Nominated To Date

  • Mark Banghart
  • Dan Beckman
  • Susan Begoske
  • Jim Boggio, Sr.
  • Susan Brown
  • Steve Buckley
  • Tom Cleworth
  • Bill DePetro
  • Pat Dexter
  • Joe Essman
  • Kristin Hamill
  • Roger Hill
  • Duane Haralson
  • Frank Herveat
  • Lige Johnson
  • Jim Kenner
  • Larry Letts
  • Thom Marusich
  • Tom Matuzak
  • Art McGuff
  • Dave' Nesbitt
  • Roger Ohman
  • John Sappington
  • Steve Trauger
  • Julie Vadnais
  • Richard Warden



 

What makes a Hall of Famer?

This question has been asked and debated. A Survey was conducted in 2012 to obtain guidance from our membership on traits they felt important. 

Traits of a Hall of Fame candidate were ranked on a scale of 1-10. (1- Not important,  3- Somewhat important,  5.5- Important,  8-Very important,  10- Critically important).

The survey results reflected that Individual skills (9.5) and Game changer/ability to handle pressure (8.8) were the highest ranked measurements falling between Critically important and Very important. Promoter/ Contributions/ Teacher (7.5), Longevity (7.2) and Team finishes (6.4) ranged from Very important to Important.  Respondents generally felt that Sportsmanship was also a very important trait.

These are the findings of the survey but it is only a framework to assist in decisions by the Full Hall of Fame voters.

Some questions to consider when nominating a candidate could include:

  • Was the player held in high regard by teammates and opponents alike?
  • Was the player good enough that he/ she could continue to play regularly after passing their prime and still had an impact?
  • Did the candidate have a significant playing career which, while not sufficiently outstanding to qualify for a Hall of Fame spot solely on playing merits, nonetheless strengthens the overall candidacy?
  • What players of the candidate's era  and of the current era most comparable? How is this player better or worse than those comparables? Are those comparables in the Hall of Fame (or worthy of being in the Hall)?

When nominating a candidate,  please include commentary answering these questions and other notable traits or contributions.

Clearly, Hall of Famers are generally recognized as the top players with a distinguished record of competitive achievement. However, nominees can also include those who have made significant contributions to our sport in addition to, or in place of, having played the game.  These accomplishments can also warrant their consideration as a Hall of Fame member.

Peer review process

1. Final candidates will be selected by the full committee which consists of HOF inductees, USA Guts Board of Directors and all HOF nomination committee members.

2. To make the best informed selections the vetting subcommittee will utilize peer groups in identifying potential candidates. The vetting subcommittee will coordinate the establishment of peer groups and a mechanism to gather input on potential candidates and the rationale for their inclusion in the context of their era.

3. Peer groups would be established, as needed, by the vetting subcommittee. In 2015, 3 peer review groups will be used. Veterans, Men and Women. The peer review group will be voting members and considered part of the full Hall of Fame Committee.

4. Outside of the formal peer review process, there will continue to be a general solicitation of the USA guts membership for other candidates.

5. The vetting subcommittee and other voting members of the full Hall of Fame Committee shall draw upon the peer review input, written applications, reference letters, personal discussions, and any other means at their disposal in making decisions regarding potential inductees.

6. The minimum age for candidates is 45 years old.

7. The vetting subcommittee and Hall of Fame voters will need to make a subjective trade-off between candidates in the veteran and men’s categories each year.

8. Each peer group, coordinated by the respective peer group chair, will develop a list of potential candidates and, for any given induction class, will rank the candidates based upon all knowledge they have about them.  Such list will be given strong consideration by the vetting subcommittee in developing the final candidates to be voted upon by the voting members of the full Hall of Fame Committee. The peer group chair is a member of the vetting subcommittee.

9. Although it will vary from any given induction class, each peer group will be asked to reduce their list. For the 2015 induction process, the goal will be to have a maximum of 2 women, 6 veteran and 6 men nominees which will be forwarded to the vetting subcommittee.

10. The vetting subcommittee will combine and distill the veteran, men and women nominee lists to the final ballot. For the 2015 induction process, the goal would be to have a maximum of 6 nominees placed on the ballot.

11. For the 2015 induction process, the final nominee’s ballot will be placed on the USA Guts website. Voting will be conducted by Survey Monkey. The threshold for induction is 67% of the total ballots cast.

12. Should no nominee be inducted, the final voting results will be shared with the vetting committee for further review or consideration.

If you have any question contact Dave Brown.