This has got to change. Those were my first thoughts when I went to MLB.com’s homepage and saw that the Veterans Committee had once again—for the third consecutive time—failed to vote anyone into the Hall of Fame. Clearly, this newfangled committee, which consists of Hall of Famers along with Frick and Spink Award winners, is not working out as intended.

It’s one thing to uphold high standards for election to the Hall of Fame. It’s quite another to keep the doors to the Hall of Fame completely closed when there are at least three deserving players and four or five qualified managers/executives who have met the established criteria for Cooperstown. In some cases, the selections should have been slam dunks. Lets’ consider the cases of Ron Santo and umpire Doug Harvey. Santo, by even the most conservative estimates, was one of the ten best third basemen in baseball history. If you’re one of the ten best anything in baseball, you deserve to be in the Hall of Fame. As for Harvey, he was generally regarded as the best umpire in the National League for much of the 1970s and eighties (and possibly longer). He was nicknamed "God," for crying out loud. If that’s not worthy of the Hall of Fame, then it’s time to remove the memberships of Jocko Conlan and Nestor Chylak.

Thankfully, we’re not going to have put up with this "they’re not worthy" attitude of the current Veterans Committee much longer. Prior to the vote, Hall of Fame officials had already met to consider possible changes to the committee; now that the Vets have shown that they don’t know how to build consensus and reward greatness to those who deserve it—and that they want to keep Hall membership exclusive for their own personal gains—the Hall will move full throttle to implement some of those changes. The Hall will have to tread lightly here because the institution doesn’t want to be seen as undermining the Hall of Fame members. Yet, the Hall will clearly have to make a significant change because the Vets Committee’s stubbornness has brought untold negative publicity to the institution over the last five years, both in terms of media criticism and angry reactions from the candidates themselves.

So what is the Hall of Fame to do? Other than returning to the old Veterans Committee setup (which consisted of five Hall of Famers, five media members, and five executives) there is no simple solution. There is, however, no shortage of ideas. In the spirit of change, here are a few concepts that might be worthy of consumption:

*Change the attitude of the voters. The Hall should require that each voting member gather on Hall of Fame Weekend in Cooperstown to discuss the vote. That way, Hall of Famers could make arguments and try to build consensus for the worthiest of candidates. The Hall should also make results of the votes completely public. That way, each Hall of Famer would be put in a position to explain why he snubbed Santo, Harvey, Gil Hodges, or Marvin Miller. Afraid of embarrassment, some of the voters might be tempted to do away with past grudges and vote with their conscience—the way it should be done.

*Change the voters themselves. A more radical change would involve a complete retooling of the Committee. If the vote were to be taken away from the Hall of Famers, it could be given to longtime members of the Baseball Writers’ Association and veteran major league broadcasters. Just for the sake of argument, any writer or broadcaster who has worked a major league beat for 20 years would be eligible to vote. Those voters would likely be far more lenient than the Hall of Famers. If the Hall doesn’t want to insult its members by taking away their right to vote, it could simply expand the committee by including veteran writers, broadcasters, and historians. The key would be to expand the voting body to include potential voters who aren’t ****-bent at keeping candidates out of the Hall of Fame.

*Hold a run-off. The Hall of Fame could conduct its Veteran Committee vote in two phases, a general election followed by a runoff. If the general election fails to produce someone with 75 per cent of the vote, then hold a runoff involving the top three finishers. Each Hall of Famer would then be required to vote for at least one person in the runoff, thereby increasing the chances of reaching a 75 per cent consensus.

None of these ideas are meant to guarantee that someone will receive the minimum 75 per cent of the vote. That’s not the point. The key is to make the 75 per cent threshold more attainable, especially with so many qualified candidates on the ballots. That will mean changing the attitude, or changing the voters. It’s up to the Hall to decide which is the best of those solutions. Clearly, the status quo isn’t getting it done.

I’ve done enough waffling on this issue; now it’s time to make a prediction. On some days, I’ve believed that no one will be elected in Tuesday’s Veterans Committee vote for the Hall of Fame. Other days, I’ve been tempted to say that for the first time since 2001, the Vets Committee will actually put someone new in the Hall. So it’s time to write down what I really think before I change my mind again.

After talking to some reliable Hall of Fame sources in an effort to gauge the general "mood" surrounding the election, I’m now willing to predict that there will be at least one new Hall of Famer by Tuesday afternoon. Let’s start with the players’ ballot, which contains the names of 27 retired stars. My sources tell me that either player/manager Gil Hodges or third baseman extraordinaire Ron Santo, and possibly both, will earn the 75 per cent of the vote needed for enshrinement. (It’s likely that only one will get in, but two is a small possibility.) One other possibility, though it’s a long shot, involves former Twin Tony Oliva, underrated as an all-round ballplayer. As for the composite ballot, which consists of 15 retired managers, owners, executives, and umpires, longtime union chief Marvin Miller stands the best shot at gaining election. Miller’s chances are probably less than that of either Hodges or Santo, so it’s still a very iffy proposition.

So why exactly the change in the voting by the Vets Committee, which consists of living Hall of Famers, along with winners of the Frick (broadcasting) and Spink (writing) awards? The Hall of Fame members are worried that if they don’t vote anyone in, thereby posting a third consecutive shutout in Vets Committee selections, the Hall’s board of directors will likely make a radical change to the voting process. One possible remedy would be to remove the vote from the Hall of Famers, which is something that Joe Morgan and company clearly don’t want. The Hall’s administration fears, and rightly so, that the Vets Committee election will become an embarrassment and lose all credibility with the public if zeros continue to be posted. The Hall is learning a hard lesson: if your standards are too high and no one is deemed worthy of election year after year, the fans and media will lose interest very quickly.

Frankly, there’s no reason for the Hall of Famers not to vote someone in. The players’ ballot has at least three worthy candidates in Santo, Hodges, and the criminally underrated Joe Gordon, while the composite ballot is chock-a-block full of excellent candidates. A landscape-changing executive like Miller, a pioneering owner like Charlie Finley, a four-time World Series participant in **** Williams, and an exceedingly well-respected umpire like Doug Harvey would all receive my vote, with no doubts and few questions asked.

I also hope that the Vets Committee has learned a lesson from last year’s special Negro Leagues election, when Buck O’Neil was bypassed, and last week’s Basketball Hall of Fame nominating committee, which overlooked Dennis Johnson. Both are gone now. If you’re going to vote for someone, vote for him while he can still appreciate the honor. Let’s have none of this, "I’ll vote for him the next time around." The "next time" might be too late to really matter.

Well before the days of Mariano Rivera, Sparky Lyle was the MAN when it came to New York City closers, or as we used to call them, firemen. When Lyle emerged from the bullpen, I felt like the Yankees had won. Even if Lyle entered a game in the seventh inning with the bases loaded protecting a mere one-run lead—something a current-day closer would never be asked to do—Lyle’s calm demeanor and wrecking-ball slider made Yankee fans feel that much more comfortable about the outcome of the game. The sight of Lyle stepping out of the Datsun bullpen car (or in later years, the Toyota) gave us fans the most legitimate reason to feel secure.

Lyle happens to be on the players’ ballot for the Veterans Committee election, with the results to be announced on February 27. He doesn’t have much of a chance at winning election—correct that, he has no chance of getting in this year—in part because his career faded a bit too quickly after its 1977 peak and in part because the Hall hasn’t been too friendly to closers over the years. Still, from 1972 to 1977, Lyle was about as efficient as any fireman in the game, rivaling more heralded ace relievers like Rollie Fingers, Goose Gossage, and Bruce Sutter.

Yet, none of those firemen were quite as colorful as Lyle. Fingers had the handlebar mustache, Gossage had the nickname, and Sutter the split-finger, but Lyle had a full repertoire of one-liners, practical jokes, and comical stunts. A list of Lyle’s hijinx could fill a chapter of a book, but let’s consider just three of his most innovative and memorable capers.

*Lyle once stole the waterbed that belonged to teammate and fellow left-hander Mike Kekich (an unusual character in his own right). During a game at Milwaukee’s County Stadium, Lyle arranged to have it hung from the scoreboard at Milwaukee’s County Stadium. The waterbed dangled in the wind for all of the fans—and Kekich’s teammates, of course—to enjoy during an otherwise uneventful game between the Yankees and Brewers.

*Lyle once had a casket delivered to the team clubhouse at Yankee Stadium. As no-nonsense manager Bill Virdon prepared to address his players in a team meeting, the casket creaked open slowly. Emerging from inside the casket was Lyle, who sat upright and then delivered his best Bela Lugosi imitation while slowly mouthing the words, "How do you pitch to Brooks Robinson?"

*Of all the Lyle pranks, his trademark stunt became his reaction to birthday cakes that arrived at Yankee Stadium. When a player celebrated a birthday during the season, the Yankees arranged to have a large cake delivered to the clubhouse. As soon as Lyle got wind of the cake’s impending arrival, he prepared to take action. Waiting in the clubhouse until the cake was placed on a table, Lyle then pulled down his pants, jumped up in the air, and proceeded to sit on top of the cake!

In spite of his destruction of birthday cakes, Lyle remained a popular player in the Yankee clubhouse. While several personalities on the Yankees clashed with each other, Lyle remained outside of the fray. Perhaps he was just too busy planning his next practical joke.