View Full Version : gehrig38: “Turn out the lights the party’s over”
jlw1980
03-30-09, 05:03 PM
Not to pick on you guys, but the only people I ever hear complain about the wildcard are old people who nostalgically romanticise days gone by and Yankee fans whose team has been burned the past 8 years mostly by wildcard teams in the playoffs.
Yeah, I've hated the Wild Card since it was invented.
NYYDragoon
03-30-09, 05:03 PM
You guys = the two anti-WC posters I was responding to.
You guys ≠ the entire Yankee fanbase.Right. Because those two posters are the only ones whose team has been "burned the past 8 years mostly by wildcard teams in the playoffs."
It came off as a cheap shot. Remember where you are and pick your words more carefully next time.
President Kennedy
03-30-09, 05:15 PM
Nice try, sweetie, but I've said the same thing before on this very forum. It wasn't intended as a cheap shot the first time I said it (nor is it now), and it wasn't taken as such. I'm not really sure what has changed between now and then, but since I can't control it, I won't worry about it much.
I'm not really sure if your agenda is to intentionally lump every Sox fan on this board in with TommyK8 and TheoSchmeo or whether those two have you so paranoid that you're constantly on the lookout for bogeymen, but either way, take me out because I'm not interested in the boring, redundant drama fest the three of you share.
If I'm being unfair and you really have a point, you'd be well served to clearly state what, indeed, my "true colors" are, how I've been nefariously hiding them all this time, and in what other instances I have revealed them. If you can't, perhaps you can salvage your credibility and mine by apologizing to me.
As to anybody else who didn't like what I said, what precisely about it didn't you like? That I insinuated that the majority of wildcard haters are either old or Yankee fans? That's just my personal observation, and I clearly stated that. Did you dislike that I said the reason most Yankee fans who oppose the WC dislike it mostly because the Yankees have had trouble in the playoffs with WC teams the past 7-8 years? Why would anybody have a problem with that? Jesus Christ.
If any one of you told me that a disproportionate amount of salary cap proponents are small-market team and Red Sox fans, I wouldn't accuse you of being anti-Red Sox or trying to hurt my feelings. If you also told me that the biggest reason those Sox fans support the salary cap is largely an emotional reaction toward the success of the Yankees, I wouldn't pout my lips and accuse you showing your true colors. I've been in a million arguments here without ever having been accused of haboring some hidden agenda before. This seems like a pretty absurd reason to suddenly accuse me of having one.
I think after the amount of words used here to whine about people calling you out on taking a cheap shot, it is pretty safe to lump you in with the latter.
Bronson'sCornrows
03-30-09, 05:25 PM
Right. Because those two posters are the only ones whose team has been "burned the past 8 years mostly by wildcard teams in the playoffs."
No, those are simply the only two I was responding to. Hence "you guys." Ironically, when I said "not to pick on you guys", I was worried more about them thinking I was calling them old than any of the other stuff I said.
It came off as a cheap shot. Remember where you are and pick your words more carefully next time.
I said the same thing here before without anyone accusing me of taking cheap shots. The only difference I can see is that this time I used the phrase "you guys." WTF?
Bronson'sCornrows
03-30-09, 05:30 PM
I think after the amount of words used here to whine about people calling you out on taking a cheap shot, it is pretty safe to lump you in with the latter.
Parsimony and I always tried to get along, but we just can't seem to connect like we should.
YanksFan1992
03-30-09, 05:31 PM
No, those are simply the only two I was responding to. Hence "you guys." Ironically, when I said "not to pick on you guys", I was worried more about them thinking I was calling them old than any of the other stuff I said.
I said the same thing here before without anyone accusing me of taking cheap shots. The only difference I can see is that this time I used the phrase "you guys." WTF?
I often wonder why Red Sox fans are allowed to post here.
NYYDragoon
03-30-09, 05:33 PM
No, those are simply the only two I was responding to. Hence "you guys." Ironically, when I said "not to pick on you guys", I was worried more about them thinking I was calling them old than any of the other stuff I said.
I said the same thing here before without anyone accusing me of taking cheap shots. The only difference I can see is that this time I used the phrase "you guys." WTF?
I can't believe you're that nearsighted.
If I were you, I'd just leave this alone and move on.
Casey at the Bat
03-30-09, 05:35 PM
I often wonder why Red Sox fans are allowed to post here.
It's a conspiracy.... I am sure it has something to do with ESPN.
In Mo I Trust
03-30-09, 05:37 PM
It's a conspiracy.... I am sure it has something to do with ESPN.
Zing!
Yankees Empire
03-30-09, 05:46 PM
I often wonder why Red Sox fans are allowed to post here.
"Allowed" is one thing. I wonder why they'd want to. It seems hardly worth the grief a lot of them take to post here.
I never post on (and rarely visit) message boards of other teams.
CanoForPresident
03-30-09, 05:47 PM
It's a conspiracy.... I am sure it has something to do with ESPN.
I have to admit, this made me lol.
Well done.
CallOfTheCrow
03-30-09, 05:47 PM
"Allowed" is one thing. I wonder why they'd want to. It seems hardly worth the grief a lot of them take to post here.
I never post on (and rarely visit) message boards of other teams.
Most bring it upon themselves by saying really stupid sh*t &/or trying to bait others. Nobody ever has a bad thing to say about Dave Visbeck, Archer, or YASS (wherever he dissapeared to). It's not JUST a Red Sox thing.
Unless I've missed some posts (quite possible) I've actually always found Bronson's posts to be pretty balanced. I'm glad he or she posts here. At least based on my past experience, I think he's been pretty overt with his statements whereas others that really frustrate folks throw down those covert jabs or are just otherwise smarmy. Perhaps it was worded poorly, but 20 Yankee fans jumping all over him is probably not a real balanced reaction. No offense meant, but I really like that Sox fans come here and post opposing views as long as they're not tools about it. YASS and Bronson are two that I really enjoy.
They should be able to zoom in a little more for the Team Picture this year.
Dave Visbeck
03-30-09, 07:03 PM
If it wasn't for us old people, they're be no young people.
I agree with this statement. http://nohomers.net/images/smilies/oldman.gif
yanksphan
03-30-09, 07:05 PM
They should be able to zoom in a little more for the Team Picture this year.
Hmmm....
http://mlb.mlb.com/images/2009/03/28/HnDqN6wP.jpg
They should be able to zoom in a little more for the Team Picture this year.
ahahahahahahahahahha:D
They should be able to zoom in a little more for the Team Picture this year.
I love you so much.
sweet_lou_14
03-30-09, 07:18 PM
Unless I've missed some posts (quite possible) I've actually always found Bronson's posts to be pretty balanced.
Never had a problem with him, and willing to give him a mulligan this time, but I agree 100% with everyone who didn't like the anti-Yankee jab in the post in question. That kind of crap rubs me wrong. Whoever said "remember where you are" hit the nail on the head.
Reggie Smith
03-30-09, 07:22 PM
"Allowed" is one thing. I wonder why they'd want to. It seems hardly worth the grief a lot of them take to post here.
I never post on (and rarely visit) message boards of other teams.
Since we are way off from the intent of this thread anyway, I will only vouch for my "want":
-I personally rarely, if ever, post on my own team's sites, whatever that team may be. I'm not interested in hearing similar thoughts as mine, I like to hear differing opinions.
-The Red Sox thread is actually more balanced than any other thread regarding the Red Sox. Anywhere. I may not like what I hear, and it's biased, but at least it's a different PoV. It might be 100% factually incorrect and laced with searing venom, but it's least it's a contrary opinion.
-About 50% of the time, any breaking baseball news I happen to catch here first.
-I'm generally interested in baseball in general, and with some exceptions, the postings are excellent and the information is phenomenal.
-I usually stay out of 'other threads' because they don't interest me. Some, like a Cano (I still love his swing) or Joba (the entire 'debte') I might put my opinion in there. I weighs exactly the same as any others in there when the Front Office makes decisions.
-The Other Sports Forums have some great threads, especially the soccer threads that BroadwayBomber55 keeps updated. That's good stuff.
-I get to crap on the Pats, and feel like one of the crowd.
-The Sports Bar is absolutely hilarious, even the Sox thread.
You take your lumps at times. Try to wipe your feet when you enter the house. Put the Prez on ignore. It's not a bad gig.
jlw1980
03-30-09, 07:22 PM
They should be able to zoom in a little more for the Team Picture this year.:roflmao:
nyyfanatic85
03-30-09, 07:24 PM
Hmm, who will the next Public Enemy #1 be for the Yankees? I'll miss Curt's colorful quotes and passion for the game.
President Kennedy
03-30-09, 07:49 PM
Since we are way off from the intent of this thread anyway, I will only vouch for my "want":
-I personally rarely, if ever, post on my own team's sites, whatever that team may be. I'm not interested in hearing similar thoughts as mine, I like to hear differing opinions.
-The Red Sox thread is actually more balanced than any other thread regarding the Red Sox. Anywhere. I may not like what I hear, and it's biased, but at least it's a different PoV. It might be 100% factually incorrect and laced with searing venom, but it's least it's a contrary opinion.
-About 50% of the time, any breaking baseball news I happen to catch here first.
-I'm generally interested in baseball in general, and with some exceptions, the postings are excellent and the information is phenomenal.
-I usually stay out of 'other threads' because they don't interest me. Some, like a Cano (I still love his swing) or Joba (the entire 'debte') I might put my opinion in there. I weighs exactly the same as any others in there when the Front Office makes decisions.
-The Other Sports Forums have some great threads, especially the soccer threads that BroadwayBomber55 keeps updated. That's good stuff.
-I get to crap on the Pats, and feel like one of the crowd.
-The Sports Bar is absolutely hilarious, even the Sox thread.
You take your lumps at times. Try to wipe your feet when you enter the house. Put the Prez on ignore. It's not a bad gig.
You could have just saved time and typed "I'm just here for interesting baseball conversation."
Do you guys earn points on your RSN cards for every word you type on a message board or something?
You could have just saved time and typed "I'm just here for interesting baseball conversation."
Do you guys earn points on your RSN cards for every word you type on a message board or something?
He can't hear you.
b-ball-lunachick
03-30-09, 08:20 PM
"Allowed" is one thing. I wonder why they'd want to. It seems hardly worth the grief a lot of them take to post here.
I never post on (and rarely visit) message boards of other teams.
I wonder why some of them would want to also but not because of the grief they get here. I feel most are treated fairly because most act/post like someone as a fan of another team and aren't here to troll...I happen to like most of them personally.
The ones that really bother me are the ones that go on other sites (not just Red Sox sites) and trash this site, Yankees, their fans and talk about how much glory they get out of any misery for this franchise and their fans and then come here for "the great baseball talk". :barf: Or the other person who trolls constantly and takes indirect digs about the Yankees constantly. I will never understand that...
-I get to crap on the Pats, and feel like one of the crowd.
:lol: :lol: :D
Casey at the Bat
03-30-09, 08:55 PM
I have to admit, this made me lol.
Well done.
Once in a while I come up with a funny. Most of the time, it's only funny in my head.
They should be able to zoom in a little more for the Team Picture this year.I can't wait until gehrig38 reads this beautiful bit of prose. Priceless.
JDPNYY for Commissioner.
Steve Dalkowski
03-30-09, 10:22 PM
You could have just saved time and typed "I'm just here for interesting baseball conversation."
Do you guys earn points on your RSN cards for every word you type on a message board or something?
Why are you always so grumpy? Go outside.
Dave Visbeck
03-30-09, 11:21 PM
I can't wait until gehrig38 reads this beautiful bit of prose. Priceless.
JDPNYY for Commissioner.
JDPNYY for Commissioner! :eek: How about if YOU could first ... vote to put JDPNYY into the HOF -- in what follows. :-shrug-: He is already the Commissioner there. Your vote will matter! :)
#137 (http://forums.nyyfans.com/showpost.php?p=5820213&postcount=137)
Sticky: Contest - The 8th Annual NYYFans.com Prediction Contest (http://forums.nyyfans.com/showthread.php?t=116646) (http://forums.nyyfans.com/images/misc/multipage.gif 1 (http://forums.nyyfans.com/showthread.php?t=116646) 2 (http://forums.nyyfans.com/showthread.php?t=116646&page=2) 3 (http://forums.nyyfans.com/showthread.php?t=116646&page=3) 4 (http://forums.nyyfans.com/showthread.php?t=116646&page=4) ... Last Page (http://forums.nyyfans.com/showthread.php?t=116646&page=5)) JDPNYY
Bronson'sCornrows
03-31-09, 07:32 AM
Do you guys earn points on your RSN cards for every word you type on a message board or something?
Every 1000 points nets a free ballpark frank. The sauerkraut is extra, though.:(
President Kennedy
03-31-09, 10:01 AM
Why are you always so grumpy? Go outside.
Oops, only two sentences. Someone isn't going to get his free wiener at Fenway this season. :(
Why are you always so grumpy? Go outside.
Incisive
CT_Bomber
03-31-09, 12:34 PM
I often wonder why Red Sox fans are allowed to post here.
Well, some of them, like Dave Visbeck are decent guys. The trolls though... I don't get them either. I wonder if the Sox have a fan site similar to this; not that I'd want to go there, but maybe if there isn't one that would explain why some of their fans come here.
Dave Visbeck
04-01-09, 12:58 AM
I'm probably gonna start a big argument with this, but now the discussion of if he's Hall of Fame worthy or not will arise...
I think he will probably get in, but I don't think he SHOULD get in. He was great, don't get me wrong, but I don't think he was Hall of Fame worthy. If he gets in, Mussina should be in the Hall as well.
Buster Olney brought up the issue with some of the HOF voters carrying a grudge because Schilling rubbed them the wrong way. Of course it shouldn't even enter into the decision, but as he said, sadly, it does. Like Moose, he should also get some credit for pitching during the steroid era, but I doubt it'll be enough to get him in. 216 wins vs. 270 for Mike is a big gap and all of those 270 were in the AL East.
His post season record was outstanding, but the regular season stats don't quite match up to others who're already in or will be. Although he "only" has 214 wins, Pedro will be voted in because he was so dominant for years and only has 99 loses vs. 146 for Schilling and Curt's career lasted 20 years. Post season stats vs. career stats - it'll be interesting in 5 years to see how the committee handles it.
Concerning the possible National Baseball Hall of Fame class of 2013. Take a look at this short list of players that will be eligible, along with Mr. Schilling, a list that is a little expanded with some players that may have at least a few votes coming their way.
Wondering about what negative impact will come from the court stuff that is about to happen. Also thinking about the 100+ list. Any of the named players here that possibly could be among the 100+? :(
Sure changes the sure-fire-lock curve for making the HOF grade -- without aid.
Craig Biggio
Barry Bonds
Roger Clemens
Julio Franco
Steve Finley
Shawn Green
Roberto Hernandez
Kenny Lofton
Mike Piazza
Curt Schilling
Reggie Sanders
Sammy Sosa
David Wells
DEADSOX
04-01-09, 04:42 PM
Craig Biggio
Barry Bonds
Roger Clemens
Julio Franco
Steve Finley
Shawn Green
Roberto Hernandez
Kenny Lofton
Mike Piazza
Curt Schilling
Reggie Sanders
Sammy Sosa
David Wells
I would put $100 on everyone player on that list tried steroids.
sweet_lou_14
04-01-09, 08:34 PM
I would put $100 on everyone player on that list tried steroids.
Not sure about Wells.
But if eating a cow that was fed steroids counts, then yeah.
Not sure about Wells.
But if eating a cow that was fed steroids counts, then yeah.Standing ovation. Well done.
Yankees13
04-01-09, 08:48 PM
Craig Biggio
Barry Bonds
Roger Clemens
Julio Franco
Steve Finley
Shawn Green
Roberto Hernandez
Kenny Lofton
Mike Piazza
Curt Schilling
Reggie Sanders
Sammy Sosa
David Wells
I'd say Biggio and Piazza are locks. Clemens and Bonds should be locks but will be punished for roids (I think they'll get in eventually). Franco, Finley, Green, Hernandez, Sanders, and Wells are non-factors and won't get the 5% needed to stay on the ballot. Lofton will probably get enough to stay on, but barely. Sosa has HOF stats but won't be anywhere close. Schilling is borderline, I think he gets in because of who he is.
roblyo33
04-01-09, 09:42 PM
I'd say Biggio and Piazza are locks. Clemens and Bonds should be locks but will be punished for roids (I think they'll get in eventually). Franco, Finley, Green, Hernandez, Sanders, and Wells are non-factors and won't get the 5% needed to stay on the ballot. Lofton will probably get enough to stay on, but barely. Sosa has HOF stats but won't be anywhere close. Schilling is borderline, I think he gets in because of who he is.
Who is he???
Casey at the Bat
04-01-09, 10:18 PM
[/u][/i][/b]
Who is he???
Karim Garcia?
Yankees13
04-02-09, 09:08 AM
He's a media darling who pitched for the Red Sox and beat the Yankees in two very famous playoff series. That pushes him from borderline, probably outside looking in, to sure-fire HOF, only question is whether it's on the first ballot.
He's a media darling who pitched for the Red Sox and beat the Yankees in two very famous playoff series. That pushes him from borderline, probably outside looking in, to sure-fire HOF, only question is whether it's on the first ballot.
I don't think he gets in on the first ballot.
However, your point is well taken. Schilling had a rep (well deserved I might add) as a big game pitcher who helped lead three different franchises to the WS and was instrumental in three WS winners. If he gets in, it will be because of who he is and not necessarily what's on the back of the baseball card.
Yankees13
04-02-09, 01:28 PM
I don't think he gets in on the first ballot.
However, your point is well taken. Schilling had a rep (well deserved I might add) as a big game pitcher who helped lead three different franchises to the WS and was instrumental in three WS winners. If he gets in, it will be because of who he is and not necessarily what's on the back of the baseball card.
Definitely. I was of course being a little snide in my post, but I think it's a legitimate argument to make to a certain extent. My problem is that if Rivera doesn't throw the ball away, and Roberts is caught stealing, Schilling probably has no chance. I generally think HOF criteria should based on the player's body of work, not whether his team happened to win a WS. Of course Schilling played a huge role in those WS wins, but as I pointed out, a simple twist of fate and his legacy is very different.
Casey37
04-02-09, 01:44 PM
He's a media darling who pitched for the Red Sox and beat the Yankees in two very famous playoff series. That pushes him from borderline, probably outside looking in, to sure-fire HOF, only question is whether it's on the first ballot.
....and he'll probably end up going into the Hof as a RS. Sad but true.
jeterdaman
04-02-09, 01:46 PM
There is ZERO chance that Schilling gets in on the first ballot, but I would be surprised if he doesn't eventually get in by his 10th year.
Carbon Fiber
04-02-09, 01:49 PM
My problem is that if Rivera doesn't throw the ball away, and Roberts is caught stealing, Schilling probably has no chance. I generally think HOF criteria should based on the player's body of work, not whether his team happened to win a WS. Of course Schilling played a huge role in those WS wins, but as I pointed out, a simple twist of fate and his legacy is very different.
That is so true... I often wonder how much of the "big game" thing is just plain luck. Don't get me wrong, I'm sure part of it is skill, but as you allude to I also think a significant part is being in the right place at the right time and having some truly random events fall your way.
That is so true... I often wonder how much of the "big game" thing is just plain luck. Don't get me wrong, I'm sure part of it is skill, but as you allude to I also think a significant part is being in the right place at the right time and having some truly random events fall your way.
This phenomenon is often referred to as "baseball."
Carbon Fiber
04-02-09, 01:56 PM
This phenomenon is often referred to as "baseball."
Ok, ok, I guess I win the captain obvious award. :lol:
jimmyquickpitch
04-02-09, 01:59 PM
"Allowed" is one thing. I wonder why they'd want to. It seems hardly worth the grief a lot of them take to post here.
I never post on (and rarely visit) message boards of other teams.
I asked a Red Sox fan friend of mine why he spends time here, his response was that redsoxnation.net is basically dead, and SOSH is a closed forum, so this is really the only place left with a lot of people talking about baseball that he can interact with.
Reggie Smith
04-02-09, 02:39 PM
Definitely. I was of course being a little snide in my post, but I think it's a legitimate argument to make to a certain extent. My problem is that if Rivera doesn't throw the ball away, and Roberts is caught stealing, Schilling probably has no chance. I generally think HOF criteria should based on the player's body of work, not whether his team happened to win a WS. Of course Schilling played a huge role in those WS wins, but as I pointed out, a simple twist of fate and his legacy is very different.
And Bucky's fly doesn't catch a breeze, and Gedman catches Stanley's pitch, Jim Rice is a two-time WS winner.
Dems da breaks.
That being said, I do agree fate can swing a legacy. And, if Schilling is a first-ballot HoFer I'm going to eat my hat.
roblyo33
04-02-09, 03:58 PM
And Bucky's fly doesn't catch a breeze, and Gedman catches Stanley's pitch, Jim Rice is a two-time WS winner.
Dems da breaks.
That being said, I do agree fate can swing a legacy. And, if Schilling is a first-ballot HoFer I'm going to eat my hat.
Not if Curt eats it before you!!!
Reggie Smith
04-02-09, 08:34 PM
[/u][/i][/b]
Not if Curt eats it before you!!!
ZZZZIIIIIINGGGGGGGGGGGGGGG
b-ball-lunachick
04-03-09, 09:26 AM
And Bucky's fly doesn't catch a breeze, and Gedman catches Stanley's pitch, Jim Rice is a two-time WS winner.
Dems da breaks.
That being said, I do agree fate can swing a legacy. And, if Schilling is a first-ballot HoFer I'm going to eat my hat.
I don't think he makes it in at all but I'm not offering to eat anything if I'm wrong. :P
BxBomber44
04-03-09, 10:39 AM
I want Curt to come get in a flame war with me, I'll sunshine pump him Yankee info/good feelings all day.
Powered by vBulletin™ Version 4.0.7 Copyright © 2013 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.
0