outfielders of all time. But at the time, who wanted to be a pitcher facing any of these guys in their prime, and each had a string of at least 10 years where they were a feared hitter and/or decent to above fielder. Dawson had the bad luck of playing most of his career in Montreal, Rice has numbers for BoSox teams that mostly did not make the playoffs, and Murphy played on BAD Atlanta Braves teams. These guys would be comparable to the Manny Ramirez and Sammy Sosa of their era, leading the league in HR, RBI and OPS.

[ January 09, 2005, 08:36 AM: Message edited by: MSUBulldog ]