1967 vs 2013

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from 67redsox. Show 67redsox's posts

    Re: 1967 vs 2013

    In response to BigPapiforever's comment:

    In response to BurritoT-'s comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

    What kinda 'ride' did they have back in 1967? Was it electric? Was it 'enjoyable'?

     




    I was a kid but names like Rico, Scott and Andrews were just as popular as Yaz an Tony C.  Jim Longberg is another guy I would like to see in the booth sometime.

     

    As great as Yaz was, it as always a team effort.

    Thanks for the correction on the attendance for the last game.  When game highlights are shown for the last out, which I believe was made by Reggie Smith,those bleachers look pretty empty.

    [/QUOTE]

    Back then fans were "allowed" to storm the field.  If you look at pictures of the last game you will see the field covered with those who were in the stands.

    Those in the bleachers were probably making their way to the grandstand section so they could jump onto the field.  The bull pens prevented them from doing that in the bleachers.

     
  2. This post has been removed.

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from JimfromFlorida. Show JimfromFlorida's posts

    Re: 1967 vs 2013

    In response to Sheriff-Rojas' comment:

    In response to JimfromFlorida's comment:
    [QUOTE]

     

    2013 is as good as. NO ONE excpected 1967 and most laughed when Dick Williams said the team would win more than they lost that year. This year most if not all never saw better than a 500 record.

    Since I was 17 in '67 and I am now 63 comparision of the teams stops at what we expected, which was little. One was led by the Captain the other by Big Papi

    The '67 team was a lot of kids who we knew little about.

    The 2013 team is a buch of players we thought we knew and were not overly impressed.

    I am enjoying this season as much as '67 and more than '03, 04 and '07. just because of the unexpected coming true.

     



    2004 was expected after 86 years?  Jimbo, gain some perspective. 

    [/QUOTE]
    2004 was EXPECTED to be good with the ability to win it all. Remembber 2003 was a disappointment because of the expectations.


    67 and this year had NO such expectations.

    I do  have the perspective of having been thru the RS seasons since 1957 and know that '67 there were no such expectations and the same for this year.

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from JimfromFlorida. Show JimfromFlorida's posts

    Re: 1967 vs 2013

    Funny I said this SEASON was as good as 1967. SEASON folks.

    I said nothing about the playoffs funny how some read the same info and get different ideas. If you were around in 67 and now you will see a lot of the same things. A new hero every day role players coming thru pitchers doing their part. '67 was a GREAT ride for a fan just as this year has been.

    Yup 04 and 07 were great and the finishes were even better but both had far far more promise to start the season than either 1967 or 2013

     

    LOVE my  Red Sox, Bs, Cs, Pats and enjoy the ride every year. 

     
  5. This post has been removed.

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from 67redsox. Show 67redsox's posts

    Re: 1967 vs 2013

    In response to BigPapiforever's comment:


    Red Sox fans back then always had hope at the beginning of the season.  No die hard fan ever picked them for last like shaughnessy.

    The combination of Yaz and Tony was getting noticed and Rico's abilities were respected by other teams. Probably the only time a kid did not get in trouble for hooking school was if he had a ticket stub from the red sox. I was just kid at the time but I remember my uncles picking me up and heading to a game and early in the season them thinking this was a special year.



    Lucky kid and smart uncles

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from nhsteven. Show nhsteven's posts

    Re: 1967 vs 2013


    '67 Team was THE team that changed Sox also-ran image

    Big turnaround, Sox finished 9th in '66

    Incredible Pennant Race & WS; it looked like pale-hose would win pennant

    It was Yaz & Lonborg's best yr

    Unfortunately, it was also the yr Tony C had that career changing injury

    I always liked Lee Stange - unflappable, gritty & tough, gave the GOOD NYYs (pre-1965) fits

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from djcbuffum. Show djcbuffum's posts

    Re: 1967 vs 2013

    I wasn't alive in 1967, so I won't speak on it.

    However, 2004 and 2013 are apples and oranges.

    The 2004 team was mostly the same as the 2003 team which, consistent with our long history, blew it at the last moment. We started the 2004 season with the knowledge that it would be a good team with Pedro, Schilling, Manny and Ortiz. We had the very justified concern that, once again, they'd blow it in the end. Another Bill Buckner. Another Bucky Dent. Another Grady Little. Expectations were high, going in to 2004, but the long-standing pessimism couldn't be shaken. Through the whole season we maintained high expectations, but a sneaking suspicion that when the cards were down, they'd blow it again somehow. Then they were down 0-3 in the ALCS to the Yankees. It was fate; the Sox were going to fail again, just like they always did; just like we had worried from the beginning. That's why we didn't get to hopeful with the Sox; because they always let us down at the last minute. Then they won, and we thought, "at least it won't be a sweep." And then they won again, and we were like, "whoa, this team has some fight in them." And then, believe it or not, they won a third time, and we went into game four thinking, "how is this possible?" "Can this even be done?" "Will I cry when they lose game 4?" And then they won, and our minds were blown. Then there was the WS with the Cardinals, which was just gravy, really.

    In contrast, we had no hopes or expectations going into 2013. We watched that torrid April, and figured it was a lucky month and they couldn't keep it up. May rolled around and they dropped out of first, and we all expected this was the regression to the mean: when they'd drop down to .500 where they belonged. Somehow, by early June they pulled together and got back on top. But the bullpen was a mess, and we were all concerned they couldn't make it through the whole season. Then Buchholz went down, and we all thought "it was nice while it lasted." Maybe some of us had a glimmer of hope that the team could keep it up, but nobody could really have expected what happened next. First, John Lackey, of all people, pitched like an ace. Then Jon Lester stepped up. The Koji Uehara became the reincarnation of Dennis Eckersly. But even going into August, we were worried that the @!$% Yankees would catch up; that A-Rod and Jeter would pick them up, while our cast of misfits would return to "normal." Our hopes gently and slowly built over the season. There was no one moment when it became clear that this team was good. They just kept piling on the wins, while we kept expecting them to regress. And now here we are, headed into the post-season, and really the favorites to take the pennant. If they [i]don't[/i] take the pennant, it will be a surprise. Who'd a thunk it back in April?

    "Who would have guessed it possible that waiting is sustainable, a place with its own harvests -- or that in time's fullness the diamonds of patience couldn't be distinguished from genuine brilliance or hardness." --Kay Ryan.

    "Everything is happening, all the time, very fast. I like that." -- Warren Ellis

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from Sheriff-Rojas. Show Sheriff-Rojas's posts

    Re: 1967 vs 2013

    In response to JimfromFlorida's comment:

    In response to Sheriff-Rojas' comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

    In response to JimfromFlorida's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

     

    2013 is as good as. NO ONE excpected 1967 and most laughed when Dick Williams said the team would win more than they lost that year. This year most if not all never saw better than a 500 record.

    Since I was 17 in '67 and I am now 63 comparision of the teams stops at what we expected, which was little. One was led by the Captain the other by Big Papi

    The '67 team was a lot of kids who we knew little about.

    The 2013 team is a buch of players we thought we knew and were not overly impressed.

    I am enjoying this season as much as '67 and more than '03, 04 and '07. just because of the unexpected coming true.

     

     



    2004 was expected after 86 years?  Jimbo, gain some perspective. 

     

     

    [/QUOTE]
    2004 was EXPECTED to be good with the ability to win it all. Remembber 2003 was a disappointment because of the expectations.

     


    67 and this year had NO such expectations.

    I do  have the perspective of having been thru the RS seasons since 1957 and know that '67 there were no such expectations and the same for this year.

    [/QUOTE]

    "Expected to be good with the ability to win it all" is a far cry from winning it all and ending the most storied sports drought in US history.  A somewhat objective observer would conclude that the 2004 Red Sox had a fair chance of winning it all at the beginning of the season, but any angst-ridden Red Sox fan, which is nearly all of us here and somewhat redundant, especially at that point in history, would still have held back from expecting the Red Sox to fulfill this dream.  How many fans on here could actually say they didn't suffer pangs of trepidation when Pedro struggled a little in the 7th inning of Game 7 of the 2004 ALCS in spite of a 7 run lead and former game and series momentum?

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from Sheriff-Rojas. Show Sheriff-Rojas's posts

    Re: 1967 vs 2013

    In response to djcbuffum's comment:

    I wasn't alive in 1967, so I won't speak on it.

    However, 2004 and 2013 are apples and oranges.

    The 2004 team was mostly the same as the 2003 team which, consistent with our long history, blew it at the last moment. We started the 2004 season with the knowledge that it would be a good team with Pedro, Schilling, Manny and Ortiz. We had the very justified concern that, once again, they'd blow it in the end. Another Bill Buckner. Another Bucky Dent. Another Grady Little. Expectations were high, going in to 2004, but the long-standing pessimism couldn't be shaken. Through the whole season we maintained high expectations, but a sneaking suspicion that when the cards were down, they'd blow it again somehow. Then they were down 0-3 in the ALCS to the Yankees. It was fate; the Sox were going to fail again, just like they always did; just like we had worried from the beginning. That's why we didn't get to hopeful with the Sox; because they always let us down at the last minute. Then they won, and we thought, "at least it won't be a sweep." And then they won again, and we were like, "whoa, this team has some fight in them." And then, believe it or not, they won a third time, and we went into game four thinking, "how is this possible?" "Can this even be done?" "Will I cry when they lose game 4?" And then they won, and our minds were blown. Then there was the WS with the Cardinals, which was just gravy, really.

    In contrast, we had no hopes or expectations going into 2013. We watched that torrid April, and figured it was a lucky month and they couldn't keep it up. May rolled around and they dropped out of first, and we all expected this was the regression to the mean: when they'd drop down to .500 where they belonged. Somehow, by early June they pulled together and got back on top. But the bullpen was a mess, and we were all concerned they couldn't make it through the whole season. Then Buchholz went down, and we all thought "it was nice while it lasted." Maybe some of us had a glimmer of hope that the team could keep it up, but nobody could really have expected what happened next. First, John Lackey, of all people, pitched like an ace. Then Jon Lester stepped up. The Koji Uehara became the reincarnation of Dennis Eckersly. But even going into August, we were worried that the @!$% Yankees would catch up; that A-Rod and Jeter would pick them up, while our cast of misfits would return to "normal." Our hopes gently and slowly built over the season. There was no one moment when it became clear that this team was good. They just kept piling on the wins, while we kept expecting them to regress. And now here we are, headed into the post-season, and really the favorites to take the pennant. If they [i]don't[/i] take the pennant, it will be a surprise. Who'd a thunk it back in April?

    "Who would have guessed it possible that waiting is sustainable, a place with its own harvests -- or that in time's fullness the diamonds of patience couldn't be distinguished from genuine brilliance or hardness." --Kay Ryan.

    "Everything is happening, all the time, very fast. I like that." -- Warren Ellis



    Well said, and similar to the post I was writing at the same time.  Maybe Jim is just not as in tune with the collective consciousness of the typical Red Sox fan.  That may or may not be such a bad thing and probably better for his blood pressure and emotional well-being.  

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from maxbialystock. Show maxbialystock's posts

    Re: 1967 vs 2013

    I think 1967 and 2004 were both transformational.  1967 because it was both a great year on the field and in attendance.  Remy says that was the beginning of the Sox being really popular with the fans.  Then along came John Henry and company, and they got really serious about fielding a good team and sabermetrics, etc.  Finally, success in 2004 with the first WS in 86 years, and that year was one of 9 in which the Sox set the record for most consecutive sellout games. 

    2013 is a great year by any measure, but not transformational.  At least, not yet.  It is the start of the Ben C era. 

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from Bill-806. Show Bill-806's posts

    Re: 1967 vs 2013

    In response to Hammah29r2's comment:

    In response to Bill-806's comment:

     

    In response to royf19's comment:

     

     

    In response to Bill-806's comment:

     

    so Bill if I understand what your sayin, you were at the tender age of 18 swabbin the deck of that tin can back in 67 right? what this means is that back in 67 I was at the tender age of 19 and getting ready to enlist. what I wanted to ask you is if you ever saw the picture of yaz and dick williams in his office both puffin on a butt chit chatting.......it was a great shot.

    GO NAVY!

     

    Yaz might not have known it then, but to this day I believe that Dick Williams made him the player that he became

     

     

     



    The only problem with this idea is that Yaz had committed himself to a strenuous offseason, which had nothing to do with Dick Williams. And that also was when Yaz adjusted his swing to pull the ball more, which was why his HR total bumbed up to 44, which again had nothing to do with Williams.

     

     

     

    Williams was the right manager at the right time for the Sox, but his impact was more on the younger players. I know it impresses you that Williams showed who was boss by stripping Yaz of the captaincy, but Yaz could care less.

     

    Roy19er .....   Your right, Yaz worked hard that offseason to get speed & strength in his swing......  However, please don't downplay the effect that D W had on his growing up that year.......  D W was "the boss" even though YAZ always had "PAPA TOM'S ear"  !!!!


     

     




     

    HAMMAH,  Yes I saw everything of that magical 1967 season..........  The new gang, after the Ted Williams years & a few bad years along the way should up in 1967.........   When the SOX came out to play the Angels myself & Mass buddies + midwest buddies would go out to the park and along with many transplants route for our beloved Sox..........  Good seats were always available   God, we had a great time !!! I still say that the new era of Sox came alive with Dick Williams !!!

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from 67redsox. Show 67redsox's posts

    Re: 1967 vs 2013

    In response to maxbialystock's comment:

    I think 1967 and 2004 were both transformational.  1967 because it was both a great year on the field and in attendance.  Remy says that was the beginning of the Sox being really popular with the fans.  Then along came John Henry and company, and they got really serious about fielding a good team and sabermetrics, etc.  Finally, success in 2004 with the first WS in 86 years, and that year was one of 9 in which the Sox set the record for most consecutive sellout games. 

    2013 is a great year by any measure, but not transformational.  At least, not yet.  It is the start of the Ben C era. 



    Some say what was left unfinished in 67' was made complete in 04'

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from 67redsox. Show 67redsox's posts

    Re: 1967 vs 2013

    In response to Bill-806's comment:

    In response to Hammah29r2's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

    In response to Bill-806's comment:

     

    In response to royf19's comment:

     

     

    In response to Bill-806's comment:

     

    so Bill if I understand what your sayin, you were at the tender age of 18 swabbin the deck of that tin can back in 67 right? what this means is that back in 67 I was at the tender age of 19 and getting ready to enlist. what I wanted to ask you is if you ever saw the picture of yaz and dick williams in his office both puffin on a butt chit chatting.......it was a great shot.

    GO NAVY!

     

    Yaz might not have known it then, but to this day I believe that Dick Williams made him the player that he became

     

     

     



    The only problem with this idea is that Yaz had committed himself to a strenuous offseason, which had nothing to do with Dick Williams. And that also was when Yaz adjusted his swing to pull the ball more, which was why his HR total bumbed up to 44, which again had nothing to do with Williams.

     

     

     

    Williams was the right manager at the right time for the Sox, but his impact was more on the younger players. I know it impresses you that Williams showed who was boss by stripping Yaz of the captaincy, but Yaz could care less.

     

    Roy19er .....   Your right, Yaz worked hard that offseason to get speed & strength in his swing......  However, please don't downplay the effect that D W had on his growing up that year.......  D W was "the boss" even though YAZ always had "PAPA TOM'S ear"  !!!!


     

     




     

     

    HAMMAH,  Yes I saw everything of that magical 1967 season..........  The new gang, after the Ted Williams years & a few bad years along the way should up in 1967.........   When the SOX came out to play the Angels myself & Mass buddies + midwest buddies would go out to the park and along with many transplants route for our beloved Sox..........  Good seats were always available   God, we had a great time !!! I still say that the new era of Sox came alive with Dick Williams !!!

     

    [/QUOTE]

    You are right about dick williams bill.  Read a great book on the history of the sox and it said the same, williams knocked heads and made the sox a real team.  I'm out of town so I can't get the title of the book but it was a great read.

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from JimfromFlorida. Show JimfromFlorida's posts

    Re: 1967 vs 2013

    [/QUOTE]

    Well said, and similar to the post I was writing at the same time.  Maybe Jim is just not as in tune with the collective consciousness of the typical Red Sox fan.  That may or may not be such a bad thing and probably better for his blood pressure and emotional well-being.  

    [/QUOTE]
    I know very well of the collective consciousness of the typical Red Sox fan.

    I just realized no matter what happens i have no control over anything they do or do or do not do. I know every Sox fan is always waiting for the worst to happen. That disaster is just the next pitch away.

     So as my posts always say I just enjoy the ride since there is not a damn thing I can do about it.

    However I do have a special seating position I do assume when my superstitions kick in during every game I watch or am able to watch.

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from Sheriff-Rojas. Show Sheriff-Rojas's posts

    Re: 1967 vs 2013

    In response to JimfromFlorida's comment:



    Well said, and similar to the post I was writing at the same time.  Maybe Jim is just not as in tune with the collective consciousness of the typical Red Sox fan.  That may or may not be such a bad thing and probably better for his blood pressure and emotional well-being.  

    [/QUOTE]
    I know very well of the collective consciousness of the typical Red Sox fan.

    I just realized no matter what happens i have no control over anything they do or do or do not do. I know every Sox fan is always waiting for the worst to happen. That disaster is just the next pitch away.

     So as my posts always say I just enjoy the ride since there is not a damn thing I can do about it.

    However I do have a special seating position I do assume when my superstitions kick in during every game I watch or am able to watch.

    [/QUOTE]

    Well then, just keep assuming that position.  

     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from kannaman. Show kannaman's posts

    Re: 1967 vs 2013

    In response to BurritoT-'s comment:

    What kinda 'ride' did they have back in 1967? Was it electric? Was it 'enjoyable'?


    What kind of ride...well how about 4 teams fighting for first place all summer long....finally Chicago dropped out about 10 games left in the season....left the Sox, Tigers and Twins....Twins had a one game lead with 2 games left to play vs the Sox at Fenway....The Tigers had to play a doubleheader vs the Angels on the last day....if they would have swept it they would have tied the Sox. Electric doesn't begin to describe that season....it was nuclear powered...I wish every season was like that one because it got everyone involved.

     

Share