Originally Posted by Moose Malloy
I read an interview with Tony Trabert(who ran the HOF) a few years ago. He implied that since the Hall of Fame isn't exactly raking in the dough(do many people travel there year round & pay for tickets to see their exhibits like so many of the hall of fames in other sports?), they needed to induct players that would show up if they were inducted. And that some players drew a lot more media attention & ticket requests for their induction than others. Draw your own conclusions as to what that means(& take that into consideration everytime posters here whine about their standards being lowered. The fact is they need to induct a certain amount of players every year in order to survive. Its not like the Baseball Hall of Fame which is such a bigger deal in terms of fan attendance & money - that they go some years without inducting anyone)
"international tennis hall of fame?" maybe, but the fact is it is in Rhode Island, which is in the US. Its a lot easier for Americans to show up & have a lot of their friends & families show up than it is for non Americans. I believe all the voters for the Hall of Fame are Americans as well.
I'm guessing the year Andy Roddick gets inducted, they will have no trouble getting a good crowd to show up.
It seems that way(in recent years)
I guess Andy Murray could still get in at some point, even if he wins no majors.
Interesting posts. I know Newport is a very scenic "high-class" home for the HOF, but I wonder if it would be better simply as part of or adjacent to the National Tennis Center (assuming that if it were ever to move, it would stay in the USA). That way it would be located in a major city, more potential patrons during the year, and the USO crowds would always be a source of attendance. Induction ceremonies could be held during or right before the USO, when many former greats are in around anyway.
Or, would this just be too much linkage to the USTA and the crassness and commercialism of the USO? And, would the USTA even allow the HOF to operate independently on its property without getting its meaty paws all over it? (that's why I added "or adjacent" to the NTC). Probably not.