04 Jun 05
Any baseball fans? What do you think about MLB Baseball and Yanks vs. Sox in the American League East? Do you think that is good for baseball having 2 teams that probably always will make playoffs?
Should the burden of being good be spread to all teams in MLB, so that the Tigers and Expos of the world can win?
Some say MLB season would be a flop if there is no Sox and Yankees. Some say this is good for the sport, while others say it is bad.
Here is my position on it all. Baseball would be better all around if the teams were more even like in the NFL. It might be a tough start at first... but I think after a season or 3 people would migrate back to their home teams, rather than sucking up on my Red Sox Nation... or being complete pea-brain and loving the Yankees when they live in another city.
To not agree with myself right off the bat, I will say there are places like St.Louis where they should have huge fans, they have a great team. Yet they still just don't get the same passion from their fans. Many of the people really like the Sox, cuz they are a great team... or they are very busy sucking up to the Yankees cuz they always win. That leaves 5 men to root for St. Louis.
What are your thoughts?
ES
04 Jun 05
Originally posted by PhlabibitI'm a life long Cub fan, does that count? 🙁
Any baseball fans? What do you think about MLB Baseball and Yanks vs. Sox in the American League East? Do you think that is good for baseball having 2 teams that probably always will make playoffs?
Should the burden of being good be spread to all teams in MLB, so that the Tigers and Expos of the world can win?
Some say MLB season would be a flop if ...[text shortened]... cuz they always win. That leaves 5 men to root for St. Louis.
What are your thoughts?
ES
Kelly
04 Jun 05
2 edits
Originally posted by PhlabibitHey Trav,
Any baseball fans? What do you think about MLB Baseball and Yanks vs. Sox in the American League East? Do you think that is good for baseball having 2 teams that probably always will make playoffs?
Should the burden of being good be ...[text shortened]... aves 5 men to root for St. Louis.
What are your thoughts?
ES
How doing?
I guess all of us are built different. Me? I adopted Frank Robinson and have just followed him whereever he went. I thought he was the greatest in Cincinatti. Then I was an Oriole. Then I was a passionate Dodger. Then I thought the Angels were cool. Then (believe it or not) I fell in love with the Indians.
Go figure.
Did I ever tell you that I had a glove that was given to me by the nephew of Walter Johnson? My wife gave it to a charity without asking. To quote her... "It was just an old ugly piece of leather."
snark.
Oh well. I guess that's life. I got to warm up (as catcher) some A pitchers in Idaho Falls old McDermott field when I was 12 in the bull pen. It's a long story. I was the MVP Idaho little league catcher. That was fun. I batted .785 and had only one strike-out in 52 at bats. And 23 homers. Not to brag or anything. But what the hell. If I don't... who will?😀
<edit> Salt Lake City now has its first "major league" team. Well... except for the Jazz who did make it to the final game -- twice -- and lost both times. "Real Salt Lake" er whatever. Do I sound excited? A bunch of socialists kicking the sh1t out of a little ball that never did anything to them! To what purpose? Exhaustion? All that mindless running about with no hope of final success? Wow. I guess. 😠😵
04 Jun 05
Originally posted by KellyJayI'm a Cub fan also... really a fan of baseball. If you guys didn't get screwed by that guy that must have moved to Florida, I wouldn't mind you guys getting a win. I'm a fan of Detroit Tigers too. Astros... Mets... almost any team but the Yankees. Heck, I was a Marlins fan a few years back!
I'm a life long Cub fan, does that count? 🙁
Kelly
Anyway... would it be better for the sport if the field were more even? Or do you think Sox vs. Yanks is what makes baseball great? I bet the Cubs would have even more fans... once all the Sox fans and Yankers went home.
ES
04 Jun 05
Originally posted by StarValleyWyThat's pretty neat to follow a player... but that's pretty new with free agency. Good old days were when a team stayed a team. Must have been that way when I was a kid, cuz it still breaks my heart every year to watch people go.
Hey Trav,
How doing?
I guess all of us are built different. Me? I adopted Frank Robinson and have just followed him whereever he went. I thought he was the greatest in Cincinatti. Then I was an Oriole. Then I was a passionate Dodger. Then I thought the Angels were cool. Then (believe it or not) I fell in love with the Indians.
Go figure.
Di ...[text shortened]... 2 at bats. And 23 homers. Not to brag or anything. But what the hell. If I don't... who will?😀
I was pitcher, or shortstop in LL baseball. I was ok with the bat, but one day I guess I got scared of the ball. Who knows, I might have been pelted good and blocked it... or one too many balls got close. I got scared, and pitchers had to bat.
I can still huck a ball where I want it (for the most part), curve, slider, or knuckle... and they all move... but I can't do it well enough to have someone in a batter's box while I was doing it. They'd get plinked.
Before I hijack my own thread... do you think a level playing field is better for MLB?!
T
04 Jun 05
Originally posted by PhlabibitWe don't need your pity. I'll have you know that the Tigers have been to the World Series nine times in their history, winning four of those (1935, 1945, 1968, 1984). Your Red Sox have only been to one more World Series than that. In fact, only the Yankees, the Athletics, and the Red Sox have been to more World Series than the Tigers for the American League. If you want to pick on some loser teams, then go pick on the White Sox or the Indians. Those two jokers have only been to four World Series apiece.
Any baseball fans? What do you think about MLB Baseball and Yanks vs. Sox in the American League East? Do you think that is good for baseball having 2 teams that probably always will make playoffs?
Should the burden of being good be spread to all teams in MLB, so that the Tigers and Expos of the world can win?
Some say MLB season would be a flop if ...[text shortened]... cuz they always win. That leaves 5 men to root for St. Louis.
What are your thoughts?
ES
04 Jun 05
Originally posted by rwingettIt's not pitty. Up Tigers! Please answer my question now. Should MLB be a more level playing field?
We don't need your pity. I'll have you know that the Tigers have been to the World Series nine times in their history, winning four of those (1935, 1945, 1968, 1984). Your Red Sox have only been to one more World Series than that. In fact, only the Yankees, the Athletics, and the Red Sox have been to more World Series than the Tigers for the American Leag ...[text shortened]... k on the White Sox or the Indians. Those two jokers have only been to four World Series apiece.
ES
04 Jun 05
Originally posted by PhlabibitA more level playing field? You'd get fewer bad hops on the infield, I guess.
It's not pitty. Up Tigers! Please answer my question now. Should MLB be a more level playing field?
ES
All the revenue from baseball should go to the league as a whole, which would then split it up evenly between all the teams. Then Steinbrenner couldn't buy every free agent under the sun. That's probably not a very good idea, but it was all I could come up with on the spot.
Just don't start thinking that because you won the Series last year that you can go around looking down your nose at the Tigers. How dare you use us in the same sentence as the Expos!
04 Jun 05
Originally posted by PhlabibitShould I get two moves for every one of Ironman31's? Maybe they could make it more even by saying teams which made it to the playoffs only get two strikes the next year. Would that be even enough for those losers teams that aren't the most successful sports franchise in history?
It's not pitty. Up Tigers! Please answer my question now. Should MLB be a more level playing field?
ES
04 Jun 05
Originally posted by rwingettBAH, give it up with your socialist drivel. You're a Detroit fan and you would be even if Bill Gates spent 1/gadzillioniths of his vast wealth to buy your lame team and renamed them the Detroit Windows.
A more level playing field? You'd get fewer bad hops on the infield, I guess.
All the revenue from baseball should go to the league as a whole, which would then split it up evenly between all the teams. Then Steinbrenner couldn't buy every free agent under the sun. That's probably not a very good idea, but it was all I could come up with on the spot. ...[text shortened]... und looking down your nose at the Tigers. How dare you use us in the same sentence as the Expos!
04 Jun 05
Originally posted by no1marauderThat's an inexact analogy. It would be more accurate to say that there are two free agents on the market: Ironman31 and No1marauder. Steinbrenner lavishes more money on Ironman31 for his chess team than Kansas City can afford for their whole payroll. So teams like Kansas City get stuck with the No1marauder's of the world and perenially finish near the bottom. 😛
Should I get two moves for every one of Ironman31's? Maybe they could make it more even by saying teams which made it to the playoffs only get two strikes the next year. Would that be even enough for those losers teams that aren't the most successful sports franchise in history?
04 Jun 05
1 edit
Originally posted by Phlabibit<grin>
Before I hijack my own thread... do you think a level playing field is better for MLB?!
T
How can I remain a good Capitalist and say that I believe in equality imposed for the sake of social norm?
No. It's a big boys game of glamour and fame and money. Half the reason we watch is to see who will fall the hardest.
I think that it is a life lesson on chimpness. Those with the gold hold the mold. The rest of us just pour ourselves into it.
Sorry Manchester United. Malcolm Glazer has the gold. So fit the mold.
04 Jun 05
Originally posted by no1marauderwith chess, we talk about an individuals brains. Baseball is about money, now anyway.... I like Rwing's idea about money going back in for all teams.
Should I get two moves for every one of Ironman31's? Maybe they could make it more even by saying teams which made it to the playoffs only get two strikes the next year. Would that be even enough for those losers teams that aren't the most successful sports franchise in history?
On the other hand, are there not team owners that already pocket the money coming back? They should be hangeded!
ES
04 Jun 05
Originally posted by rwingettYeah, and what I said.
That's an inexact analogy. It would be more accurate to say that there are two free agents on the market: Ironman31 and No1marauder. Steinbrenner lavishes more money on Ironman31 for his chess team than Kansas City can afford for their whole payroll. So teams like Kansas City get stuck with the No1marauder's of the world and perenially finish near the bottom. 😛
04 Jun 05
Originally posted by no1marauderWe had something almost as bad when Tom Monaghan owned the Tigers. Mr. christian, holier than thou, freak of nature was running the show before Ilitch bought them.
BAH, give it up with your socialist drivel. You're a Detroit fan and you would be even if Bill Gates spent 1/gadzillioniths of his vast wealth to buy your lame team and renamed them the Detroit Windows.