Voting should be done in the summer to get us away from the drunk-with-happiness problem that would come up if we voted right after a very successful NCAA run or a Rose Bowl win.  I, for one, probably would have voted for the whole 2011-12 football team right after they beat OSU, but that would not have been wise.

how about tying the inductee's pyramid level to the % of vote that he garners? 

We have have a MHOF with high criteria, and something like the MLB system makes sense.

I also think there could be a broadcaster/administrator/writer part of this... it would be an honor that is voted on, and would also have a high bar to achieve.

Lastly, I think annual awards similar to the ESPYs could be fun, and they could be inclusive of   many non-revnue sports:

-Female Michigan Athlete of the Year

-Team of the Year

-Bo Schembechler Those Who Stay Will Be Champions Award

-Michigan Freshman of the Year

-MGOLeadership Award

Clearly tons of options exist... Then Brian and co. could do some type of unveiling of the results, podcast or web videocast? With follow-up installments involving player interviews, etc?

Not sure of all the rules out there, but I have wondered why this blog doesnt have more current player interviews?

 

Is this something where anybody can present a name for consideration, or will Brian (or a mod committee or something) do that? Would voting take place at the end of each respective team's season (January for football, March for basketball, April for hockey), or just have one vote once every sport is done? No matter what, I agree with others who have said that the bar should be very high. I would even say leave it at 95% for the first two years after graduation, then slowly reduce it for each year after that.

I think the inaugural class does have to be bigger to make up for lost time. After that the best two options for each year are: 1) have a really high threshold for induction or 2) limit amount of nominees per year. 

I really like the idea that individuals are immediately eligible upon graduation (or leaving for respective professional sport), but that in the immediate years, there should be a higher threshold for induction than for the subsequent years. Brian's idea of 95% for induction upon graduation, declining towards 75% each year is excellent. I actually think the ultimate floor should be 80%, just for the purposes of exclusivity. 

I don't think there is one method to determine admissibility. Each voter should be allowed to factor in their own considerations: talent level, performance on the field/court/ice/what-have-you, general love from the fanbase, individual love from the specific voter, etc. We should be able to assume that voters are reasonable people (sorry, I'm in law school, "reasonable" is overused, but a pretty good standard) and reasonable people will not make unreasonable decisions (for example, voting in GERG). 

As a general matter, on a fairly slow day, I LOVE THIS IDEA

I like what has been suggested so far especially a larger first class of potentially 20 odd inductees then 3 or four each year after with a non-revenue athlete having a spot every other year., 

I also agree that for acceptance the number has to be very high given our fandom. The 95% seems about right to me. It seems like the diea needs to be refined somewhat, but the idea is a great one. I look forward to it!

Tacopants is a first-ballot hall-of-famer for sure.

End of discussion.

It would necessarily be subjective, because like you say, Brian, the purpose of such a HOF would be to recognize the amount of enjoyment a player added to the experience of being a Michigan fan. For this reason, football players would be the most highly represented because most Michigan sports fans are football fans, and thus an electric football player would bring more enjoyment to more Michigan fans than a world-class gymnast. It would take a really, really out-of-this world non-revenue-sport athlete (e.g., Michael Phelps) to make the grade. There would be few hockey players for this reason, too. 

I would also suggest that voting privileges be based on point total and/or on duration of site membership, and I would argue that the latter is a much, much better criterion for seriousness and knowledge of Michigan sports. There are plenty of people who have been reading this blog religiously for years who don't often post. And there are plenty of people who joined a couple of months ago and, by virtue of too much leisure time and lack of thought censor, quickly reach some point cut-off. Obviously site tenure and points are correlated, but this would help achieve your goal of granting voting rights to only the landed gentry.

Justin Feagin is a first ballot MGoHallofFamer

Lexi Zimmerman is a HOFer.

That is all.

HOF, etc) are to me, much less meaningful than those "earned" on the playing field (Conference Champion, Bowl Game winner, most yards rushing, etc.).  So, this idea doesn't excite me much.  But hey, if the rest of you like to. go for it.

…and a favorite personal subject of mine, in all sports.   a waiting period is important, even if it’s just a couple of years – i think it’s important to see the team after a great player leaves.  do you still wish he was around?  did the team seem like less after he left?  were we talking about how much we missed him the following season?  in the case of an MGoHOF, that gut feeling – and that question – is critical.  do you miss them?  you need some time to answer that question accurately.  I missed blanchard after he left.  but not that much.   i wouldn’t recommend a minimum or maximum per year, either.  there are going to be some years where picking three guys will force us to hold our nose a little bit as we click ‘yes,’ and similarly, years where there are about six automatics, either because of sheer greatness, or symbolic value, or the joy that they brought us.   i like the idea of non-revenue sports – some of them have crossed over into our consciousness, they should be recognized.  voting will out.   lastly, i love bill simmons, but the levels / pyramid idea is pretty dumb.  you’re in or you’re not…but make the bar very, very high, like 90% or more.  these should be the best of the best of the best of the MGoBlogiverse.   and no team inductions.  that’s silly.

yes...on the 95% first year then sliding down to ensure that the deserving get in.  I'd say have an unlimited first class, and unlimited individual classes thereafter.  Let the nomination process help limit the inductees as well as the blog at large.  Let the users nominate, but let a (very) select few chosen by Brian have the ability to second the nomination to allow for a vote.  It isn't hard to imagine sending 5 or 6 inductees out of a national championship-type year.

we'll have 9 guys sitting at 85% and a Denard ruling them all. I like a max of 5 each year, and then of course they would be eligible again the following year etc., kind of like baseball's HOF. We all add our nominations, Brian and a few others sit around and pick the top 10 that should be eligible that season, this eliminates Tacopants and Pop Evil, send out a ballot on the front page, we all vote. 90% gets in on first year, ties go to some kind of tiebreaker. Those that don't make it again can be put back on the ballot the next year if Brian and the panel approve. Maybe Wolverine Historian can be on the "Veterans Committee" and nominate someone from the past each year as well with stats and video(if it exists)

Hockey may be a little tricky though, mostly because the program is so stong. It's easy to forget about a great player like Kevin Porter or Andrew Cogliano because we reload so quickly.