Sometimes it comes down to choices, right?

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

    Sometimes it comes down to choices, right?

    I believe the catch Chris Young made on Jerry Hairston Jr's fly ball was incredible. Chris Carpenter and Roy Halladay pitched great games last night; too bad one of them had to lose. Imagine, the first two batters of a game tripling and doubling with no other runs scored over the next fifty four outs! Watching Jose Valverde strike Alex Rodriguez out will always be memorable for us and Adrian Beltre hitting three (3) home runs in one playoff game? Nice! You gotta love baseball fans, huh?
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from ZILLAGOD. Show ZILLAGOD's posts

    Re: Sometimes it comes down to choices, right?

    I will watch the odd playoff game and I follow who's winning in each series.

    I will not watch games in the first round as TBS coverage is lousy and they monopolize the whole thing by hogging all 4 series.

    Fox is not much better, the coverage of games has too many commercials and I lose interest when the breaks become endless repeats of the same stupid ads.

    I sometimes watch if the World Series is a good matchup, but honestly, it doesn't hold my interest like it used to before the league got so out of control. The league is watered down talent wise by expansion in the 90's, the high paid players are mostly way overpaid and do not perform in postseason like the big stars of years past, many games are won by some unexpected player who batted .235 or something during the year. The umpires miss so many major calls and hold up the game to review or argue with the players and managers. I just find the whole postseason is very anticlimactic and the announcers talk too much and are mostly boring.

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

    Re: Sometimes it comes down to choices, right?

    Zilla, You seem to be jaded (just sayin') and hopeless. It's a shame. You miss(ed) some good baseball by not tuning in. Verlander's performance may be "one for the ages" if he goes on to win it all? He could have nearly thirty (30) wins dude! -WO
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from 1958lesspaul. Show 1958lesspaul's posts

    Re: Sometimes it comes down to choices, right?

    Yes. Do not offer a MLB contract to Wastefield and Varitek.
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from ZILLAGOD. Show ZILLAGOD's posts

    Re: Sometimes it comes down to choices, right?

    Very possibly just weary from a long season of watching too many awful games.

    I suppose if you watch enough sports you will eventually see some exciting games. It just seems to me that the exciting games are becoming fewer and further apart.

    I think back to the 1986 season , although disappointing from a Red Sox fan's standpoint, but the series between Sox/Angels and the series between Mets/Astros were nailbiters, edge of the seat games. The World Series between Boston and the Mets was just back and forth and as a fan of baseball you were just riveted to the screen. Excitement every night, every inning. Big stars like Gooden ,Clemens, Rice, Carter, Hernanadez, etc.

    I guess I don't get excited about the game as much as I used to...maybe the problem IS with me...I apologize, but it is the way I feel about many sports these days. I really think expansion has watered all major sports down and made them less exciting.
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from ABQDan. Show ABQDan's posts

    Re: Sometimes it comes down to choices, right?

    I will turn on games and keep watching if I feel that they are interesting.  This week's games have been great to watch.

    What Zilla said about TBS and Faux telecasts.  The on-air talent are OK with me (I must be getting old, Joe Buck no longer makes me want to shoot up my TV), but the endless jump-cuts and graphics and basic unstated principle that the game itself is not enough to keep one interested are annoying as hell.  It's chicken/egg; if they covered the game better, they might help people appreciate the nuances more, and need to have Craig Sager carpet-bomb our dignity.

    Someone please help Craig Sager - he is desperately in need of radical psychic transformation.  Maybe six months in the Amazon jungle, a bone through his nose and hallucinogenic enema ceremonies would be a start.
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from UticaClub. Show UticaClub's posts

    Re: Sometimes it comes down to choices, right?

    I don't get upset at all with the announcers since I consider them to be background noise and I'll tune them out if they are boring or irritating. It is like being in the stands and tuning out the idiots that are within earshot of you. Concentrate on the game. You can always turn off the volume on your TV and pretend that you are sitting in the top row of the bleachers.
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from WesternOregon. Show WesternOregon's posts

    Re: Sometimes it comes down to choices, right?

    "Never let the messenger overshadow the message..."
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from ABQDan. Show ABQDan's posts

    Re: Sometimes it comes down to choices, right?

    Good point, Utica, but OTOH there are telecasts that I've seen that really nail the game, and just make it that much more fun to watch.

    Honestly can't say I've noticed that more with one network over another, probably more related to the style of whomever is directing the telecast from the truck.

    Just saying I strongly prefer broadcasts where they keep the camera on the pitcher between pitches, the commentators don't feel like they have to constantly talk - you know, they let the game show itself, rather than trying to pile extraneous garbage like Sager.

    Sager is a lost soul - I could picture him drowing his sorrows in a Holiday Inn at 2am, uncomfortably trying to paw the barmaid.

    Can't wait to hear Francona.
     
  10. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Sometimes it comes down to choices, right?

    In Response to Re: Sometimes it comes down to choices, right?:
    [QUOTE]Yes. Do not offer a MLB contract to Wastefield and Varitek.
    Posted by 1958lesspaul[/QUOTE]

    relentless, I love it.
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from BurritoT. Show BurritoT's posts

    Re: Sometimes it comes down to choices, right?

    Who would not prefer shorter seasons and perhaps see 2 to 4 teams contracted, a salary max/minimum that keeps ALL teams honest, and datyime WSC games? Anyone say that any of those would be a bad thing? Anyone here?
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from sindarin-erebor. Show sindarin-erebor's posts

    Re: Sometimes it comes down to choices, right?

    Despite being out of the playoff hunt, I still will listen to a playoff game or two on XM Radio. I rarely if ever will watch a game on TV anyway. Once the Sox are gone and the Yankees are gone too, my passion wanes considerably.
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from expitch. Show expitch's posts

    Re: Sometimes it comes down to choices, right?

    I pick up on Zilla's remark about "watered down talent" owing to expansion. IIRC, in the "then and now" thread, one argument advanced for the superiority of the game "now," especially since intergration, is the expansion of the talent pool because of the doubling of the population since the mid-1950's. But the doubling of the population has been matched by the doubling of teams in MLB. If, say, only 25 or 22 teams instead of 30 were drawing upon the population of 300 million, this rawly statistical argument might carry more weight.  ( Might. ) Some of us in that thread pointed out that whereas in the past, up through, say, the 1960's, baseball had first call on the best athletic talent in the country, nowadays and for some time, baseball has had to compete with football and basketball, in particular for  black athletes. Thus, qualitatively baseball is probably not doing as well fishing in the talent pool of 300 million ( OK, 150 million ) as it did in the talent pool of 150 million ( OK, 75 million. ) It no longer has first dibs. Far from it. 
    Nothing trumps talent. Not "improved" methods of conditioning. Not better nutrition.  ( Here comes the DL. Someone on that thread said that someone else had shown or could show that baseball players were injured just as often and just as seriously in the past as they are now. I've not yet seen the data and the methodology that will support that conclusion. I haven't looked for it, true, but the proposer has the onus of proof. ) Not video analysis. Not "bigger, stronger, faster," especially if a good deal of talent answering to that description is being drained off into other sports. In any case, bigger, stronger, faster are categories of numbers. In a game like baseball, with such heavy reliance on instinct and mental altertness ( and the numerous head games that the slow pace allows players to work upon one another ), the data in those categories do not automatically guarantee better play. More powerful play, yes, but more powerful is not necessarily improved.
    In the 1950's one did not hear that the game is better now than it was in the 1920's. On the whole, players in the 50's were bigger, stronger, and faster than had been those in the 1920's. A good deal that had been learned about improved nutrition during World War Two was widely known. Baseball coaches were making use of conditioning coaches. ( At USC, Rod Dedeaux enlisted Jess Mortenson, the track coach, to work with us, especially the pitchers. ) And so on. 
    On that "now and then" thread, a point was made about the emergence of relief specialists and about new pitches.  Few, if any, of the "new" pitches are really new. Some pitchers came to rely upon or to specialize in, say, the splitter, but the action on that pitch was nothing new. Same with the slider. A lot of terrific relievers have been on the scene in the last, say, forty years, but there are many more weak sisters who get to play at all because starters are on pitch counts.
    Unless one is relentlessly committed to the doctrine of linear progress ( note how that mind set has run afoul of reality in many non-scientific areas of human life ), pause at the very least is in order before declaring the contemporary game "better." That stance makes one liable to the charge of temporal arrogance.  And if one insists that baseball has become or is becoming "scientific," I think that the term is being used very loosely, as it is, IMO, when it is applied to sociology.  
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from UticaClub. Show UticaClub's posts

    Re: Sometimes it comes down to choices, right?

    Did this thread go off onto a tangent? If one has other thoughts then why not start a new fresh thread?
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from expitch. Show expitch's posts

    Re: Sometimes it comes down to choices, right?

    Zilla says he's losing interest in PS baseball in part because "the league is watered down talent wise by expansion in the 90's." That seems to me a strong statement that warrants thoughts about then and now. 
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from harness. Show harness's posts

    Re: Sometimes it comes down to choices, right?

    In Response to Re: Sometimes it comes down to choices, right?:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Sometimes it comes down to choices, right? : relentless, I love it.
    Posted by BurritoT[/QUOTE]

    Man, R U two-faced. Since when does constant repetition suddenly become relentless?

    Answer: When it supports your position. Or Softone's. Bend over Softone;
    here comes the judge.

    When does "CERA" become relentless? Will you love it when it does?
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from hill55. Show hill55's posts

    Re: Sometimes it comes down to choices, right?

    I rarely listen to ESPN commentator Colin Cowherd, but last week I caught him talking about the television ratings for postseason baseball. Cowherd acknowledged that Boston fans follow their teams with fervor. However, Cowherd claims the ratings in recent years show that New England fans are the most provincial because they won't watch the sport once their team is eliminated.

    Cowherd contends that a "good sports town" will follow the sport regardless of whether the local team remains in contention. Because New England fans won't, Cowherd does not consider Boston a "good sports town."
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from WesternOregon. Show WesternOregon's posts

    Re: Sometimes it comes down to choices, right?

    Hill, I agree with Mr. Cowherd.

    Get over yourselves.
     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from Thesemenarecowards. Show Thesemenarecowards's posts

    Re: Sometimes it comes down to choices, right?

    In Response to Re: Sometimes it comes down to choices, right?:
    [QUOTE]I rarely listen to ESPN commentator Colin Cowherd, but last week I caught him talking about the television ratings for postseason baseball. Cowherd acknowledged that Boston fans follow their teams with fervor. However, Cowherd claims the ratings in recent years show that New England fans are the most provincial because they won't watch the sport once their team is eliminated. Cowherd contends that a "good sports town" will follow the sport regardless of whether the local team remains in contention. Because New England fans won't, Cowherd does not consider Boston a "good sports town."
    Posted by hill55[/QUOTE]

    Cowherd is a dope.  I heard the same thing last week, he said things like  Boston doesn't care about March Madness because it isn't a great College hoops town.... give me a break.  Baseball is very localized for all franchises.  I assure you Philly isn't watching the NLCS all that closely.

    That said, I personally am still very into this post-season, I'm pullying hard for Milwaukee.  Axford pitching out of the 9th inning jam in game 5 against AZ was incredible.  All those game 5's last week were incredible.  Carpenter was everything I wish the Red Sox pitchers were.  Pitching to contact, throwing strikes, working fast..... how refreshing to watch!
     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from susan250. Show susan250's posts

    Re: Sometimes it comes down to choices, right?

    In Response to Re: Sometimes it comes down to choices, right?:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Sometimes it comes down to choices, right? : Cowherd is a dope.  I heard the same thing last week, he said things like  Boston doesn't care about March Madness because it isn't a great College hoops town.... give me a break.  Baseball is very localized for all franchises.  I assure you Philly isn't watching the NLCS all that closely. That said, I personally am still very into this post-season, I'm pullying hard for Milwaukee.  Axford pitching out of the 9th inning jam in game 5 against AZ was incredible.  All those game 5's last week were incredible.  Carpenter was everything I wish the Red Sox pitchers were.  Pitching to contact, throwing strikes, working fast..... how refreshing to watch!
    Posted by Thesemenarecowards[/QUOTE]

    I do agree that any real sports fan will always watch the playoffs even if your team isn't still playing.  I will still watch the World Series this year.  I watched every playoff game of the NBA last seaason.  I am sure that most football fans watch the playoffs and the SuperBowl.    Of course I watched the NHL playoffs last season since the Bruins were still playing.   I do admit that I don't really watch college basketball unlike a large majority of sports fans.  I will watch this year if the NBA season is cancelled. 
     

Share