Ken, in regards to your post on the MLB season, it shows my concerns that you don't get baseball. I mean, you understand the points of the game, but you don't understand the soul of the game.
You're looking at this as pure entertainment value, which is to be expected from someone who prefers football. But the long season has come to be more about a competition for a championship: of course that is the great goal. However, why did Cubs fans, for example, sell out all of their games for years with loosing records?
Its called the Church of Baseball for a reason: a whole lifestyle is build around it.
Sometimes its nice to go and just watch a game: no nail biting playoff ramifications, no bull-shit, just a baseball game.
Besides that, you have to look at the supply and demand value. With so many games, it allows the MLB to have far cheaper tickets than the NLF, NHL, or NBA. I’ll choose that every game.
Thread hijack: Yankees, MLB and making everything better.
-
Chris Adams
- Rookie
- Posts: 29
- Joined: Thu Mar 03, 2005 9:38 pm
oh ken hit aalso every piont i was gonna make aand the ones he didnt seth or someone else made. MLB needs a salary cap. its just that simple. and daniel tdid you really say the yankees only have 5 superstars wheater aare not aa superstar produces in an eviroment doesnt make him not a super star. (i know being a super star is producing but.) so on that note lets go though the yankees position players as their pitching sucks.
C- jorge posada, while he is starting to go downhill and i think the yaanks will let him go at the end of his contract. aand there has to be a hole somewhere
1B - jason giambi, do they have him at 1B or is he still dhing while any ways he is a probally in thre top 3 of 1B men
2B- robinson cano, ROY runner-up to Street, while he isnt the best 2B in the game as a rookie you take him in a heartbeat
SS-derek jeter- while i dont like him and would take miggy its fucking derek jeter
3B- A-Rod while he isnt an 3B he is a SS he is one of the best SS in the game
LF- gary sheffield, he is aging and he isnt manny he is in the top 20ish of outfielders
CF- johnny damon- ok i like damon, i do cuase he is one hell of a LF, i just dont feel he has the arm for CF
RF-godzilla, i just dont know how to speel his name and am too lazy to find out i am not that impressed with him as in i wouldnt call him a superstar but i would gladly take him in oakland
DH- bernie williams this is just what i would to as his fielding has diminished not his bat. but maybe im wrong
now then starting pitchers randy is all washed up, mussina is running on fumes, and then you haave smalls (YOU'RE KILLING ME SMALLS) sorry i couldnt resist
to me that makes 10 superstars at least plus rivera, farnsworth
C- jorge posada, while he is starting to go downhill and i think the yaanks will let him go at the end of his contract. aand there has to be a hole somewhere
1B - jason giambi, do they have him at 1B or is he still dhing while any ways he is a probally in thre top 3 of 1B men
2B- robinson cano, ROY runner-up to Street, while he isnt the best 2B in the game as a rookie you take him in a heartbeat
SS-derek jeter- while i dont like him and would take miggy its fucking derek jeter
3B- A-Rod while he isnt an 3B he is a SS he is one of the best SS in the game
LF- gary sheffield, he is aging and he isnt manny he is in the top 20ish of outfielders
CF- johnny damon- ok i like damon, i do cuase he is one hell of a LF, i just dont feel he has the arm for CF
RF-godzilla, i just dont know how to speel his name and am too lazy to find out i am not that impressed with him as in i wouldnt call him a superstar but i would gladly take him in oakland
DH- bernie williams this is just what i would to as his fielding has diminished not his bat. but maybe im wrong
now then starting pitchers randy is all washed up, mussina is running on fumes, and then you haave smalls (YOU'RE KILLING ME SMALLS) sorry i couldnt resist
to me that makes 10 superstars at least plus rivera, farnsworth
So long, and thanks for all the fish. - Douglas Adams
so you're saying you'd prefer a preseason game to a Sept. game between two contenders? I simply don't believe you.retep wrote:Ever been to Spring Training?TheLegend wrote:I do enjoy watching an A'a game just because I love the A's, but I don't know anyone who would prefer to watch a meaningless game when they could be watching one that has playoff implications.
So, could you clear up this, then?TheLegend wrote: I suggested cutting 2 games from the season.
TheLegend wrote: The season needs to be shorter. Significantly. like... cut it in half. I don't want to watch 162 baseball games for the same reason I don't want to watch 1 basketball game. . ..
Cut the season in half... or if you insist on playing 100+ games a year, split it into sub-seasons (i.e. name a "first half champion").
Ken, the National Republican Party has an opening for a spin-man.TheLegend wrote:
so you're saying you'd prefer a preseason game to a Sept. game between two contenders? I simply don't believe you.
I never said that I prefered Srping training. No shit I want to watch a game that has some drama behind it, but you ideas would make up reasons for the games to be exciting, and a true baseball fan can be satisfied by nearly any baseball exerpaicne. I remeber Scott and I talking about how we've both stopped to watch a t-ball game before.
Not every game needs to have the same level of drama. That what makes September and October baseball special. I find the football season boring, because the drama is so pushed forward, I find it boring: every game and every play has so much meaning that it somehow gets boring again!
But, as an NLF fan, I don't expect you to get this.
No, your ideas fuckin' suck! Haha!TheLegend wrote:the more I think about this the more I like this idea!
seeing as the player's union will never agree to a salary cap, how about total revenue sharing, or something close. maybe you let teams keep their income from ticket sales and concessions, but share all the merchendising and media. that's most of the money anyway. i've long thought that MLB needs to be run as one business, albeit a collection of partners. if you had a really strong revenue sharing you would have all the teams in the same ballpark financially while still having somewhat significant variation because the teams that sold more tickets would do better. you would probably need a payroll minimum to prevent teams from just pocketing the cash, but i don't think the union would have a problem with that. of course, it'll never happen. there's no way you can make the richest clubs give that money up. still, i think it would work.
ken, lay off the crack. there can never be too many baseball games. yes, there is more to be interested in late in the season, but baseball is baseball precisely because there's so much of it. 162 games really does determine the best team. five hundred at bats is a pretty good judge. just think of it this way, if it was an 80 game season, the o's would have won the AL east last year (and i doubt the A's would have been in it). that's just wrong. personally, i love going to late spring games more than any other game (maybe cause my team is always out of it (and falling fast) by august). baseball takes patience.
i do agree that the season is too long. it should not be snowing in the world series. they start too early too. my solution would not be a popular one among players, but fuck 'em. play a lot more double headers, like at least one a week (saturday or sunday), and often enough more. you could knock at least a month off the season. i wish there was a way to shorten the playoffs, but i don't see it. it's a bit much, but there's no way you can go to a five game league championship series. i don't even like the first round being a five game series. i don't know, it just seems like the best team doesn't win that series often enough.
i'll tie this in with the prospects of a four man rotation, another thing we'll never see again. with all those double headers teams will need more guys to start games here and there. they'll also have lest rest for their regular rotation. why not get guys back into a four man rotation? keep your best pitchers out there, and use the spot starters when needed. i know it's a long season, with lots of wear and tear, but they're professionals. 'sides, it's not like no one's done it before. i know it won't happen anymore, partially because of the money invested in each player, but it still makes so much sense to me. get your best pitchers on the field more.
in closing, yankees suck.
ken, lay off the crack. there can never be too many baseball games. yes, there is more to be interested in late in the season, but baseball is baseball precisely because there's so much of it. 162 games really does determine the best team. five hundred at bats is a pretty good judge. just think of it this way, if it was an 80 game season, the o's would have won the AL east last year (and i doubt the A's would have been in it). that's just wrong. personally, i love going to late spring games more than any other game (maybe cause my team is always out of it (and falling fast) by august). baseball takes patience.
i do agree that the season is too long. it should not be snowing in the world series. they start too early too. my solution would not be a popular one among players, but fuck 'em. play a lot more double headers, like at least one a week (saturday or sunday), and often enough more. you could knock at least a month off the season. i wish there was a way to shorten the playoffs, but i don't see it. it's a bit much, but there's no way you can go to a five game league championship series. i don't even like the first round being a five game series. i don't know, it just seems like the best team doesn't win that series often enough.
i'll tie this in with the prospects of a four man rotation, another thing we'll never see again. with all those double headers teams will need more guys to start games here and there. they'll also have lest rest for their regular rotation. why not get guys back into a four man rotation? keep your best pitchers out there, and use the spot starters when needed. i know it's a long season, with lots of wear and tear, but they're professionals. 'sides, it's not like no one's done it before. i know it won't happen anymore, partially because of the money invested in each player, but it still makes so much sense to me. get your best pitchers on the field more.
in closing, yankees suck.
-
Baseball=Life
- Baseball Deity
- Posts: 1031
- Joined: Sat Jan 29, 2005 11:16 pm
- Location: SF, CA
I'd like there to be as much baseball as possible pretty much. However, I do see merit in shortening the season, if it would mean no more amphetamine use in MLB. I don't think that's going to happen--the owners will never give up the gates, the gate revenue. And the players, it's hard to imagine the future day without the pills, but I bet someday it could happen, just not anytime soon, that's for sure.
Now as for spring training vs postseason game. I definitely have more fun at the postseason game, but I certainly enjoy the exhibition as well. It's fun to see a team form into shape, like to see a depth chart develop over the Spring for a team...
I think you can enjoy baseball at many levels--I think that what Peter differentiated is the baseball fanatic. I'm definitely one of those. There are many people who like baseball that don't understand the majority of what's going on, only that more runs wins, gotta get around bases to score runs, if they catch it / miss three times / ball thrown to first before runner ..... then they're out. There are plenty of real baseball fans that have just a basic understanding. But, yes, they pale in comparison to my (and others') fanaticism, but they're real. Baseball=Life.
Double-headers once a week would take 3 weeks off the season max. Snowing in the World Series? Does this really happen? The D-backs 2001 WS was delayed into Nov because of 9/11.
Now as for spring training vs postseason game. I definitely have more fun at the postseason game, but I certainly enjoy the exhibition as well. It's fun to see a team form into shape, like to see a depth chart develop over the Spring for a team...
I think you can enjoy baseball at many levels--I think that what Peter differentiated is the baseball fanatic. I'm definitely one of those. There are many people who like baseball that don't understand the majority of what's going on, only that more runs wins, gotta get around bases to score runs, if they catch it / miss three times / ball thrown to first before runner ..... then they're out. There are plenty of real baseball fans that have just a basic understanding. But, yes, they pale in comparison to my (and others') fanaticism, but they're real. Baseball=Life.
Double-headers once a week would take 3 weeks off the season max. Snowing in the World Series? Does this really happen? The D-backs 2001 WS was delayed into Nov because of 9/11.
"Baseball is like church, many attend, few understand"
- Leo Durocher
- Leo Durocher
The part directly below this, where I suggest two 80 game sub-seasons...retep wrote:So, could you clear up this, then?TheLegend wrote: I suggested cutting 2 games from the season.
TheLegend wrote: The season needs to be shorter. Significantly. like... cut it in half. I don't want to watch 162 baseball games for the same reason I don't want to watch 1 basketball game. . ..
Cut the season in half... or if you insist on playing 100+ games a year, split it into sub-seasons (i.e. name a "first half champion").
80+80=160... where's the confusion?
TheLegend wrote:
so you're saying you'd prefer a preseason game to a Sept. game between two contenders? I simply don't believe you.Ken, the National Republican Party has an opening for a spin-man.
whatever peter. Here is your exact quote:
It seems here that you're responding to my statement that meaningful games are more important as if you disagree... if that's not what you meant, then I suggest you edit and clarify your post.retep wrote:Ever been to Spring Training?TheLegend wrote:I do enjoy watching an A'a game just because I love the A's, but I don't know anyone who would prefer to watch a meaningless game when they could be watching one that has playoff implications.
Again, it looks as if you need to clarify your previous post. But since we do agree that meaningful games are more entertaining, I'm a little lost about how we fail to agree that making the games more meaningful as a whole would be preferable...I never said that I prefered Srping training. No shit I want to watch a game that has some drama behind it,
i think it was the 2000 subway series where it snowed. most years they play in some un-baseball like weather. it's just too damn late in the year. if they played two double headers every other week, that's a month off the season. you could even do more than that, though i'm already pushing it.
didn't they add amphetimine testing as part of the new drug policy? i can't believe they'd do this. i mean, amphetimines are as much a part of baseball as beer and sunflower seeds. i don't exactly have a lot of faith in their drug testing anyway, but imagine if they did take the speed out of baseball.
what if they increased the active roster to accomadate the number of pitchers and catchers and such that would be needed to play more double headers. i don't know that there's anything sacred about having twenty-five guys. i'm not sure, but i imagine that it's changed over the years. maybe i just like double headers (which i do), but what i really don't like is baseball in freezing cold weather. that's what footballs' for.
didn't they add amphetimine testing as part of the new drug policy? i can't believe they'd do this. i mean, amphetimines are as much a part of baseball as beer and sunflower seeds. i don't exactly have a lot of faith in their drug testing anyway, but imagine if they did take the speed out of baseball.
what if they increased the active roster to accomadate the number of pitchers and catchers and such that would be needed to play more double headers. i don't know that there's anything sacred about having twenty-five guys. i'm not sure, but i imagine that it's changed over the years. maybe i just like double headers (which i do), but what i really don't like is baseball in freezing cold weather. that's what footballs' for.
-
Chris Adams
- Rookie
- Posts: 29
- Joined: Thu Mar 03, 2005 9:38 pm
Ken I have always thought that the long season is a great thing in baseball. In football you can what all year for the 49ers season to start. You hope maybe this year(hypotheticly speaking of course) they will turn it around, you bust out your niners gear buy season tickets, get all exicted and shit. Then what they lose the first 2 on the road, You go see them get there ass kicked at home a few times, BAM 5 weeks in your 0-5 Fuck, well theres always next year. Thats crap. Baseball is about hoping to win("hope SPRINGS eternal" I wonder if they were talking of baseball), not winning. Fuck if were ALL about winning we would all be Yankee fans and leave it at that (fuck the Yankees!!!!!!!) I like winning, Fuck we all do. but the best hitters of ALL TIME only get a hit 2 for 5. Each seasons best baseball team's winning perct. is like .650, in football they have the PERFECT season and the best teams ussually go .875 winning perct. Anyway Chris is the voice of reason. 5 months without baseball is 2 much.
I am not sure any of this makes sense but...... I don't care
I am not sure any of this makes sense but...... I don't care
Go A's in '06
the main thing is that the long season gives a much greater chance that the best team wins. i'm not a big football fan, but does 16 games really determine the best team (or teams)? there are so many things in baseball (and almost all sports) that are at least in part dependant on chance. any individual player can only put themselves in the best position to suceed. that doesn't garenttee success. how many runs have scored on eighty foot base-hits? over a long season these things even out.