Chad Finn on the "identity crisis of Red Sox fans.
Bonus points for referencing Rick Pitino's classic "this town sucks" outburst. It's right up there with Jim Mora and "Playoffs?!?!" and Allen Iverson opining about practice.
Friday, October 31, 2008
Rant of the Week: Hockey East does not suck
The out of conference play in Hockey East has been very encouraging this year as compared to last year. For a while during the beginning of last season, the only Hockey East team with a winning record against non-conference foes was Merrimack (!!!). This year, there have been a few highlights:
- BU and UMASS taking care of North Dakota
-BC and UNH beating the Badgers on consecutive nights
-UNH throttling RPI
-UVM beating and tying Miami
-UML taking a game at East Lansing against MSU
-PC actually winning both non-conference games against teams they'd lost to in the last two years
Sure, there have been let downs: Merrimack managing only a tie against Canisius and Niagara, UNH's misadventure up at SLU, UML getting shut out by Colgate and NU's tie against the Nanooks. It's a bit early to say that the league is back, but the early results are encouraging. Last year, only BC and UNH made it to the NCAA tournament and the culprit was a weak record out of conference. Turning that around is the key to getting 3-5 teams in the Big Dance.
Random ranting:
-(It's actually working!) Hi Mark!
- I wish people would stop labeling the Phillie's five game victory over the Rays as the "worst World Series ever". It's just stupid: There were three close games, one titanic marathon in game three and the final game decided by one run. That doesn't sound like "the worst World Series ever". Really, what people are complaining about is the weather. The rain delay in game three and the suspension of game five were frustrating, but that's not MLB's fault. That would be the fault of Mother Nature. It's also preposterous to say that the World Series should now be played entirely in domes or at a "neutral spot". The format isn't the problem: the length of the season is the issue. When baseball decided it would be okay to have the season stretch to late October, did they actually think it would be nothing but Southern teams competing?
- As encouraging as the first two games of the Bruin's merry jaunt through northwest Canda were, the last game against the Flames left a nasty taste in my mouth. Simply put, the NHL's early season scheduling leaves a lot to be desired. The Bruins seem to start every season on an extended road trip (thanks to the bloody circus) following a span of weeks where they seem to play all of two or three games. And then we have the sadistic schedule that saw them play 3 games in 4 days. It's a wonder they didn't lose by more last night.
-In a similar vein, just as I was hoping to see the Celtics play at least once or twice before tonight, they have one game on Tuesday. Then, another game tonight. Why the three day gap? Did the circus come back?
-The Patriots are - for the second time in a month - entering into a game against a talented but desperate team. The Colts game is frighteningly similar to the San Diego game in a lot of respects. The good news is that - even if the Colts win - the Pats have acquitted themselves admirably enough that a 5-3 record is in no way disappointing.
- BU and UMASS taking care of North Dakota
-BC and UNH beating the Badgers on consecutive nights
-UNH throttling RPI
-UVM beating and tying Miami
-UML taking a game at East Lansing against MSU
-PC actually winning both non-conference games against teams they'd lost to in the last two years
Sure, there have been let downs: Merrimack managing only a tie against Canisius and Niagara, UNH's misadventure up at SLU, UML getting shut out by Colgate and NU's tie against the Nanooks. It's a bit early to say that the league is back, but the early results are encouraging. Last year, only BC and UNH made it to the NCAA tournament and the culprit was a weak record out of conference. Turning that around is the key to getting 3-5 teams in the Big Dance.
Random ranting:
-(It's actually working!) Hi Mark!
- I wish people would stop labeling the Phillie's five game victory over the Rays as the "worst World Series ever". It's just stupid: There were three close games, one titanic marathon in game three and the final game decided by one run. That doesn't sound like "the worst World Series ever". Really, what people are complaining about is the weather. The rain delay in game three and the suspension of game five were frustrating, but that's not MLB's fault. That would be the fault of Mother Nature. It's also preposterous to say that the World Series should now be played entirely in domes or at a "neutral spot". The format isn't the problem: the length of the season is the issue. When baseball decided it would be okay to have the season stretch to late October, did they actually think it would be nothing but Southern teams competing?
- As encouraging as the first two games of the Bruin's merry jaunt through northwest Canda were, the last game against the Flames left a nasty taste in my mouth. Simply put, the NHL's early season scheduling leaves a lot to be desired. The Bruins seem to start every season on an extended road trip (thanks to the bloody circus) following a span of weeks where they seem to play all of two or three games. And then we have the sadistic schedule that saw them play 3 games in 4 days. It's a wonder they didn't lose by more last night.
-In a similar vein, just as I was hoping to see the Celtics play at least once or twice before tonight, they have one game on Tuesday. Then, another game tonight. Why the three day gap? Did the circus come back?
-The Patriots are - for the second time in a month - entering into a game against a talented but desperate team. The Colts game is frighteningly similar to the San Diego game in a lot of respects. The good news is that - even if the Colts win - the Pats have acquitted themselves admirably enough that a 5-3 record is in no way disappointing.
Tuesday, October 28, 2008
The most wonderful time of the year...
I'd just like to state - very briefly - the World Series is taking place at the same time as the NHL, NBA, and NFL are around. College hockey is going on and if I want to bond with my TV, there's college football on Saturday afternoons. And if I really want to watch sports, I get EPL games every Saturday and Sunday morning on the Fox Soccer Channel.
The fall does indeed rule.
The fall does indeed rule.
Thursday, October 23, 2008
Rant of Week: Huh? Speak up!
I love Schneider Arena. I know, it's not the most aesthetically pleasing building in Hockey East, it doesn't have tremendous atmosphere, the sight lines leave something to be desired, most of the fan base tends to wander off to Clubbie's, Brad's, the Abbey or Louie at 9:00 PM and the games were a lot more visceral when the glass was shorter. Still, I have a lot of affection for the old barn and I'm not even half kidding when I say I want to be buried under center ice.
I do have to say that the building has one problem right now. One small detail that drives me and everyone else who has ever attended a Friar home game to distraction. It's a tiny, easily correctable fault that would take a short memo or five seconds worth of worth to correct. To whit:
THE VOLUME ON THE SPEAKERS IS TOO BLOODY LOUD!
The speakers are drowning out the band (and with an awful selection of music too. I dig Metallica, but some of the rest of the music is the awful emo "metal" you hear on WAAF). It's drowning out the fans when they try to make noise. It's driving people away who otherwise have no problem spending a night at PC hockey games. So why not fix this extremely easy problem? The other problems this rink might have (the team is mediocre, pools of water sometimes form on the ice at the end of the game, the refs don't like their dressing room (this sentiment and the fact PC so often get jobbed by bad calls can NOT be a coincidence!) are tough to solve. But the volume of the music in the arena?
Unlike a lot of blog entries, this is not just something that bugs me. This is something that bothers everyone I talk to, everyone sitting near me in Section E, every opposing fan, every PC fan online. So why isn't it fixed? As I said earlier, it can not be that difficult to adjust the volume of the speakers.
And if it doesn't get fixed, I'll probably still go to games. It will just be much harder to hear the anthem with the ringing in my ears.
Other Rants:
-Hi Mark!
-This election needs to end soon. My nightmares now begin with "I'm Barack Obama/John McCain and I approve this message". On a related note, I would like to exile John Sununu and Jean Shaheen to a small island in the South Pacific. Preferably one with the castaways from "the Minnow".
-The Rays are so unbelievably likable (except for Garza, who needs to stop spitting every five seconds. If I want to see that, I'll stare at Francona.) that you just know the Phillies are going to win this series. No one talked about them in the NLCS and here they are now.
-The Bruins are the only team that could improve to the point where they are - literally - winning or within a goal in every game and still not pick up more than one point per game because of Gary Bettman and his stupid bloody shoot outs. If the Maple Leafs win a shoot out tonight... sigh.
-Do you think Kevin Garnett has stopped ranting to himself yet? Or will he just continue from where he left off after Game Six? I'd like to see a debate between him and Papelbohn just so we can see who is more insane.
I do have to say that the building has one problem right now. One small detail that drives me and everyone else who has ever attended a Friar home game to distraction. It's a tiny, easily correctable fault that would take a short memo or five seconds worth of worth to correct. To whit:
THE VOLUME ON THE SPEAKERS IS TOO BLOODY LOUD!
The speakers are drowning out the band (and with an awful selection of music too. I dig Metallica, but some of the rest of the music is the awful emo "metal" you hear on WAAF). It's drowning out the fans when they try to make noise. It's driving people away who otherwise have no problem spending a night at PC hockey games. So why not fix this extremely easy problem? The other problems this rink might have (the team is mediocre, pools of water sometimes form on the ice at the end of the game, the refs don't like their dressing room (this sentiment and the fact PC so often get jobbed by bad calls can NOT be a coincidence!) are tough to solve. But the volume of the music in the arena?
Unlike a lot of blog entries, this is not just something that bugs me. This is something that bothers everyone I talk to, everyone sitting near me in Section E, every opposing fan, every PC fan online. So why isn't it fixed? As I said earlier, it can not be that difficult to adjust the volume of the speakers.
And if it doesn't get fixed, I'll probably still go to games. It will just be much harder to hear the anthem with the ringing in my ears.
Other Rants:
-Hi Mark!
-This election needs to end soon. My nightmares now begin with "I'm Barack Obama/John McCain and I approve this message". On a related note, I would like to exile John Sununu and Jean Shaheen to a small island in the South Pacific. Preferably one with the castaways from "the Minnow".
-The Rays are so unbelievably likable (except for Garza, who needs to stop spitting every five seconds. If I want to see that, I'll stare at Francona.) that you just know the Phillies are going to win this series. No one talked about them in the NLCS and here they are now.
-The Bruins are the only team that could improve to the point where they are - literally - winning or within a goal in every game and still not pick up more than one point per game because of Gary Bettman and his stupid bloody shoot outs. If the Maple Leafs win a shoot out tonight... sigh.
-Do you think Kevin Garnett has stopped ranting to himself yet? Or will he just continue from where he left off after Game Six? I'd like to see a debate between him and Papelbohn just so we can see who is more insane.
Monday, October 20, 2008
Red Sox post mortem
So, I guess the big question this weekend is what went wrong? In truth, not a hell of a lot did go wrong. I'm usually the high priest of pessimism - especially in regards to the Red Sox who have caused me more heartache than any team not named the Bruins - but there wasn't a whole lot to complain about in general.
Basically, when you lose a seven game series in the ALCS, it's the little things that kill you. To whit:
In Game Two, Beckett was lifted too late into the game. The bull pen held the Rays scoreless until Francona waved the white flag by bringing in Timlin. Even then, the Sox had every opportunity to break the game open - they simply failed to come through with a clutch hit.
Games three and four were unmitigated disasters in every sense of the term. No chance.
In Game Seven, the Red Sox had the Rays on the ropes in the eighth inning and they couldn't tie the game. Again, no clutch hitting. Lester was fine and the bullpen did their job for the most part.
Summarized like this, it doesn't look like the Red Sox failed that badly. Francona made some odd decisions, but the blame doesn't lie solely at his feet. The problem for this team was injuries. Plenty of teams have injuries, but the Red Sox woes piled up at the end of the season. It would interesting to see how this series would have played out with healthy versions of Beckett, Drew, Papi, Lowell, and even Captain Blogosphere. That will never happen, but we have 6 months to wonder...
Realistically, this team was 3 runs away from the World Series, pushed a series to seven games despite an at times vastly superior foe and over came a lot adversity to even get to Game Seven. I'm not jumping off the Tobin Bridge and I'm not going to suggest Terry Francona jump either even though his refusal to pinch hit for Kotsay and Variteck in the ninth inning last night was positively insane. You can't win them all. And no, they don't get to the playoffs if they keep Manny who would have packed it in like he did in 2006 so enough of that crap.
As for the Rays, let me just say this to the Phillies. Good luck. You will need it.
(one final note, I'm mentally preparing for a "Defending Tito" entry to counteract the unending "Fire Fran-coma" silliness we'll be seeing later on this week. Beware.)
Basically, when you lose a seven game series in the ALCS, it's the little things that kill you. To whit:
In Game Two, Beckett was lifted too late into the game. The bull pen held the Rays scoreless until Francona waved the white flag by bringing in Timlin. Even then, the Sox had every opportunity to break the game open - they simply failed to come through with a clutch hit.
Games three and four were unmitigated disasters in every sense of the term. No chance.
In Game Seven, the Red Sox had the Rays on the ropes in the eighth inning and they couldn't tie the game. Again, no clutch hitting. Lester was fine and the bullpen did their job for the most part.
Summarized like this, it doesn't look like the Red Sox failed that badly. Francona made some odd decisions, but the blame doesn't lie solely at his feet. The problem for this team was injuries. Plenty of teams have injuries, but the Red Sox woes piled up at the end of the season. It would interesting to see how this series would have played out with healthy versions of Beckett, Drew, Papi, Lowell, and even Captain Blogosphere. That will never happen, but we have 6 months to wonder...
Realistically, this team was 3 runs away from the World Series, pushed a series to seven games despite an at times vastly superior foe and over came a lot adversity to even get to Game Seven. I'm not jumping off the Tobin Bridge and I'm not going to suggest Terry Francona jump either even though his refusal to pinch hit for Kotsay and Variteck in the ninth inning last night was positively insane. You can't win them all. And no, they don't get to the playoffs if they keep Manny who would have packed it in like he did in 2006 so enough of that crap.
As for the Rays, let me just say this to the Phillies. Good luck. You will need it.
(one final note, I'm mentally preparing for a "Defending Tito" entry to counteract the unending "Fire Fran-coma" silliness we'll be seeing later on this week. Beware.)
Friday, October 17, 2008
Rant of the week: Who are these guys?
Here in Friar Country, we pride ourselves in not knowing what the hell to expect from our team from week to week. Or in some cases, day to day. A perfect example comes from the GLI Tournament least year where the Friars were lost against the Wolverines one night and took out the defending national champion Spartans the next. Who would have predicted that (aside from the Michigan and MTU fans who spent the rest of the night high fiving me)? The Friars are an awful team to predict because they have no consistency. The team radically shifts in quality for year to year and some times even night to night. This was as true in the 60's as it is now. If you notice the banners at Schneider Arena, the Friars fielded great teams in 1978, 1981, 1983, and 1985. What happened to the Friars in 1979, 1982, 1984 and 1986? I have no idea.
Then we get to teams I did follow. I do know that the 1997 Friars had goal tending issues that prevented them from repeating. I know that the offense of the 1999 Friars did not translate into 2000 and the 2002 Friars were quite possibly the most underachieving team in the history of the universe. I'm still not sure what happened that year. The team is an enigma.
This is why I find Hockey East predictions so comical - nobody can ever figure out Providence College. The Friars either finish 5 positions lower than they're supposed to or 3 or 4 positions higher. You might as well use a dart board. PC isn't alone in this: Northeastern is impossible to predict. UMASS vacillates just as insanely as Providence. Even BU has had season where they were supposed to do something and finished in eighth place, or they were supposed to finish in fifth place and they win Hockey East. The only mortal locks are that BC will be good and Merrimack will be in the basement and UNH will botch the post season. Anything else is conjecture. Hockey is a bizarre game. A goaltender can get hot, an offense can go cold, or a ref can make a strange call and all the predictions are for naught.
Complicating matters for the Friars is the fact that no one has seen them play yet. The only thing we have to judge this team on is the influx of freshman, the departures of Jon Rheault, Cody Wild, and (most importantly) Tyler Sims. The Huskies are supposed to be good and Bowling Green is supposed to be much improved. But barring that, I have no idea what to expect this weekend from the Friars except for this: we will finally figure out who these guys are.
More random thoughts:
- Hi Mark!
-One thing I do know this weekend. The Patriots are going to get CLOBBERED. They never beat the Broncos, and the team has looked lost since the Super Bowl. Someone needs to get some electrical shockers on the defense. Matt Cassel has been poor, but the defense is the real culprit for the Patriots sucking.
- No idea what to make of Game Six in Tampa Bay. It's almost a relief to get away from Fenway after the bludgeonings in Games Three and Four. The Sox can NOT keep spotting the Rays 5 run leads.
Then we get to teams I did follow. I do know that the 1997 Friars had goal tending issues that prevented them from repeating. I know that the offense of the 1999 Friars did not translate into 2000 and the 2002 Friars were quite possibly the most underachieving team in the history of the universe. I'm still not sure what happened that year. The team is an enigma.
This is why I find Hockey East predictions so comical - nobody can ever figure out Providence College. The Friars either finish 5 positions lower than they're supposed to or 3 or 4 positions higher. You might as well use a dart board. PC isn't alone in this: Northeastern is impossible to predict. UMASS vacillates just as insanely as Providence. Even BU has had season where they were supposed to do something and finished in eighth place, or they were supposed to finish in fifth place and they win Hockey East. The only mortal locks are that BC will be good and Merrimack will be in the basement and UNH will botch the post season. Anything else is conjecture. Hockey is a bizarre game. A goaltender can get hot, an offense can go cold, or a ref can make a strange call and all the predictions are for naught.
Complicating matters for the Friars is the fact that no one has seen them play yet. The only thing we have to judge this team on is the influx of freshman, the departures of Jon Rheault, Cody Wild, and (most importantly) Tyler Sims. The Huskies are supposed to be good and Bowling Green is supposed to be much improved. But barring that, I have no idea what to expect this weekend from the Friars except for this: we will finally figure out who these guys are.
More random thoughts:
- Hi Mark!
-One thing I do know this weekend. The Patriots are going to get CLOBBERED. They never beat the Broncos, and the team has looked lost since the Super Bowl. Someone needs to get some electrical shockers on the defense. Matt Cassel has been poor, but the defense is the real culprit for the Patriots sucking.
- No idea what to make of Game Six in Tampa Bay. It's almost a relief to get away from Fenway after the bludgeonings in Games Three and Four. The Sox can NOT keep spotting the Rays 5 run leads.
Thursday, October 16, 2008
Please...
... don't hurry back to spring training.
I certainly don't want to see you back for a long time.
I certainly don't want to see you back for a long time.
Wednesday, October 15, 2008
Appalling
No, not the Red Sox play this week, although that has been atrocious enough. I'm talking about the reporting by our beloved sports press which has been the equivalent of rubbing salt in the wounds.
First off are the nimrods who pronounced the Rays dead after Game One. Why would you ever write that in a seven games series?
Secondly, we have the people who stubbornly cling to the idea that the Red Sox are going to make a miraculous comeback. They aren't. The team can't hit or pitch. They could not beat the Kansas City Royals at this point. Injuries and awful luck have taken their toll. The Sox would be just as screwed even if they had won Game Two. This team - as currently constituted can NOT win three games in a row. They were lucky to win ONE game. It doesn't just seem like it's over, it is.
Thirdly, someone needs to criticize the team. I either see people praising the Rays to the high heavens or glossing over the fact the team is playing poorly. Some one needs to come out and say it. The Red Sox absolutely suck. Many of these wounds are self inflicted. If you can't hit or pitch, you can not win, period. Francona would be better off suiting up the Lowell Spinners.
I have a theory that when you get blown out, half of it is your own damn fault. This is not college or high school where there is a massive talent discrepancy. Yes, the Rays have played well, but they played well in the first and second games, both of which were competitive. If the Red Sox play well, the games will be competitive. If not, you get annihilated.
The article that really set me off this morning was Bob Ryan's piece on why the Rays are unbelievably awesome. While I'm certainly not in the position to argue that point right now, he goes on to say that the Rays are the team of the future and we should all get ready for them to be a power for years to come. I enjoy Bob's writing and I think he might be the best sports writer in Boston. But did he suddenly forget the great young players on the Red Sox who helped them win the WORLD ****ing SERIES last year?
Is that basically what it comes down to? We should just give up because Team Awesome will be around forever and ever? Great, I'm going to stop rooting for the Red Sox and reading the Globe, and I'll encourage the rest of my friends to do the same because we are now powerless before Cowbell Nation (maybe I should trademark that!) and watching baseball is futile. They should just call themselves the Tampa Bay Borg. And when the Red Sox fans disappear and the Globe is out of business at least Bob will be right.
Just taking things to their logical conclusion.
First off are the nimrods who pronounced the Rays dead after Game One. Why would you ever write that in a seven games series?
Secondly, we have the people who stubbornly cling to the idea that the Red Sox are going to make a miraculous comeback. They aren't. The team can't hit or pitch. They could not beat the Kansas City Royals at this point. Injuries and awful luck have taken their toll. The Sox would be just as screwed even if they had won Game Two. This team - as currently constituted can NOT win three games in a row. They were lucky to win ONE game. It doesn't just seem like it's over, it is.
Thirdly, someone needs to criticize the team. I either see people praising the Rays to the high heavens or glossing over the fact the team is playing poorly. Some one needs to come out and say it. The Red Sox absolutely suck. Many of these wounds are self inflicted. If you can't hit or pitch, you can not win, period. Francona would be better off suiting up the Lowell Spinners.
I have a theory that when you get blown out, half of it is your own damn fault. This is not college or high school where there is a massive talent discrepancy. Yes, the Rays have played well, but they played well in the first and second games, both of which were competitive. If the Red Sox play well, the games will be competitive. If not, you get annihilated.
The article that really set me off this morning was Bob Ryan's piece on why the Rays are unbelievably awesome. While I'm certainly not in the position to argue that point right now, he goes on to say that the Rays are the team of the future and we should all get ready for them to be a power for years to come. I enjoy Bob's writing and I think he might be the best sports writer in Boston. But did he suddenly forget the great young players on the Red Sox who helped them win the WORLD ****ing SERIES last year?
Is that basically what it comes down to? We should just give up because Team Awesome will be around forever and ever? Great, I'm going to stop rooting for the Red Sox and reading the Globe, and I'll encourage the rest of my friends to do the same because we are now powerless before Cowbell Nation (maybe I should trademark that!) and watching baseball is futile. They should just call themselves the Tampa Bay Borg. And when the Red Sox fans disappear and the Globe is out of business at least Bob will be right.
Just taking things to their logical conclusion.
Tuesday, October 14, 2008
Oh my God, the sky is falling!
Argh! Argh!
(don't we go through this EVERY time the Red Sox make the playoffs?)
(don't we go through this EVERY time the Red Sox make the playoffs?)
Friday, October 10, 2008
More randomness while I wonder why the cat has been so mellow lately...
... I think he's planning something. Seriously.
-College hockey season begins! I'll have to update The Coffin Online some point this weekend. I'm not in a hurry of course: PC opens with Northeastern next week. Only the Ivy's start later, it seems. Best of luck to our Hockey East co-horts, especially UMASS and BU who take on UND and MSU in the Icebreaker this weekend.
-Maybe Charlie Chaplin is saving himself for Dan Shaugnessy? This attempt to irritate Tampa Bay fans was kind of predictable. In fact, it's way too much like his 1997 offering as the Whalers were about to move. Get ready, Charlie.
-Speaking of Shaugnessy's latest atrocity, why are Rays fans talking trash about things that haven't happened yet? Did Marty McFly loan them a flux capacitor?
-Dice-K starts tonight for the Red Sox. This means that for half the game, Red Sox fans need to find something else to do. Just throw strikes. Please?
-If the Patriots/Chargers game doesn't hold that much interest, why all the columns about how it's not holding that much interest? The fact that people curious as to why people aren't paying attention means that people are paying attention. Did I make anyone's head explode?
-This Halloween, I want to go out as Craig Sager. Where do you get a bright orange blazer?
-Nice win by the Bruins, especially considering their defense was invisible most of the night and neither the Versus announcers nor the officials could figure out there were two teams on the ice. See, I'm in mid-season form all ready!
-College hockey season begins! I'll have to update The Coffin Online some point this weekend. I'm not in a hurry of course: PC opens with Northeastern next week. Only the Ivy's start later, it seems. Best of luck to our Hockey East co-horts, especially UMASS and BU who take on UND and MSU in the Icebreaker this weekend.
-Maybe Charlie Chaplin is saving himself for Dan Shaugnessy? This attempt to irritate Tampa Bay fans was kind of predictable. In fact, it's way too much like his 1997 offering as the Whalers were about to move. Get ready, Charlie.
-Speaking of Shaugnessy's latest atrocity, why are Rays fans talking trash about things that haven't happened yet? Did Marty McFly loan them a flux capacitor?
-Dice-K starts tonight for the Red Sox. This means that for half the game, Red Sox fans need to find something else to do. Just throw strikes. Please?
-If the Patriots/Chargers game doesn't hold that much interest, why all the columns about how it's not holding that much interest? The fact that people curious as to why people aren't paying attention means that people are paying attention. Did I make anyone's head explode?
-This Halloween, I want to go out as Craig Sager. Where do you get a bright orange blazer?
-Nice win by the Bruins, especially considering their defense was invisible most of the night and neither the Versus announcers nor the officials could figure out there were two teams on the ice. See, I'm in mid-season form all ready!
Thursday, October 9, 2008
The loser mentality and you: Just say "no!"
Way back in 1996, I had an RA who was a die hard fan of the Yankees (and the Cowboys, Celtics, Fighting Irish, and... HARTFORD WHALERS?!?!?). He was a great RA and an all around good guy despite the fact that he rooted for the baseball equivalent of Satan. Once, just to infuriate most of the people around him, he described the Red Sox fans as embracing a "loser mentality". For the past 12 years, I thought he was just insulting us and I took it as a throw away line. But now I'm starting to understand what he was talking about.
Why is it so many Red Sox fans are unwilling - or unable - to embrace a team that actually wins? It makes no sense. You root for a team in hopes that they finally win a championship. Too many idiots in the fan base and the general media (especially - for some inscrutable reason- the Sox-centric Globe) have recoiled from the Sox because they're too successful. My question is why.
It's not like New Englanders are afraid of success in sports. No one gave up on the Orr/Esposito era Bruins when they won Stanley Cups. They became more popular. The Russell era Celtics didn't start out popular, but they got more and more popular as they started hording titles. The Patriot's burst of popularity started with the hiring of Bill Parcells drafting Drew Bledsoe in 1993 and despite some lows at the end of the Pete Carroll era, they've maintained a decent level of popularity even after the disasters of the past couple of years. Anyone jumping off the bandwagon because Spygate or the Brady probably doesn't care about football to begin with, but at least they aren't scared off by success. The Patriots were every bit as incompetent as the Red Sox were before 2004 (add pre 08' Celtics and the current Bruins to that mix). And on a college front, I don't see a lot of UCONN basketball fans or BU, BC and Maine hockey fans complaining that their teams are too successful. So why Red Sox fans?
Let's take a look at some of arguments why we shouldn't root for the Red Sox:
"The Red Sox have become the Yankees"- What does this even mean? Are they wearing pinstripes? Are they playing Sinatra after every home game? Despite the fact that they're the Yankees and we all hate them, what is it that the Yankees do that is egregious? Spend money? Win a lot? Oh shame on the Steinbrenners for trying to win! Don't they realize that the main point of owning a team is to underachieve and impress other fanbase by your "classy" refusal to win. Do we really hate the Yankees that much that we don't want to win 26 championships?
Does anything say "loser" more than hating the Yankees more than you like the Red Sox?
"The Red Sox buy championships"- Not only does this betray a comically insane view of capitalism (professional sports teams shouldn't spend money? They should pay players using the barter system?) but it also displays a breathtakingly ignorant view of Red Sox history. When Tom Yawkey's underachieving teams were referred to as "country club " teams, it wasn't just because they were lily-white. It was because Yawkey foolishly spent on high priced veterans who couldn't deliver. Bad news people: the Red Sox had the highest payroll in baseball for years, and couldn't get within sniffing distance of a pennant. That happened 50 years ago. To pretend that the Sox have always been a plucky yet cheap small market team is beyond stupid.
Spending money is no guarantee of success: ask the Yankees, Mets and Tigers, all of whom have higher payrolls than the Red Sox. Meanwhile, the Marlins, A's, Twins, Cardinals, Rockies, and Rays all make deep post season runs with payrolls a fraction of the Yankees. Money buys you nothing if not invested wisely. Rather than crediting the Red Sox with spending wisely, the critics imagine that they're buying a title. You can't.
"They don't feel like my team. I miss Ted Williams/Yaz/Manny, etc."- They wear the same uniform and play home games at Fenway Park. Of course they're your team. Why don't they "feel" like your team? And bad news, everyone. Yaz isn't playing. He hasn't played since 1983. I don't see George Scott, Dom Dimaggio, Bill Lee and Dwight Evans out there either. Someone alert the authorities! Strangely enough, baseball players don't play baseball their entire lives. Some times they get traded or - in the case of Manny - attempt to destroy everything around them until we have no choice in the matter. It's a fact of life.
"I can't stand Red Sox Nation/Wally/the Pink Hats/et al"- Then don't pay attention to them. I admit, these things are annoying. But I don't ALLOW them to take away from my enjoyment of the game. The same goes for people who can't stand Neil Diamond, the Dropkick Murphies or the Standells. I've somehow learned to deal with the fact that the classic rock station plays "Hotel California" 72 times a day and so can you! Are so many Red Sox fans that mentally weak?
"The fans annoy me"- The fans annoy me too. I root for the team. Not the fans. We just happen to all root for the Red Sox. By the way, Boston fans have always been this annoying. We just notice because there are more of them. Success means the fan base gets bigger which means there are more chances to annoy you.
"the Rays are more like the Red Sox"- There are a bunch of teams that remind me of the Red Sox. The White Sox are kind of like the Red Sox since they're named after hosiery! The Cubs have that "will we ever win?" desperation the Sox used to have. The Indians and Braves have similar uniforms. The Mets pre-playoff collapses usher in delightful memories of 1991 and 2006. Kevin Millar plays for the Orioles which makes them kind of like the Red Sox in that the Red Sox used to have Kevin Millar on their team.
This is such an inane argument that it beggars the imagination. This is like rooting for the Brewers because I really liked "Mr. Belvidere".
"I can't afford to go to games at Fenway"- Then don't. Support the team by listening to the radio, watching NESN, or even going to sports bar to watch them play. I haven't gone to a Bruins, Celtics, or Patriots team in years and I don't feel like my experience as a fan has been lessened in any way. It's not like I can hop a plane to Glasgow every Saturday to watch the Hoops play...
In summation, if you want to stop rooting for the Red Sox, I can't stop you. But I can at least point out that you're arguments are idiotic and being addicting to losing is foolish. Just say "no" to the loser mentality and embrace a team. Even if they win.
Why is it so many Red Sox fans are unwilling - or unable - to embrace a team that actually wins? It makes no sense. You root for a team in hopes that they finally win a championship. Too many idiots in the fan base and the general media (especially - for some inscrutable reason- the Sox-centric Globe) have recoiled from the Sox because they're too successful. My question is why.
It's not like New Englanders are afraid of success in sports. No one gave up on the Orr/Esposito era Bruins when they won Stanley Cups. They became more popular. The Russell era Celtics didn't start out popular, but they got more and more popular as they started hording titles. The Patriot's burst of popularity started with the hiring of Bill Parcells drafting Drew Bledsoe in 1993 and despite some lows at the end of the Pete Carroll era, they've maintained a decent level of popularity even after the disasters of the past couple of years. Anyone jumping off the bandwagon because Spygate or the Brady probably doesn't care about football to begin with, but at least they aren't scared off by success. The Patriots were every bit as incompetent as the Red Sox were before 2004 (add pre 08' Celtics and the current Bruins to that mix). And on a college front, I don't see a lot of UCONN basketball fans or BU, BC and Maine hockey fans complaining that their teams are too successful. So why Red Sox fans?
Let's take a look at some of arguments why we shouldn't root for the Red Sox:
"The Red Sox have become the Yankees"- What does this even mean? Are they wearing pinstripes? Are they playing Sinatra after every home game? Despite the fact that they're the Yankees and we all hate them, what is it that the Yankees do that is egregious? Spend money? Win a lot? Oh shame on the Steinbrenners for trying to win! Don't they realize that the main point of owning a team is to underachieve and impress other fanbase by your "classy" refusal to win. Do we really hate the Yankees that much that we don't want to win 26 championships?
Does anything say "loser" more than hating the Yankees more than you like the Red Sox?
"The Red Sox buy championships"- Not only does this betray a comically insane view of capitalism (professional sports teams shouldn't spend money? They should pay players using the barter system?) but it also displays a breathtakingly ignorant view of Red Sox history. When Tom Yawkey's underachieving teams were referred to as "country club " teams, it wasn't just because they were lily-white. It was because Yawkey foolishly spent on high priced veterans who couldn't deliver. Bad news people: the Red Sox had the highest payroll in baseball for years, and couldn't get within sniffing distance of a pennant. That happened 50 years ago. To pretend that the Sox have always been a plucky yet cheap small market team is beyond stupid.
Spending money is no guarantee of success: ask the Yankees, Mets and Tigers, all of whom have higher payrolls than the Red Sox. Meanwhile, the Marlins, A's, Twins, Cardinals, Rockies, and Rays all make deep post season runs with payrolls a fraction of the Yankees. Money buys you nothing if not invested wisely. Rather than crediting the Red Sox with spending wisely, the critics imagine that they're buying a title. You can't.
"They don't feel like my team. I miss Ted Williams/Yaz/Manny, etc."- They wear the same uniform and play home games at Fenway Park. Of course they're your team. Why don't they "feel" like your team? And bad news, everyone. Yaz isn't playing. He hasn't played since 1983. I don't see George Scott, Dom Dimaggio, Bill Lee and Dwight Evans out there either. Someone alert the authorities! Strangely enough, baseball players don't play baseball their entire lives. Some times they get traded or - in the case of Manny - attempt to destroy everything around them until we have no choice in the matter. It's a fact of life.
"I can't stand Red Sox Nation/Wally/the Pink Hats/et al"- Then don't pay attention to them. I admit, these things are annoying. But I don't ALLOW them to take away from my enjoyment of the game. The same goes for people who can't stand Neil Diamond, the Dropkick Murphies or the Standells. I've somehow learned to deal with the fact that the classic rock station plays "Hotel California" 72 times a day and so can you! Are so many Red Sox fans that mentally weak?
"The fans annoy me"- The fans annoy me too. I root for the team. Not the fans. We just happen to all root for the Red Sox. By the way, Boston fans have always been this annoying. We just notice because there are more of them. Success means the fan base gets bigger which means there are more chances to annoy you.
"the Rays are more like the Red Sox"- There are a bunch of teams that remind me of the Red Sox. The White Sox are kind of like the Red Sox since they're named after hosiery! The Cubs have that "will we ever win?" desperation the Sox used to have. The Indians and Braves have similar uniforms. The Mets pre-playoff collapses usher in delightful memories of 1991 and 2006. Kevin Millar plays for the Orioles which makes them kind of like the Red Sox in that the Red Sox used to have Kevin Millar on their team.
This is such an inane argument that it beggars the imagination. This is like rooting for the Brewers because I really liked "Mr. Belvidere".
"I can't afford to go to games at Fenway"- Then don't. Support the team by listening to the radio, watching NESN, or even going to sports bar to watch them play. I haven't gone to a Bruins, Celtics, or Patriots team in years and I don't feel like my experience as a fan has been lessened in any way. It's not like I can hop a plane to Glasgow every Saturday to watch the Hoops play...
In summation, if you want to stop rooting for the Red Sox, I can't stop you. But I can at least point out that you're arguments are idiotic and being addicting to losing is foolish. Just say "no" to the loser mentality and embrace a team. Even if they win.
Wednesday, October 8, 2008
Sox/Rays Preview
I was going to do another lazy "Random thoughts" blog entry, but I decided against it. And there will be no entry on the Pats/49ers game because I heard most of it on the radio. Sorry.
At any rate, most people are picking the Rays to win the ALCS for two reasons:
1. The Rays won the AL East and the season series.
2. Everyone hates the Red Sox and their fans. Way to stay objective, US sports media.
Here's my take:
Batting: Advantage Rays. This would be different if Mike Lowell was healthy and the last 3 batters in the order ever did anything (well, aside from Jed Lowrie winning game four, of course). As long as the Rays keep having a different person hit two home runs a game, I have to give them the edge.
Starting pitching: Slight advantage to the Sox, mostly because John Lester is untouchable in the playoffs, so far. Beckett isn't nearly as good as he was last year and Dice-K is as much fun as a prostate exam, but he keeps winning. The Rays have an excellent staff, but Lester puts the Sox over the edge.
Defense: Slight advantage Rays. They don't make spectacular plays, but they make the ones they need to. I like the Red Sox defense a lot (they don't lose much when they switch Youk to third base and Kotsay/Casey to first), but the Rays seem more dependable.
Bullpen: Advantage Rays. Simply put, the Rays are masters of winning close games in late innings and the reason is that their bullpen has been superb. For the Sox, Papelbon has been fantastic so far and Okajima has rebounded from a bad sophomore season, but they aren't nearly as dependable as Tampa Bay.
Managers: Advantage Red Sox. Would someone please tell the nimrods who infest ESPN, WEEI and the Herald nuthou- er, comments section, that "Francoma" has two world series titles? They were wrong about Belichick and Doc Rivers. Dare you go zero for three?
Intangibles: Push. On one hand you have the defending World Series champions who seem to find a way to win. On the other, you have a team that just never goes away and seems to embrace their role as the "scrappy underdog." I don't think the "Trop" is a negative: for all the talk about how tiny Tampa Bay's fan base is, it hasn't affecting them so far. I'm sure those awful cowbells are murder on opposing teams, no matter how many people show up. And the Red Sox are terrible in domes. On the flip side, I can't imagine too many people want to play against the Red Sox at Fenway, especially since the Yankees imploded in 2004.
As you can see, we're pretty much even. I'd expect this series to go seven and if that happens, the Red Sox have a decent chance of advancing because they've been there before. The caveat is that "inexperience" hasn't caught up to the Rays yet and sitting around waiting for them to fall apart might be as futile now as it was a month ago.
At any rate, most people are picking the Rays to win the ALCS for two reasons:
1. The Rays won the AL East and the season series.
2. Everyone hates the Red Sox and their fans. Way to stay objective, US sports media.
Here's my take:
Batting: Advantage Rays. This would be different if Mike Lowell was healthy and the last 3 batters in the order ever did anything (well, aside from Jed Lowrie winning game four, of course). As long as the Rays keep having a different person hit two home runs a game, I have to give them the edge.
Starting pitching: Slight advantage to the Sox, mostly because John Lester is untouchable in the playoffs, so far. Beckett isn't nearly as good as he was last year and Dice-K is as much fun as a prostate exam, but he keeps winning. The Rays have an excellent staff, but Lester puts the Sox over the edge.
Defense: Slight advantage Rays. They don't make spectacular plays, but they make the ones they need to. I like the Red Sox defense a lot (they don't lose much when they switch Youk to third base and Kotsay/Casey to first), but the Rays seem more dependable.
Bullpen: Advantage Rays. Simply put, the Rays are masters of winning close games in late innings and the reason is that their bullpen has been superb. For the Sox, Papelbon has been fantastic so far and Okajima has rebounded from a bad sophomore season, but they aren't nearly as dependable as Tampa Bay.
Managers: Advantage Red Sox. Would someone please tell the nimrods who infest ESPN, WEEI and the Herald nuthou- er, comments section, that "Francoma" has two world series titles? They were wrong about Belichick and Doc Rivers. Dare you go zero for three?
Intangibles: Push. On one hand you have the defending World Series champions who seem to find a way to win. On the other, you have a team that just never goes away and seems to embrace their role as the "scrappy underdog." I don't think the "Trop" is a negative: for all the talk about how tiny Tampa Bay's fan base is, it hasn't affecting them so far. I'm sure those awful cowbells are murder on opposing teams, no matter how many people show up. And the Red Sox are terrible in domes. On the flip side, I can't imagine too many people want to play against the Red Sox at Fenway, especially since the Yankees imploded in 2004.
As you can see, we're pretty much even. I'd expect this series to go seven and if that happens, the Red Sox have a decent chance of advancing because they've been there before. The caveat is that "inexperience" hasn't caught up to the Rays yet and sitting around waiting for them to fall apart might be as futile now as it was a month ago.
Friday, October 3, 2008
Random thoughts from the happily married...
-One last (or at least I HOPE it's the last time I have to go through this!) comment about Bill Simmons crusade against Scott Boras and the Boston media: is WEEI too stupid to realize that they're playing right into the man's hands? The rumors of Simmons attempts to burn all his bridges at ESPN have been swirling throughout the summer and it looks like the Sports Guy is tugging at the cape of the Red Sox Cabal (Globe/Herald/NESN/WEEI/WRKO) by suggesting that Manny wasn't 100% to blame. While I don't buy all of his premise, the Boston media has a reputation of running players out of town and/or bad mouthing them when they leave (Mo Vaughn, Roger Clemens, Joe Thornton, and others). And Boston has a reputation of being inhospitable to non-white athletes. As Manny's trade was a result of his awful behavior (with prodding from Satan Boras, no doubt), I don't think it was racial motivated. It just makes the move look much worse to outsiders.
At any rate, Simmon's ideas do have merit. Whether or not he's 100% accurate, is under debate. The idiots at WEEI who chose to slam him for "defending" Manny - and let's be fair, the Sports Guy comes off as a fan boy of massive proportions - are making his point. Why no one is seriously pursuing the Boras angle is beyond me.
-The Charlie Pierce article I linked to last week generated some of the usual idiotic comments. I was surprised to see many of the nitwits who infest the Herald's comments section have infested the Globe - the great Satan of the "oppressed" MA conservative - as well. I admitted that Mr. Pierce went a bit too far with his anti-Republican sentiment. The problem is that Curt Schilling is just as guilty of inserting politics into everything. Both Charlie Pierce and Curt Schilling should be taken to task for inserting politics into sports, but Mr. Pierce is less guilty because he's REACTING to some of the crazy things he sees on 38Pitches. Does Curt realize he plays for a team in a Blue State? Why antagonize the people who adore you by running around acting like the Giant Forehead? It makes no sense and that was Charlie Pierce's argument. He doesn't have to vote for Obama, but he should at least try not to insult people who do yet root for the Red Sox.
I would say the same thing about Hollywood liberals, but they can't throw a decent curveball.
-And as an added bonus, if Curt and Charlie can post their messages, and commentators who dropped fully formed from the Pink Hamster's anus can post their comments, then I can insult all parties. That's the First Amendment.
-Al Davis used to be kind of a joke. Now he's a complete joke. I don't doubt that he had good reason to gong Lane Kifflin. But why bring up a tampering charge against the Pats 1 year later? Only ESPN and their attendant twits in Hater Nation are buying this. Caveat emptor.
-Let's see: the Mets disintegrate, the Cubs are awful in the playoffs and the Angels can't beat the Red Sox (well, up until this evening, I suppose). Is it still 2007?
-I understand nothing can be done about this, but I absolutely hate the fact that the circus is always in town during the first two weeks of the Bruin's season.
At any rate, Simmon's ideas do have merit. Whether or not he's 100% accurate, is under debate. The idiots at WEEI who chose to slam him for "defending" Manny - and let's be fair, the Sports Guy comes off as a fan boy of massive proportions - are making his point. Why no one is seriously pursuing the Boras angle is beyond me.
-The Charlie Pierce article I linked to last week generated some of the usual idiotic comments. I was surprised to see many of the nitwits who infest the Herald's comments section have infested the Globe - the great Satan of the "oppressed" MA conservative - as well. I admitted that Mr. Pierce went a bit too far with his anti-Republican sentiment. The problem is that Curt Schilling is just as guilty of inserting politics into everything. Both Charlie Pierce and Curt Schilling should be taken to task for inserting politics into sports, but Mr. Pierce is less guilty because he's REACTING to some of the crazy things he sees on 38Pitches. Does Curt realize he plays for a team in a Blue State? Why antagonize the people who adore you by running around acting like the Giant Forehead? It makes no sense and that was Charlie Pierce's argument. He doesn't have to vote for Obama, but he should at least try not to insult people who do yet root for the Red Sox.
I would say the same thing about Hollywood liberals, but they can't throw a decent curveball.
-And as an added bonus, if Curt and Charlie can post their messages, and commentators who dropped fully formed from the Pink Hamster's anus can post their comments, then I can insult all parties. That's the First Amendment.
-Al Davis used to be kind of a joke. Now he's a complete joke. I don't doubt that he had good reason to gong Lane Kifflin. But why bring up a tampering charge against the Pats 1 year later? Only ESPN and their attendant twits in Hater Nation are buying this. Caveat emptor.
-Let's see: the Mets disintegrate, the Cubs are awful in the playoffs and the Angels can't beat the Red Sox (well, up until this evening, I suppose). Is it still 2007?
-I understand nothing can be done about this, but I absolutely hate the fact that the circus is always in town during the first two weeks of the Bruin's season.
Thursday, October 2, 2008
Last word on Manny (for a while)...
The Sports Guy (gasp!) gets it right
I don't often give Bill Simmons credit, but he is right on this issue. Scott Boras has a LOT to answer for. Or, Manny is bi-polar. Either explanation works.
I particularly like the snarky comment about the Globe/NESN/WEEI/WRKO regurgitating the company line. Tee hee.
I apologize for the lack of snark here, but as a married man, I have to start acting like a grown up. (kidding!)
I don't often give Bill Simmons credit, but he is right on this issue. Scott Boras has a LOT to answer for. Or, Manny is bi-polar. Either explanation works.
I particularly like the snarky comment about the Globe/NESN/WEEI/WRKO regurgitating the company line. Tee hee.
I apologize for the lack of snark here, but as a married man, I have to start acting like a grown up. (kidding!)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
