Game 140: Rangers 10, Indians 0
by afh4 on Sep 9, 2009 5:09 PM EDT
in Game Recaps
559 comments
It took the Texas Rangers less than 24 hours to sweep the Indians and make much of the pitching "progress" that the Tribe had been clinging to start to look more than a bit shaky. Last night, we had to watch Aaron Laffey and Carlos Carrasco get shelled, as well as witness Jess Todd's continued unraveling and then, finally and most despicably, Chris Perez didn't even look inhuman. Today, the pain kept coming as Fausto Carmona lasted only 0.2 IP and surrendered 5 ER. In the last two days the Indians have watched key parts in their 2010 rotation turn in outings that match the shortest starts of their careers, with Carmona's 0.2 standing alone in his illustrious career and Laffey's 3.1 IP performance matching his explosion in Detroit this year.
There were no bright spots in today's game, as the Indians managed only six hits and only Luis V. managed extra bases, with his double in the 8th. To add insult to injury, Rafael Perez got demolished again, going only 0.1 IP and allowing 5 runs to cross the plate, 3 earned. Perez' ERA has now ballooned to 7.94 and I wonder if there's still a place for him in the Cleveland organization this winter.
No matter, though, the Indians losing is old hat. The real problem today was the lineup and that's coming from somebody who normally cares very little about the lineup. However, when Eric Wedge filled in Niuman Romero as the first basemen today he finally crossed the line. I am literally seething about this:
- He cannot possibly believe that Romero, a player who managed a .626 OPS in Columbus this year and who has hit righties even worse than he has hit lefties this year, gave the Indians a better chance to win today than did either Andy Marte, who has always pounded righties despite his handedness, or Jamey Carroll, who's having a near career year at the plate.
- He undermined the front office and developmental staff who just yesterday had Ross Atkins explaining Jordan Brown's non-callup by saying: "With Andy Marte, Matt LaPorta and four catchers on the roster, there just weren’t plate appearances for Jordan. That is the most important aspect of the decision." Hey, Ross! What do you know, Eric found four at-bats that were just lying around! There is literally no argument, zero, that the Indians should have Romero taking at-bats in Cleveland instead of Brown. There is plenty of argument, being made cogently elsewhere on the site, that at-bats should be taken by LaPorta, Marte, Toregas, Shoppach, Gimenez or Marson before they are taken by Brown. But there is no justification, none, for giving the at-bats that ought to be going to LaPorta, Marte, Toregas, Shoppach, Gimenez or Marson to Romero. Wedge has made Atkins look like a fool and, more importantly, he's made him look like a liar to Brown.
Wedge is a rogue agent on this one: this cannot possibly be the front office's plan and, frankly, I think it represents the most obvious act of insubordination out of Wedge that I've ever seen. As a manager, Eric has always wielded the lineup card as a weapon, using it to punish players and seemingly to send messages to the front office about what will and will not fly on his watch (specifically: Marte will not fly). This, though, this is unbelievable. If Shapiro is not excoriating Wedge right now, I'm disappointed.
Wedge ought to have already been fired for trotting Romero out there. Giving Marte major league at-bats is critical at this point as the Indians need to gather as much information as possible before the offseason. The decision on Marte is going to reverberate to a decision on Peralta and also to decisions on guys like Brown. Wedge stupidly wasting a game watching Romero isn't just stupid, it's hurting the team.
The only upside here is that the Rangers are only 1.5 back of Boston now.
Wedge does things that have no conceivable explanation, large and small.
-Jay
6 recs |
559 comments
|
Email
Print
Comments
i went all the way to the last paragraph thinking “wow, ryan is seriously pissed,” before scrolling back up.
Excuse me for a sec while I repeat a tired complaint, but I am getting fed up. Indians pitching is horrific right now and looks bleak for next year and maybe the year after. You know what would have helped? A system where we don’t have to lose the 2 reigning Cy Young award winners in consecutive years.
For guys not named Sabathia and Lee, it seems like we are struggling to develop pitchers who can throw three pitches…whether it be improving the fastball on guys with good breaking and/or off-speed stuff, or improving the secondary stuff on guys with a decent fastball.
by APV on Sep 9, 2009 5:24 PM EDT up reply actions
You know what I’d like to see? An Indians pitcher throwing a spit-finger fastball. Who was the last one? Byrd? Other than him?
The last Indians pitchers to (legally) throw a spit-fingered fastball were Ray Caldwell and Stan Coveleski, I believe.
Illegally? Gaylord Perry.
"But people are stupid, and their memories are short." - FredOx
by woodsmeister on Sep 10, 2009 8:56 AM EDT up reply actions
am i the only one not that worked up about this?
It took the Texas Rangers less than 24 hours to sweep the Indians
three games in that span is going to get some bench guys some action, no?
I just don’t see how there’s any justification. He gave a game to Gimenez last night and I didn’t think that was insane. To sit Marte down for two games in a row, in favor of Romero, when you just told Brown that it was an ABs issue, is indicative of an organization not on the same page, embarrassingly so.
it’s two “games” in a row, but just one “day off.” I’m just not that peaved because of this rain-out DH followed by day game oddity. Plus Marte’s in like a 3/25 or something. Not undheard of and he did use him to pinch hit, right? i think wedge did male chicken block marte before, but not this one time. this is not to say i wouldn’t rather just see LaPorta or Gimenez at first over Romero or something else… but as it pertains to Brown/Marte, i’m not too upset.
Look, I’m on board with ambiguous malaise when it comes to lineups but I just can’t get behind anything regarding “days off” for a first basemen. Romero was not brought to Cleveland to spell the corners; he was brought to Cleveland because he wasn’t a corner.
It’s a total disconnect between the FO and the manager and I find it pretty mortifying.
It’s a total disconnect between the FO and the manager and I find it pretty mortifying.
If (When) a new manager comes in this off-season, I hope a clearer hierarchy is established.
by APV on Sep 9, 2009 6:03 PM EDT up reply actions 4 recs
As in, boss-subordinate, as opposed to “partners”, please. And rec.
by kennesawmountainwahoo on Sep 9, 2009 6:08 PM EDT up reply actions
This, although Farrell knows quite a bit about stuff other than managing/coaching.
Dodgers, Rockies, Giants, Padres and Diamondbacks. Oh my!
I have no problem with a dialogue between manager and GM – indeed I would be shocked if it didn’t occur. But the guy who acquires the player should have veto rights over how and when those players get used.
by APV on Sep 9, 2009 8:21 PM EDT up reply actions
Checks and balances are a necessity, always.
by kennesawmountainwahoo on Sep 9, 2009 8:22 PM EDT up reply actions
Ryan, if you hadn’t said this, I would’ve.
Marte has a 2-5 night in the first game, then only gets 1 at bat in the next 24 hours??? WTF!!!!
Matre needs to play every inning of every game.
I now place the blame for this squarely on Shapiro’s shoulders. Not because he can make the lineup card, but because he’s Wedge’s boss.
After the second game last night he should’ve called Wedge into his office and said “Listen, Gimenez is hitting .150. We have 2 more options on him. Marte just went 2-5 and has no options. You WILL play Marte EVERY inning so we know what we have in him for next year.”
Either Shapiro didn’t do that and he’s not paying attention to his team and should lose his job. Or Shapiro did do that, Wedge rolled out this lineup and it’s been 2 hours since the game ended and Wedge is still employed despite the insubordination Ryan mentioned.
“There is literally no argument, zero, that the Indians should have Romero taking at-bats in Cleveland instead of Brown”
If those at-bats had been at SS or 2b, like they should have been, what would have been the problem with that?
Argument contrary to fact.
Also, there is no reason to give Romero a start anywhere. He’s not a developing prospect whose performance against big-league pitching tells us anything about our future plans, nor is he a guy who is producing and might help us win games in the here and now. To start him at 1B is a punch in the nuts to Marte and Brown. Heck, it’s probably even insulting to Giminez. I felt about Wedge when I saw that lineup the same way Clark W. Griswold felt about his boss when he was enrolled in the jelly of the month club. I just turned the game off and busied myself elsewhere.
Everybody should get ice cream every day.
Rec on principle.
The once and future
by Manhattan Tribe Fan on Sep 9, 2009 8:04 PM EDT up reply actions
Oops. That was for the “Gimenez” spelling comment.
The once and future
by Manhattan Tribe Fan on Sep 9, 2009 8:04 PM EDT up reply actions
I felt this way about Dellucci. Two Ls! Two Cs! It’s not that hard!
by dgcambridge on Sep 10, 2009 12:07 AM EDT up reply actions
You’re right. He’s essentially worthless. But he if can give Valbuena or Cabrera a day off, I’m all for it. When he starts taking AB’s away from Marte, it just becomes ridiculous.
Perez’ ERA has now ballooned to 7.94 and I wonder if there’s still a place for him in the Cleveland organization next winter.
I hope the FO isn’t thinking along these lines. He was awfully good for a long time. Surely we should be waiting to see what he brings with him to Goodyear next spring.
As for Niuman Romero, yeah, he shouldn’t be getting his ABs at 1B, but I don’t see it as “insubordination” so much as a weird kind of capriciousness on Wedge’s part. Like Jay said….
by ken from alexandria on Sep 9, 2009 5:44 PM EDT reply actions
Yeah, I think they’ll absolutely give him a chance to come back from this year, but I wonder if he’ll be able to do it. Same with Carmona. I’m a believer that if someone fails spectacularly, it’s tough for that player to re-establish themselves in that same environment. At this point, I think the Indians are just hoping that either guy can return to some level of effectiveness, and have probably given up on them returning to their old form. If they don’t start out well in 2010, my guess that any return to their former selves will occur in a different uniform.
The game today really sums up the year. It’s not that Carmona and Perez have underperformed, or have been mediocre. It’s that they have arguably been the worst starter and the worst reliever in the AL. Pretty stunning, considering where they were two years ago.
Yes, pretty stunning.
It’s not clear that they should save a spot for Perez on the 40-man, all winter long. They can outright him now, or later, and probably would get him through waivers, but that would only expose him to the Rule 5, and ultimately he’d be a minor league free agent if he wasn’t selected.
They can also release him and then try to re-sign him to a minor league deal. The question for Rafael and any other player is, who are we going to lose by keeping him?
by Jay on Sep 9, 2009 8:11 PM EDT up reply actions
I hadn’t even considered Perez getting taken off the 40-man, but you are right. I’ve always had confidence because his slider was so good the past two seasons. But it has vanished this year. I hope the FO and coaching staff have some idea why and use that knowledge to make a decision. If his slider doesn’t stand a good chance of coming back, there is no reason Perez should. It is easy to forget that Rafael Perez was once the prospect equivalent of Frank Herrmann, who just happened to turn into a great reliever for a short while.
by APV on Sep 9, 2009 8:17 PM EDT up reply actions
Well hold on now. Rafael Perez gets taken in the Rule 5. And there is no pressure to contend next year. I’m extremely disheartened and dissappointed in his performance but I’d rather see what he can do next year.
And who knows? We might have two pitching coaches on the staff next year wink wink nudge nudge.
Steel Nick
I think framing it in the context of saying there are no ABs at first for Brown, then turning around and starting the dude they brought up “instead” of him, is what makes it so offensive.
Everybody should get ice cream every day.
Right there with ya
"You are an LGT success story" -- Jay
by Turkmenbashi on Sep 10, 2009 2:43 PM EDT up reply actions
Games might not matter on a losing team but AB’s certainly do.
by Joe. on Sep 9, 2009 5:55 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
i’m just messing around here, and don’t mean to conflate the two. it’s just two of the things that have encited a lot of vitrol lately, but i, personally, never thought were a big deal.
It becomes a big deal when it adds up. Would it be annoying if once or twice a year Wedge did something like this? Sure.
He does this 30-40 times a year, and mostly at the expense of the same guys and their PT. He’s probably lost Marte over a hundred ABs for no justifiable reason. That’s no longer annoying, it’s counter to the team’s best interests.
by afh4 on Sep 9, 2009 6:02 PM EDT up reply actions 3 recs
Yay! Back to firing Wedge. Please let him be gone and the players have a fresh start next season. Maybe Mangini will be available…
Mangini will certainly be available in January 2011.
Dodgers, Rockies, Giants, Padres and Diamondbacks. Oh my!
Andrew, if Romero for Marte happens multiple times the remainder of the year, then I’ll be seething alongside you. For now, I’m just mildly perturbed and am saving my seething for Carmona/R Perez.
This was a noon game following a twi-night double-header. Marte is 4 for his last 31 with no walks…and that includes the two hits last night. Wedge will often give days off to guys who have been playing regularly (and struggling) when the team has a day off immediately following. This gives the player 2 days of rest. He did it with Cabrera as well today. Wedge also has a track record of giving a quick start to a player who has just come up, ostensibly to make the player more comfortable and get their first AB’s (and hopefully hit) out of the way.
This all said, I’m a little concerned that what happened last night affected the lineup today. Not sure why I’m writing this, because Conspiracy Guy will love it. Also not sure why this hasn’t been brought up in the thread yet, but maybe nobody else listens to Wedge’s post-game comments on STO. But he was asked about the 9th inning in Game 2, and I couldn’t tell for sure, but I think the question centered on Veras. I’m paraphrasing here, but Wedge said that Veras should’ve been out of the inning and that “Andy has to make that play.” He was not happy.
If this was punishment for the error, then I have a problem with it. If the day off was just to give him a 2-day break, then that’s OK by me.
I just disagree. Andy doesn’t need a break and if he does they shouldn’t be playing Romero in his stead. The tactics of the situation with the big club are really secondary here to me; my primary issue is with how Wedge is throwing Atkins under the bus with regards to the Brown situation.
I think once is too much. Brown was told, in no uncertain terms, that it was about ABs. Immediately, the same day practically, there are at-bats at a corner position for a player who doesn’t even play that position.
It’s insulting to everyone involved. All Wedge had to do was play LaPorta at 1b, Romero in the MI and Carroll in the OF. Or Carroll at 1b. He didn’t do that. He made easily the dumbest decision and also the one that most flies in the face of what Atkins was saying. I don’t think Wedge did it maliciously, I just think he’s too wrapped up in his own world or whatever to even realize what he did.
Maybe he’s decided to leave LaPorta in the outfield rather than throwing him in at 1B for one game and then moving him back.
At this point, they did lie to Brown. There were at-bats available. Four of them. Again, if this occurs more than one other time, I’m in 100% agreement. Let’s wait and see.
You would think that Wedge and the Indians management generally would want to find out who they have who can help them next year. Romero is a non-factor. Brown probably is too. Marte, on the other hand, is someone they might want to keep. So play him. If he messes up and can’t hit, then you know what you have. But, playing mind games with Marte or engaging in robotic exercises in giving the “new guy” a chance makes little sense.
I personally don’t see this as being about Brown and Atkins. I see it as being about incompetence in general in making these decisions.
It is conceivable that there could be a good reason to start Niuman Romero at first base, but that would be an emergency, or a total lack of anyone else needing AB. And I mean a total lack.
If this is about the all-around scheme juggling playing time and off-days for all the infielders, and if Wedge is so bad at managing such things that Niuman Romero somehow is the best choice to start at first base, even once, then he should be fired for that alone.
It’s not that it’s a big deal. It’s that it’s plainly a lack of competence.
by Jay on Sep 9, 2009 8:40 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
For a minute I wondered if this was a bit of a “FU” by Wedge at the org, if he knows he is already gone. But that doesn’t really make sense either. I think it really is nothing more than lack of competence.
by kennesawmountainwahoo on Sep 9, 2009 8:47 PM EDT up reply actions
"The more I’ve been playing, I feel a lot more comfortable now," Marte said. "It’s good when you know you’re going to play the next day, no matter what happens. It makes me confident."
"But people are stupid, and their memories are short." - FredOx
by woodsmeister on Sep 9, 2009 8:55 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
This is where I express support for Andrew. I also don’t get in a tizzy over lineups or PT, normally, but this was insubordination.
The once and future
by Manhattan Tribe Fan on Sep 9, 2009 8:08 PM EDT reply actions
Mahoning Valley up 3-0 in game two of their series. Jason Kipnis, after hitting 1 HR during the regular season, has HRs in each of his first two playoff games. This guys clutch grittiness is off the charts. And the legend of Vidal Nuno grows larger…
This guys clutch grittiness is off the charts
I hope you realize I’m being sarcastic. I have no idea who clutch or gritty he is, or what a chart of such things would look like. I like him going deep in big games, though.
by APV on Sep 9, 2009 8:19 PM EDT up reply actions
Geez, and I thought that Jason guy was the three point shooter drafted by the Cavs a few years ago. I thought we had a Danny Ainge-opposite.
by kennesawmountainwahoo on Sep 9, 2009 8:25 PM EDT up reply actions
Of course.
But good performance is always better than poor performance. And I’m choosing to cheer for these guys.
Of course. I just wish the guy wasn’t listed as 5’10" 175 pounds. That’s me after a few months in the weight room.
by APV on Sep 9, 2009 8:27 PM EDT up reply actions
Sadly, I think Wedge [and maybe he knew this] gets a free pass because of the 3 games in X hours crap.
Dodgers, Rockies, Giants, Padres and Diamondbacks. Oh my!
In that case, we need to hire the Rangers’ conditioning guy, whose magic workouts somehow enabled Chris Davis to play three games at first base. Three games in a row.
by FredOx on Sep 9, 2009 8:34 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
This is all quite disturbing, but let’s focus on the real problem: why is shift+C no longer working to skip backwards through comments in Chrome?
by cleveland teamer on Sep 9, 2009 8:22 PM EDT reply actions
Doesn’t work in Firefox either. Sucks, especially in a game thread.
by Jay on Sep 9, 2009 8:25 PM EDT up reply actions
You can go backwards?
Who needs affection when you can have blind hatred?
by ClemsonGirl on Sep 10, 2009 12:18 AM EDT up reply actions
Today was honestly the first time I felt the connection to the 70-80’s Indians in many, many years. All we needed was John Lowenstein’s son signaling for a fair catch in between the faded 20 and 30 yard lines on a pop-up. I know, everyone says it was Manning, but I swear it was the perpetually -.242 hitting Lowenstein. At least those guys were funny.
by kennesawmountainwahoo on Sep 9, 2009 8:42 PM EDT reply actions
Akron is also ahead tonight in the opening game of their playoff series. The Chisel saves his best for the post-season, too, 2-3 with a 2B so far. John Drennen is also 2-3 with a HR. And Josh Rodriguez, the guy who is probably a better choice for a 40-man spot than Jordan Brown, is 2-3 with 2 2Bs.
I could be wrong, but I don’t think they roster Josh. With his injury history, including 80% of this season, he’d be an odd guy to select.
by Jay on Sep 9, 2009 8:53 PM EDT up reply actions
I’m not sure they will either. But I think he’d be a better choice than Brown.
by APV on Sep 9, 2009 8:53 PM EDT up reply actions
Ok….that may be a bit of hyperbole. Neither of them are terribly good options for the 40-man in a deep system, which Cleveland’s is.
by APV on Sep 9, 2009 8:58 PM EDT up reply actions
Yeah, I think Brown will end up on a major league roster at some point, but who picks a guy with middling power and no defensive value in the Rule 5 draft? He’s not even a righty bat like Francisco. He makes a terrible 25th man, and a Rule 5 pick typically is just that.
by Jay on Sep 9, 2009 8:58 PM EDT up reply actions
Meant to add, it’s not like he’s a high-upside guy either, where you’re willing to put up with his relative uselessness on the big-league roster for one year because his long-term value is potentially enormous.
by Jay on Sep 9, 2009 9:14 PM EDT up reply actions
so……
You put us over the top!
This fantastic observation is comment #500,000.
by Jay on Sep 9, 2009 9:23 PM EDT up reply actions
Is this an attempt to create drama on a rather drab day leading into an off-day?
Much ado about absolutely nothing.
Is he Human or is he dancer?
"But people are stupid, and their memories are short." - FredOx
by woodsmeister on Sep 10, 2009 8:38 AM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
I’m actually glad to see Romero getting run out at first today. Honestly, if the complete, mind-numbing stupidity of this move doesn’t persuade the FO that Wedge needs to be fired/punched in the crotch, nothing will. I’m sick of dealing with watching be a complete idiot for no reason other than a belief in an outdated and simplistic view of baseball.
Fire him, for the love of God, I honestly am reaching some sort of breaking point.
Sure was nice of the Indians to take a trip down Memory Lane for my birthday. Yep, this series reminded me of my salad days – back in the ’70s, when all the ushers were pretty, the beer was a dime, bleacher seats were a buck, and the Indians stunk.
And Andrew, relax, get used to this. We’re in for at least two or three more seasons of this. Who cares who plays first base? Romero, Marte, Sorrento, Thorton, Whitfield or Joe Adcock, it doesn’t really make any difference. Cuz after all the only place the Tribe was goin’ was straight in the tank.
Resident LGT results-oriented boob.
Happy birthday, Chuck. We all chipped in and got you an iron lung.
Steel Nick
by nickjs21 on Sep 10, 2009 12:15 AM EDT up reply actions 3 recs
I honestly think Chuck will be disappointed if we win anything in the next couple of years.
Everybody should get ice cream every day.
Not disappointed – Shocked! Shocked!
I just got done watching Casablana for the 263rd time. I love me some Claude Raines!
Resident LGT results-oriented boob.
I can see that, after all it’s no Star Trek, Return of the Sith.
Resident LGT results-oriented boob.
George Lucas is a hack who doesn’t know how to quit when he’s ahead.
Everybody should get ice cream every day.
Yeah, he shouldda stopped after he made that first quarter of a giga-buck. I don’t understand why he needed that other $2B.
Resident LGT results-oriented boob.
The sad fact is that you’re absolutely right. Despite the fact that he should have been ashamed of himself for those last three Star Wars movies (not that the first three were anything to write home about), he certainly continued lining his pockets at the expense of people willing to shell out ten bucks to see a crappy, lazily executed film.
Everybody should get ice cream every day.
Kinda like an Indians draft.
Resident LGT results-oriented boob.
by mauichuck on Sep 10, 2009 12:53 AM EDT up reply actions 4 recs
I feel like the plot was full of holes, particularly when Anakin decided for very flimsy reasons that he had to become evil (or else the first three movies wouldn’t make sense). And some of the acting was horrible.
Everybody should get ice cream every day.
Hayden Christensen is a terrible actor.
Who needs affection when you can have blind hatred?
by ClemsonGirl on Sep 10, 2009 12:57 AM EDT up reply actions
I felt none of the characters were believable as written.
Amazing that Natalie Portman got out of that trilogy with her career intact. Ewan MacGregor skated by on pure charm.
Sam Jackson’s purple light saber was awesome, though.
Wait, do that again for me. None of the characters in a Star Trek movie were believable? I’m shocked! – SHOCKED!!
Resident LGT results-oriented boob.
It all runs together. One crappy movie or another, it makes little difference to me.
Resident LGT results-oriented boob.
The short answer is yes, I think that every last movie Lucas made was crappy.
Resident LGT results-oriented boob.
Com’on – Harrison – Freakin’ – Ford in the Buster Crabbe role?
I guess he hadda use part of his stock company, but what was the last good movie you ever saw with Harrison-Freakin-Ford?
Resident LGT results-oriented boob.
Was Air Force One bad? I’m actually asking. I even seen it since before I really judged movies on things other than cool lines and violence.
Steel Nick
It was pittiful! Stay at home, sort your socks, wash your hair, anything but watch that dog.
Resident LGT results-oriented boob.
The idea that Ford’s never been in anything good is ridiculous. Besides Indiana Jones and The Fugitive, you’ve got Blade Runner, Apocalypse Now, the movies he did with Alan Pakula. Witness was entertaining, and the remake of Sabrina was tolerable (even if Julia Ormond is clearly no Audrey Hepburn).
Now, his recent output has been bad. No argument there.
Not that this proves anything, but Ford is the number 1 grossing actor of all time re-claiming the throne from Samuel L Jackson following the 4th Indiana Jones movie (which was horrible.)
You must be joking. Hell the original Sabrina was awful, and the remake worse. And Ford in Apocalypse Now? He’s in for what? 90 seconds? They couldda used a cardboard cut-out for his part. In fact I’m not sure they didn’t. And Ford will never make anyone forget David Janssen.
Nope sorry, Ford’s shouldda stuck to carpentry.
Resident LGT results-oriented boob.
I like submarine films a lot, and I will watch this one when it comes on, but the radiation sickness scenes make me want to hurl. I’ve been exposed to higher than normal radiation levels through work, and that sort of thing gives me the heebie jeebies.
CFO of Klezmer
No one has yet to beat Run Silent, Run Deep as far as sub movies are concerned.
"But people are stupid, and their memories are short." - FredOx
by woodsmeister on Sep 12, 2009 9:13 AM EDT up reply actions
Which genre am I dismissing? Sci-fi, I’m OK with Sci-Fi. Liked Farenheit 435(?), 2001 was a great movie. It’s just the cartoonish Sci-Fi I find boring.
Resident LGT results-oriented boob.
435, 436, whatever it takes.
Actually, it’s Fahrenheit 451.
"But people are stupid, and their memories are short." - FredOx
by woodsmeister on Sep 10, 2009 5:40 PM EDT up reply actions
We get it, Chuck. Everything was better in your day. You and Abe Simpson.
by FredOx on Sep 10, 2009 9:26 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Look, you’re lucky if there’s two movies a year – every year from the Dawn of Time. I saw Taking Chance this year. Terrific flick. I like Julia/Julie – kindova chick-flick.
And Fred, you’re above this. It’s just too simple of an analysis of my tastes.
Resident LGT results-oriented boob.
The funny thing is, you would think—hope—that with so much money he could really go for doing the latter installments right, making Star Wars fans proud to identify themselves. The kind of stuff that the Academy notices, like Lord of the Rings. Cool your jets, suits; I’m not sweating for a paycheck. I’m doing this for the sake of the films, for art.
But no. Jar-Jar Binks, explosions, and fast food toy tie-ins.
Steel Nick
making Star Wars fans proud to identify themselves
What does this mean? Star Wars was utterly mainstream.
How plural kids would turn into a single groupie is a horrifying thought.
Everybody should get ice cream every day.
sounds worse than the disowning…
I reserve the right to complain about Gimenez at 1B and Carroll in the OF, no matter the facts. - FredOx
by DontCallMeJoey on Sep 10, 2009 1:46 PM EDT up reply actions
Remember how you felt about the Ronaldo poster hanging in my room? That is how I feel about this comment.
Who needs affection when you can have blind hatred?
by ClemsonGirl on Sep 10, 2009 12:33 AM EDT up reply actions
I’m sorry to hear that. I had to watch it for a course in college. After hearing the instructor orgasm about it for two weeks, my reaction was “meh.” It’s basically Out Cold, but not in Alaska.
Everybody should get ice cream every day.
This is worse than Cristiano Ronaldo.
Who needs affection when you can have blind hatred?
by ClemsonGirl on Sep 10, 2009 12:37 AM EDT up reply actions
In my mind, very little is worse than Cristiano Ronaldo. Sometime you should rent both movies in question, watch them back-to-back, notice how identical the plot lines are, then mail me a handwritten apology.
Everybody should get ice cream every day.
I am in love with HUmphrey Bogart. I may be slightly biased.
Who needs affection when you can have blind hatred?
by ClemsonGirl on Sep 10, 2009 12:42 AM EDT up reply actions
I love him for reasons other than why I love Cristiano and the reasons I love Cristiano make him poster worthy.
Who needs affection when you can have blind hatred?
by ClemsonGirl on Sep 10, 2009 12:44 AM EDT up reply actions
Um since Out Cold was made in 2001 do you think it’s possible some inspiration was drawn from such a great movie made like 50 years before?
Who needs affection when you can have blind hatred?
by ClemsonGirl on Sep 10, 2009 12:47 AM EDT up reply actions
I would even go so far as to call Out Cold the most successfully done Casablanca tribute to date.
Everybody should get ice cream every day.
That’s fine but you can’t fault Casablanca for that.
Who needs affection when you can have blind hatred?
by ClemsonGirl on Sep 10, 2009 12:49 AM EDT up reply actions
I wasn’t. That comparison was very tongue-in-cheek, but I’m starting to get the vibe that you’re really invested in Casablanca. I feel like I just ran up to a mother bear and told her about how I just got done beating one of her cubs and was on my way to find the other.
Everybody should get ice cream every day.
I actually haven’t seen it in a long time but I love all of those old movies especially if they star Humphrey Bogart or Jimmy Stewart.
Who needs affection when you can have blind hatred?
by ClemsonGirl on Sep 10, 2009 12:54 AM EDT up reply actions
Because they were friends of yours, right?
by Jay on Sep 10, 2009 12:55 AM EDT up reply actions 2 recs
If I were a 58 year old who was friends with Jimmy Stewart and Humphrey Bogart why would I be masquerading as a 20 year old girl?
Who needs affection when you can have blind hatred?
by ClemsonGirl on Sep 10, 2009 12:56 AM EDT up reply actions
I’m starting to think you might actually be a 19-year-old girl, except this all fits a little bit too well.
Everybody should get ice cream every day.
I’m 20.
Would it help if I said my favorite actress is/was Audrey Hepburn and I have a Breakfast at Tiffany’s poster in my room too?
Who needs affection when you can have blind hatred?
All 5 Bring it On movies are in my Netflix queue? Except for the first one which I own?
Who needs affection when you can have blind hatred?
Yeah, you’re 58 and a dude.
And what polite people call lonely.
Everybody should get ice cream every day.
How I went from the SBN doorknob to a 58 year old man is beyond me.
Who needs affection when you can have blind hatred?
Well, y’see, there’s these sea monsters off the coast of Spain …
by Jay on Sep 10, 2009 1:08 AM EDT up reply actions 5 recs
After thinking about it, I think you have a point about the sea monsters.
The once and future
by Manhattan Tribe Fan on Sep 10, 2009 11:55 AM EDT up reply actions
This is worse than Cristiano Ronaldo.
Seriously though I have a thing for Portugal. I love it. Everything about it. It’s such a cool country. I’m going there someday.
Who needs affection when you can have blind hatred?
by ClemsonGirl on Sep 10, 2009 12:44 AM EDT up reply actions
i only ever bothered to notice portugal when we beat them 3-2. and nothing is worse than c. ronaldo.
Whoa that avatar just woke me up from across the room…
by stuart dean on Sep 10, 2009 12:50 PM EDT up reply actions
Isn’t he our new first baseman?
by kennesawmountainwahoo on Sep 10, 2009 12:31 PM EDT up reply actions
I had an instructor orgasming over The Graduate in much this way, only the part where I sighed and found it overrated is replaced by the part that I absolutely loved it.
Steel Nick
I have never experienced a professor orgasm over a movie.
Who needs affection when you can have blind hatred?
Really? I watched that with our bullpen catcher and our radio announcer one night on a baseball road trip and found it barely coherent. It was a fine movie, I suppose, but I don’t see why some movies get called “classics” and others don’t.
Everybody should get ice cream every day.
I had a similar reaction to High Noon. I was like, okay, it was a movie.
Bridge on the River Kwai, on the other hand … totally got it.
Bridge on the River Kwai was a film I really enjoyed. Thoroughly well done.
Everybody should get ice cream every day.
High Noon was the anti-McCarthy movie of it’s time. A guy doing the right thing while being abandonned by his “friends”. And Lloyd Bridges with Lee Van Cleef as a villain. Plus Grace-Goddam-Kelly!!! How could this miss?
Resident LGT results-oriented boob.
Didn’t we just do the profanity thing up-thread? Open Range is the best western released in the last ten years, for anyone who cares.
Everybody should get ice cream every day.
Ouch! Missed by seven years!
Plus Open Range is a TV thing. If we’re gonna do TV, I’m voting for Rawhide.
Resident LGT results-oriented boob.
Not sure what you mean by a TV thing, but Unforgiven was a quality film. 3:10 to Yuma is another really good recent western, but the climax of Open Range puts the whole thing over the top.
Everybody should get ice cream every day.
I don’t know what we mean by TV either, but as long as it sneaks Deadwood into the conversation.
Steel Nick
Oh yeah, Tombstone – Powers Booth is one of the best villains ever.
Resident LGT results-oriented boob.
I just watched Once Upon a Time in the West a couple weeks ago, and Henry Fonda has my vote as best villain ever.
by Ryan on Sep 10, 2009 1:51 AM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Once Upon a Time in the West is the best western I have ever seen, and I’m unapologetic about it. Fonda is fantastic.
The once and future
by Manhattan Tribe Fan on Sep 10, 2009 11:57 AM EDT up reply actions
I’ve seen it many times – most recently here on full screen a few years back. It is very very good but it could have been so much better. Leone really, really needed an editor on this one. There are so many unnecessary lingering shots including quite a few where he zooms and you are literally forced to count Bronson’s pores. Also, the whole scene where Claudia Cardinale is in Frank’s cave just does not work. I criticize only because though very good, it should have been perfect. Robards was a real treat and Fonda’s Frank may be the best bad guy that I’ve ever seen.
The scene with Claudia Cardinale I agree with you on. But as for the close-ups and the lingering shots… my theory is that Leone just decided, with the cachet he had built up after the Man with No Name movies, that now that he had a real budget and real actors, he was going to create The Ultimate Western. So he took the Western themes and stretched every one almost to the breaking point. The protagonist-of-few-words; the female with a desultory past. The long scenic panorama shots; the extreme close-ups; the agonizingly long build-ups. Everything is pushed just a little farther than any other movie of its time or genre. Thinking of it this way helps me appreciate it more. I love, love the opening credits scene where the action just seems like it will never, ever develop, and then all of a sudden, wham! “You brought two too many.”
The once and future
by Manhattan Tribe Fan on Sep 10, 2009 7:12 PM EDT up reply actions
Opening scene – Jack Elam with the fly and Woody Strode with the drip. One scene and pffft, see yah!
“Hey, Harmonica” might have to become my signature…
And I’m too young to fully appreciate that casting—that those guys were generally leads, and that Fonda never played villains. I understand it intellectually, but it doesn’t carry the heft it would have to see it in the theater the first time.
The once and future
by Manhattan Tribe Fan on Sep 10, 2009 10:59 PM EDT up reply actions
It is a truly magnificent movie. Perfect casting, pace, actions, and story.
by The Grimace on Sep 11, 2009 12:38 AM EDT up reply actions
I’m trying to think of westerns I’ve seen that were released in the last ten years. Appaloosa, 3:10 to Yuma, and the one with Jackie Chan and Owen Wilson are the only ones I’ve seen if my memory serves me.
Steel Nick
Appaloosa was Robert Parker’s “Hawk and Spencer Go West” story.
Everybody should get ice cream every day.
I’m not even sure what this means. But I didn’t like it.I guess I assumed I would based on Harris and Mortensen. A History of Violence was so weird and brief but they were memorable.
Steel Nick
Robert Parker is an author whose main protagonists for years have been Spencer and Hawk, a Boston PI and his muscular, inscrutable black side-kick. Parker also wrote the book Appaloosa that was turned into the eponymous movie. Basically, Harris was Spencer, Mortensen was Hawk, and the old west was Boston.
Everybody should get ice cream every day.
The original suffered from the same affliction. At least the remake had the sense to sacrifice one of the characters.
The once and future
by Manhattan Tribe Fan on Sep 10, 2009 11:59 AM EDT up reply actions
couldn’t agree more.
I reserve the right to complain about Gimenez at 1B and Carroll in the OF, no matter the facts. - FredOx
by DontCallMeJoey on Sep 10, 2009 1:51 PM EDT up reply actions
when was City Slickers 2: the Legend of Curly’s Gold released?
I reserve the right to complain about Gimenez at 1B and Carroll in the OF, no matter the facts. - FredOx
by DontCallMeJoey on Sep 10, 2009 1:51 PM EDT up reply actions
You know what really makes that movie for me, Ryan? The extras and bit players. Almost all of them are refugees from the Nazi’s in real life. Lorre, and S.Z. "Cuddles" Sakall were Hungarian Jews. The guy who plays the French croupier (Marcel Dalio) – he was a star in France before the war. The girl that plays Bogart’s girl-friend (Madeleine LeBeau) post-Elsa is Dalio’s real life wife. Even the villain, Conrad Veidt, was a German born anti-Nazi who was married to a Jewish woman. When they do the dueling national anthem bit the emotion from everyone on the set is real.
One of the best flicks ever made – maybe even the best ever made.
Resident LGT results-oriented boob.
I’m sure you just momentarily forgot The Happening when you typed this.
Everybody should get ice cream every day.
You really think that’s a better flick than Fast Times at Ridgemont High?
Resident LGT results-oriented boob.
I haven’t seen it. Also, as much as I wanted to like M. Night Shyamalan’s continuing work, everything he’s done since The Village has sucked. He’s the Carlos Baerga of film makers.
Everybody should get ice cream every day.
by junkballer on Sep 10, 2009 12:50 AM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
signs > unbreakable, to me … though i liked both
I reserve the right to complain about Gimenez at 1B and Carroll in the OF, no matter the facts. - FredOx
by DontCallMeJoey on Sep 10, 2009 1:53 PM EDT up reply actions
I think Signs and The Village are two of the top best movies I have ever seen. Lady in the Water, Giamatti aside, was mediocre and Joel warned me off The Happening.
Really?!?!?!? Signed was fricking bad. But Lady in the Water was undisputibly terrible. Giamatti saved it from being the worst movie ever created this side of the Room. The Happening stands as the worst acting, writing, directing, and overall movie in the last 70 years.
by Ryan Kelsey on Sep 11, 2009 12:12 AM EDT up reply actions
That’s kind of sad. Night was already on his downswing by Signs. Sixth Sense and Unbreakable (his best) are pretty great, Signs was just okay, and The Village was frustrating. Lady in the Water is a terrible, terrible movie. The Happening was kind of entertaining as some sort of B-movie hybrid, almost so-bad-it’s-good but mostly bad.
I loved Signs and The Village. Someone spoiled Sixth Sense for me before I saw it, so I never got a fair shake on it.
Everybody should get ice cream every day.
Our newspaper spoiled The Sixth Sense for everyone. It was a big scandal.
Who needs affection when you can have blind hatred?
I nothinged Signs and didn’t take to the Village at all.
I think I was part of the 5% of the world that didn’t either guess the ending (yeah, and you were at Barker’s game, too) or have it ruined before seeing it.
Steel Nick
Signs seemed very meh to me. I thought the ending was mediocre from a film perspective and stupid from a real-life perspective.
Yeah, the only thing to talk about with M. Night’s movies recently is: which is worse- The Happening or Lady in the Water? I swear The Happening is way worse, but my friend insists Lady in the Water is a top 3 worst movie of all time.
lady in the water was much worse … and the happening sucked out loud
I reserve the right to complain about Gimenez at 1B and Carroll in the OF, no matter the facts. - FredOx
by DontCallMeJoey on Sep 10, 2009 1:54 PM EDT up reply actions
In many ways it’s the epitome of the studio system movie. It was done in a studio, with studio actors, and with (I assume) a small budget. But the writing, acting, and music were perfect. There wasn’t much plot, but you need much if have great characters.
And a great McGuffin, don’t forget the McGuffin.
Studio actors? under contract maybe, but I think that Berman was on losn from Selznik in exchange for the services of Olivia De Haviland.
BTW, Hedy Lamarr was the director’s first choice for Ilsa – that’s about the only thing that woulda improved that picture.
Resident LGT results-oriented boob.
I’m with Ryan and Chuck on this one. I could watch it three or four times in a row and I wouldn’t get bored. I have trouble even relating to why someone wouldn’t like it.
The once and future
by Manhattan Tribe Fan on Sep 10, 2009 12:02 PM EDT up reply actions
As a manager, Eric has always wielded the lineup card as a weapon, using it to punish players and seemingly to send messages to the front office about what will and will not fly on his watch (specifically: Marte will not fly). This, though, this is unbelievable. If Shapiro is not excoriating Wedge right now, I’m disappointed.
Well this is the silver lining, isn’t it? On some level, anyone on LGT that abhors Wedge this much has to be happy at any evidence suggesting not only a rift but downright feuding showmanship in a relationship we’ve always painted as symbiotic.
What I mean is: If you believe what you’re suggesting, there’s no reason to think Shapiro is going to draw a line in the sand when it comes to protecting Wedge.
Steel Nick
It may not make any difference if they’re fueding or not. They both could be gone by Thanksgiving.
Resident LGT results-oriented boob.
Of course this is true, but I think I’ve made a decision all on my own that Dolan wouldn’t get rid of Shapiro for anything this offseason. And I think a lot of people agree with me based on the concerns that Wedge might stick around just because Shapiro might be a stickler to the package deal idea.
Steel Nick
Yeah, after all when was the last time an owner praised a GM before he showed ’em the door.
Resident LGT results-oriented boob.
Are we discounting the idea that Shapiro himself might walk? Is there a quote on that?
by dgcambridge on Sep 10, 2009 11:40 AM EDT up reply actions
wasn’t there a quote about intending to be the GM next year … and that there’s some “unfinished business”? i’ll try to dig it up.
I reserve the right to complain about Gimenez at 1B and Carroll in the OF, no matter the facts. - FredOx
by DontCallMeJoey on Sep 10, 2009 1:56 PM EDT up reply actions
“It is my firm expectation that I will be general manager in 2010,” said Shapiro.
“I definitely feel I have unfinished business as a general manager,” he said.
I reserve the right to complain about Gimenez at 1B and Carroll in the OF, no matter the facts. - FredOx
by DontCallMeJoey on Sep 10, 2009 1:57 PM EDT up reply actions
By the way, this season has really brought out the darker side of Andrew. I feel like it’s been so long since Albert Belle cut Aaron Laffey’s hand off.
Steel Nick
I like it, I got a link to a Clemson Blog, which they don’t have on SBNation.
Who needs affection when you can have blind hatred?
by ClemsonGirl on Sep 10, 2009 12:33 AM EDT up reply actions
I don’t think I’ve ever been to SBN’s main page.
Although maybe I should. I just learned that Oudin lost (aww) and Tila Tequila was jealous of all the other women Merriman was bedding.
Steel Nick
Well, Tila has one thing going for her: I didn’t know who she was before this week.
Dodgers, Rockies, Giants, Padres and Diamondbacks. Oh my!
She’s famous for being acelebritywhore
Fixed.
by fwembt on Sep 10, 2009 9:26 PM EDT up reply actions 2 recs
Great insights in this thread guys, thanks. Between the season going south and our busy-ness with our new little slugger, I haven’t been too motivated to observe or ponder Wedge’s coaching manuevers (not that I would have been that insightful anyway).
I just wonder how much longer MLB can keep trotting out the Yankees, Red Sox, Angels, and the least crappy team in the AL Central each year before everyone simply walks away and starts following MLS or something in the summer. Oh wait, the Rays! Whoopie!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=exOxUAntx8I&feature=channel_page
by The Cactus Leaguer on Sep 10, 2009 1:26 AM EDT reply actions
I don’t think you have to worry about people dropping baseball and picking up MLS.
Steel Nick
by nickjs21 on Sep 10, 2009 1:37 AM EDT up reply actions 4 recs
If you’re a serious soccer fan, you follow the Europe leagues wear a dress.
Resident LGT results-oriented boob.
by mauichuck on Sep 10, 2009 1:41 AM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Seriously? There is more physical contact in one game of soccer than in an entire season of baseball. God knows you have to be in better shape to play soccer.
Gee, this is the first time I’ve heard this argument. I’m sure there’s another LeBron James-type athlete playing soccer somewhere.
Resident LGT results-oriented boob.
LeBron plays basketball, not baseball. Show me anywhere on a soccer field where you could place David Wells or any of the Molina brothers and not have them be a complete liability. You can’t, because you have no clue about how soccer works, you just like to ramble on ignorantly about it.
Everybody should get ice cream every day.
hahahaha The Molinas playing soccer is a funny thought.
Who needs affection when you can have blind hatred?
by ClemsonGirl on Sep 11, 2009 12:44 AM EDT up reply actions
Sadly enough there is a good chance all of them did at one point in their lives. Though I don’t think a team would field that many defenders. And yes, you have to be in good physical shape, or at least have high levels of endurance, to play soccer.
by The Grimace on Sep 11, 2009 12:47 AM EDT up reply actions
Well when they were little that’s fine but now? Funny.
Who needs affection when you can have blind hatred?
by ClemsonGirl on Sep 11, 2009 12:50 AM EDT up reply actions
Do you think they were actually “little” when they were little? Yadier maybe, but Bengie? No way.
by The Grimace on Sep 11, 2009 12:51 AM EDT up reply actions
I just say little to mean children.
Who needs affection when you can have blind hatred?
by ClemsonGirl on Sep 11, 2009 12:52 AM EDT up reply actions
Not mean children as in mean spritied, but mean as in the other kind. I need sleep.
Who needs affection when you can have blind hatred?
by ClemsonGirl on Sep 11, 2009 12:53 AM EDT up reply actions
Right. Soccer players wear dresses, and baseball players wear floral jumpers. Also, football players wear pantsuits, cricket players wear one-piece swimsuits, hockey players wear a skanky little miniskirt number, and tennis players wear footie pajamas.
by Chemo on Sep 11, 2009 12:48 AM EDT up reply actions 4 recs
hockey players wear a skanky little miniskirt number
My personal favorite.
Who needs affection when you can have blind hatred?
by ClemsonGirl on Sep 11, 2009 12:52 AM EDT up reply actions
While I will not dispute that you need to be in phenomenal shape to be a professional soccer player (or soccer in gererally actually), I will propose this question to you.
Which would be easier? Teaching Ryan Garko to become a soccer player? Or teaching Renaldinho to play baseball?
While baseball players may not be the most athletic in sports, they actually put a lot of strain on their bodies. An outfielder has to start from a dead stop to a full sprint to chase a liner in the gaps. Scoring from first on a double. Heck, pitchers just throwing is demanding on their bodies (look at the many injuries, etc). All the squatting done by catchers. And the collisions they do have have, there is pretty much no padding to protect them.
That’s not to say that injuries do not occur in soccer either. Plenty of head on head collisions, twisted knees/ankles, etc. It is a rougher sport, but baseball is no walk in the park either.
I can’t recall where I read this, but among professional athletes, the hardest thing to do in professional sports is to hit a baseball. (look at the failed Jordan experiment). Pro soccer is huge worldwide, and I do enjoy it, but I am not interested in the Premier leagues at all, I prefer to follow the World Cup and qualifying myself.
I agree that hitting a baseball is the hardest thing to do in professional sports. However, it would not be any more possible to make Ryan Garko into a soccer player than Ronaldinho into a baseball player.
The false assumption made is that soccer is nothing more than running a lot. It isn’t. For starters, the average soccer player runs seven miles per game. Add into that countless stops and starts, jumping consistently, almost perpetual contact with another player, and collisions on every corner and high ball and you have a pretty violent game. There’s a reason soccer is responsible for the most injuries of any sport outside football. Baseball doesn’t really even compare.
Then you get into the technical skill of it. I can promise you that Ryan Garko can never learn to hit a ball the same way Frank Lampard can. While it is not as difficult as hitting a pitch, it’s not easy by any stretch.
I personally would enjoy watching Ryan Garko trying to leap and head a swerving corner kick into a goal.
If you tried to make either player into a professional in the other sport, they would be equally useless. Neither could do anything. However, if you stuck Ronaldinho on a slow-pitch softball team, and Garko onto an adult co-ed rec soccer team, I actually think Ronaldinho would fare much better.
I consider myself a soccer fan, and I follow the Columbus Crew and I don’t follow the Euro leagues. Last night I watched the US MNT WCQ. I don’t feel like I need to adopt a Euro league team to be considered a real soccer fan.
"But people are stupid, and their memories are short." - FredOx
by woodsmeister on Sep 10, 2009 8:52 AM EDT up reply actions
But when you see a World Cup match or just about anything put on by UEFA or one of the major European leagues, don’t you feel like you’ve been watching, I don’t know, high A ball instead of the major leagues?
by Ryan Kelsey on Sep 10, 2009 10:33 AM EDT up reply actions
this is the entire reason soccer is not a big time sport here (here = US)
I reserve the right to complain about Gimenez at 1B and Carroll in the OF, no matter the facts. - FredOx
by DontCallMeJoey on Sep 10, 2009 2:04 PM EDT up reply actions
Depend on your definition of “big time.”
If you mean a professional league that makes lots of money, sure. But in terms of popularity, it is big time: millions and millions of kids play it every single weekend.
Honestly, soccer in this country is equally as valuable as any other sport, just for different reasons.
-Kyle
big time = money, exposure, people care about it
a lot of kids play soccer, yes, but a staggering number of those flee for football as soon as the pee wee ranks open up.
i enjoy soccer, but to say it’s equally “valuable” (i’m not sure what that means) to any other sport is not true, in my opinion.
I reserve the right to complain about Gimenez at 1B and Carroll in the OF, no matter the facts. - FredOx
by DontCallMeJoey on Sep 11, 2009 12:38 PM EDT up reply actions
Really? Wouldn’t you want to see the best quality talent if you’re a soccer fan? I understand following your local team, but in my mind it would be like following the Akron Aeros and never watching Major League Baseball.
I’m fully aware that MLS is inferior to European soccer. I find that as much as I enjoy soccer, it’s really behind baseball, football, hockey and basketball in my sports fandom ranking, I find the limited time I have to invest in soccer is best spent following my local team and the MNT. If I’m home in the afternoon sometimes I’ll turn on FSC and watch and enjoy whatever is on and marvel at the skill of the players and root against Man U because they’re the Yankees of international soccer, but I just don’t feel invested in the teams like I feel invested in the Crew. I can go to a Crew game and enjoy the experience. I can’t go to an EPL game.
"But people are stupid, and their memories are short." - FredOx
by woodsmeister on Sep 10, 2009 11:16 AM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
I can understand this. I do find it very hard to follow European soccer. When they play at 7:45 in the morning on Saturdays I don’t watch, so I don’t see a lot of their games.
Who needs affection when you can have blind hatred?
by ClemsonGirl on Sep 10, 2009 12:29 PM EDT up reply actions
Rec for the Man U comment!
by Luis (Tribe Fan in London) on Sep 11, 2009 3:41 AM EDT up reply actions
People have already said this but sadly American soccer isn’t on the same level as European soccer. I wish it was but it isn’t. That’s why most American soccer fans follow teams in Europe more closely than their local teams, in my experience anyway. Many of them follow their local team but care more about their European team.
Who needs affection when you can have blind hatred?
by ClemsonGirl on Sep 10, 2009 10:55 AM EDT up reply actions
All soccer is at the same level: somewhere between golf and field hockey.
Resident LGT results-oriented boob.
Hi Chuck, welcome to the 1990’s. Soccer is nearly as popular as baseball for most kids and ice hockey is dead. Let me know when you catch up!
by Ryan Kelsey on Sep 11, 2009 12:15 AM EDT up reply actions 4 recs
Dave, it’s the start of the third millenium, not the end of the second. I’ve got a coupla teen-age boys in my house that would think you guys are ancient. I got some idea of what the kids are playin’
Here’s what’s goin’ on in Maui: number 1 is baseball – it’s the Kurt Suzuki/Shane Victorino influence I guess. number 2: football. Again it could be all about Kaluka Maiava I dunno, but it’s big with the kids. And number 3: roller hockey, the play it at the rink down at the beach. It’s huge, huge.
Dave, you remember my son? He usta – that’s usta – play soccer, and football too. One time my wife told him, “I wish you stick to soccer instead of football, so you won’t get hurt”. The soccer ball hasn’t come out of the closet since.
Resident LGT results-oriented boob.
Your son is probably old enough to be Clemson’s twin brother.
Dodgers, Rockies, Giants, Padres and Diamondbacks. Oh my!
No one said soccer has more physical contact than football.
Who needs affection when you can have blind hatred?
Or that your wife has an accurate concept of the relative injury risks of major sports.
Everybody should get ice cream every day.
Right. You know that Lacrosse is a tough sport, so’s rugby. Too bad there aren’t any athletes playin’ either.
Resident LGT results-oriented boob.
Plenty of sports/games are challenging from an athletic standpoint, but that doesn’t necessarily make them better than another sport because of it. I agree with this sentiment which in no way indicates my feelings toward soccer.
I don’t dispute that, but it is at best tangentially related to the current discussion. Vintage Chuck, in other words.
Everybody should get ice cream every day.
I think the disconnect here JB is that you’re viewing the game as a spectator and I’m viewing it as a potential participant. It just seems to me that all of the soccer players – X-country runners and golfers too for that matter – were just the kids without the drive to play baseball, football or basketball. Didn’t have a lot of respect for those guys.
Resident LGT results-oriented boob.
It just seems to me that all of the doctors were just the kids without the drive to be deep-sea fishermen. Didn’t have a lot of respect for those guys.
by Chemo on Sep 11, 2009 4:12 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
I played basketball on the college level and soccer on a semi-pro level and I can assure that it takes more drive to get in soccer shape than it does in basketball shape. This is a patently absurd comment from someone doing nothing but trying to be antagonistic and annoying. Come off it, you know nothing about it.
I can assure that it takes more drive to get in soccer shape than it does in basketball shape
In this country, at least, it could also take more drive to get into soccer shape because you’re working your ass off for something NOBODY GIVES A CRAP ABOUT.
Dodgers, Rockies, Giants, Padres and Diamondbacks. Oh my!
Harsh. With our niche, it’s popular. I won’t argue it is the best attended sport or that it should be. I don’t like the insinuation (not made by you) that anyone who plays it is somehow less of a man.
i’m still not clear how this is a good point. rugby and lacrosse players aren’t athletes? i think most of the world (rubgy) and most of the acc (lax) would disagree pretty vigorously. those are both awfully demanding sports.
I reserve the right to complain about Gimenez at 1B and Carroll in the OF, no matter the facts. - FredOx
by DontCallMeJoey on Sep 11, 2009 12:41 PM EDT up reply actions
No. Just that rugby and lacrosse aren’t as interesting regardless of the amount of skill it takes to be good at the sport.
ok. i have no particular quarrel w/ that. if that was in fact chuck’s point, though, i applaud you for seeing it.
I reserve the right to complain about Gimenez at 1B and Carroll in the OF, no matter the facts. - FredOx
by DontCallMeJoey on Sep 11, 2009 12:49 PM EDT up reply actions
He’s saying that most of our best athletes play football or basketball. Soccer, rugby and lacrosse are incredibly demanding, but in this country, they’re the National League of sports.
by dgcambridge on Sep 11, 2009 1:23 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
I can’t remember the guys name – help me out here Tribefan in New Zealand – but a third/fourth string running back from the Raiders went down to Australia to play rugby and wound up being one of their best players.
Now the Cardinals – I think – had a Aussie rugby player on their D-Line for awhile, and somebody picked up an Aussie to punt – turns out he can tackle pretty good too. But in general the athletic level for rugby is at about Div. III football.
And, oh yeah, the consensus “Greatest LaCross Player of All Time” is also the consensus “Greatest Football Player of All Time” – Mr. Jim Brown.
Resident LGT results-oriented boob.
The Australian punter was, of course, Ben Graham; he now plays for the NFC Champion Cardinals. (Not sure how you missed that one; I must have heard that story 6,000 times during Super Bowl week. Importantly, though, he didn’t play rugby before the NFL. He played Aussie Rules football, which is a hybrid of the two but still closer to our football than rugby. Particularly for punters.
The once and future
by Manhattan Tribe Fan on Sep 11, 2009 3:24 PM EDT up reply actions
Oops, dropped a parenthetical.
The once and future
by Manhattan Tribe Fan on Sep 11, 2009 3:24 PM EDT up reply actions
Yeah, yer right. And the Raiders RB mighta played Aussie football too, not rugby. Dunno.
Since we’ve gotta lot of Tongans and Samoans down here the All Black is big. Just an aside.
Resident LGT results-oriented boob.
Not for 3-6 weeks. Zing!
The once and future
by Manhattan Tribe Fan on Sep 11, 2009 5:25 PM EDT up reply actions
Yeah, seriously, if you don’t risk some sort of injury playing soccer then its not a particularly competitive or high level game you’re playing
by Luis (Tribe Fan in London) on Sep 11, 2009 3:44 AM EDT up reply actions
Oh dear God.
Who needs affection when you can have blind hatred?
by ClemsonGirl on Sep 11, 2009 11:31 PM EDT up reply actions
Dave, you remember my son? He usta – that’s usta – drive on the left side of the road, and the right side too. One time my wife told him, "I wish you stick to the right side of the road instead of the left side, so you won’t get hurt". The car has been driven Euro-style since.
Everybody should get ice cream every day.
That just isn’t the case in the rest of the states. Soccer is the most widely played youth sport in America.
My unsupported, anecdotal sense is that not enough American kids take soccer seriously. It’s the default for a lot of sensitive, unoffensive and unathletic kids. Mom or Dad drops them off at practice. They run around the ball a little not getting hurt. Then they quit by middle school or high school. I have a lot of respect for soccer players who are serious athletes, but youth soccer is just flooded with kids who need a go-to sport.
I’m a huge soccer fan, but I have to agree with what you’re saying here. Parents who know little to nothing about soccer are coaching their kiddies and telling them things like “fullbacks never cross this line” and “don’t pass it away from the goal we’re attacking” and other such nonsense. When someone who knows the game coaches, it gets different in a hurry. By and large though, most rec leagues have one or two kids per team who know what they’re doing, surrounded by a bunch of mommy’s precious little snowflakes.
Everybody should get ice cream every day.
I agree. Soccer is unaggressive if you let it get that way. The fear of someone’s shoulder getting planted into your chest (or lust to do so) legally puts hockey, football, lacrosse players on edge. The other sports – baseball and basketball – always attract great athletes that make the game electric and aggressive. Soccer needs its athletes to keep the game physical and fast.
Which is different than baseball 30 years ago how? My guess is that whichever youth sport is the most popular is going to be filled at the low levels with a bunch of kids who only superficially know what they’re doing, don’t particularly care to know, are out there only because their parents think they should “play some sport and get some exercise”, and who are weeded out when it becomes appropriate.
Soccer seems particularly prone to this, in that the kids can run around the field and seem to be doing something without any real sign that they’re not doing anything except running around.
Baseball just is different. A fastball (definition of fastball is relative to age, obvi) is just a scary thing to look at whiz by your face. Line drives coming off metal bats make you alert. You just shouldn’t be a passive little thing and not jeopardize getting a serious beatdown in any level of baseball, really. In youth soccer, you really can just stand around and braid your hair at all hours of the game and not worry about it.
There was plenty of daydreaming by 8 or 9 year old outfielders in little league, too. Still is, judging by my coaching experience recently.
Absolutely. I’m not denigrating baseball (heaven forbid) or praising soccer (I never played, and my kids have only a passing interest). Just suggesting that the presence of kids that don’t take the sport seriously is not a failing of soccer. It’s endemic whenever kids are forced by their parents to play team sports because it will be good for them. There’s more opportunity to give a half-hearted effort in soccer, but there’s not necessarily more desire.
This sounds like Chuck’s comment. Soccer is popular in America—such as it is—because it has a low liability. It"s a game favored by school districts who do not want to have to pay to defend themselves against lawsuits.
All this defense of soccer on a baseball site is unusual. If coerced, I can watch a match. I’d rather watch baseball.
Soccer’s injury rate among adolescents is higher than basketball, softball and baseball, so it seems odd that schools would push it to avoid lawsuits. Fútbol is less risky than football, to be sure.
Frankly I’m surprised at the measured, intelligent response to one of my many red meat issues. But I’m also surprised that there is an angle no one’s addressed – especially since this site tends to bring up Garko and Blakes race whenever their name pops up.
Soccer is the ultimate suburban white-boy game. Does Shaw High have a team? or East Tech? or any of the other inner-city schools or even inner ring suburbs? Probably a few by now, buy it’s just not a game played in those areas – a source of many of our best athletes, like Troy Smith, Ted Ginn Jr. and the aforementioned LeBron James.
Soccer’s safe; you won’t hafta compete against the best athletes in the area. It’s not as scary as football, or basketball, or baseball to most kids. And Joe brings up a good point – that 6 foot, 11yo pitcher brining it at 65 mph can scare the crap outta that 4ft 9in nine year old.
Soccer is not the progressive up-and-coming game any more. Various groups have been trying to force it down our throats for over thirty years. It’s tiresome.
Resident LGT results-oriented boob.
Soccer is the ultimate suburban white-boy game.
This is something you can say ONLY if you never venture outside of the United States. In virtually every other country in the world, football … er … soccer is a working class sport, played by working class kids and which draws some of its very best players from the tough immigrant neighborhoods in cities like Paris, Rotterdam, and Manchester. In fact, one of the raps on US soccer is that It DOESN’T draw on working class kids, particularly Hispanic kids; some people have argued that this holds our national team back.
I find the implicit assumption in your comments that sports have to be “tough” (soccer fans wear skirts, soccer’s safe; 65 mph fastballs are scary) to be good is just silly. It’s also empirically incorrect to suggest that soccer, played properly, isn’t “tough” — there are plenty of elbows, concussions, bad knee injuries and rough play in soccer. And they don’t wear helmets, if you value risk-taking.
Maybe you’re right. But, then he should add that soccer’s really popular among girls. That, no doubt, would be additional proof that soccer’s not a “tough” (i.e., real) sport?
Yeah, I put soccer in the same bracket as volleyball. Great game for girls.
Resident LGT results-oriented boob.
The problem here is that you are curmudgeonly old man who doesn’t let his lack of knowledge prevent him from having an opinion. If you think the best athletes avoid soccer, you’re wrong, if you think that there is nothing scary about playing soccer, you’re wrong, if you think it is a sport for girls and feminine men, you’re wrong, if you think it is only for white people. you’re wrong and racist.
FWIW, go step in a cage at 65 miles an hour right now as an adult. It’s been my blow-off-steam-activity this summer. As a fully-bloomed adult male, I don’t want to get hit by one of those pitches.
Then put his comment in context and roll the clock 10-20 years back, and make yourself about the size of a chihuahua. But keep the speed the same.
I’m not quite sure what you’re arguing. As I see it, this argument is about whether soccer players are more likely than baseball players to be “hiding” out there just because their parents want them to have some physical activity.
If that’s what you’re arguing, then sure, facing a 65-mph fastball is scary, but that doesn’t really have anything to do with it. Just because the kid is scared out of his mind doesn’t mean he’s out there of his own free will.
Now, if you’re just arguing that youth baseball is more hardcore than youth soccer because 65-mph fastballs are scary, it seems like a silly argument to have. But to indulge it, I’m pretty sure more children are injured playing soccer than baseball, and someone kicking a soccer ball into your face from three feet away is every bit as scary as a pitched baseball.
What I’m saying is that certain sports feature more immediately terrifying confrontations that can spook the feint of heart. Many kids fraggin’ love stepping into the batting box. But the ones who hate it – hate the isolation and the fear of beatdown/inarguable failure – will quickly find ways to stop playing baseball. Whereas the feint of heart have no reason to quit playing soccer until they get cut by their JV team for being bad athletes and slow.
Also! By percentage participants, soccer’s 3.5% injured trumps baseball’s 2.7%. But its not just about physical damage that makes baseball intimidating. It’s also about public, isolated performance – which can last for minutes at a time, instead of a brief flailing second, in addition to team play. It hosts results that can’t really be interpreted away.
Again, none of this applies to the serious athlete who steps on to the soccer field wanting as many touches as he can get to put one in the back of the net and really assert himself over his opponent.
I think you’re off-base. If you stick a bunch of children onto a field to play a sport, a bunch of them are going to lose interest regardless of what sport you’re playing. Baseball isn’t any different.
Maybe your baseball player pays attention the three times per game that he comes up to bat, but the soccer player also pays attention when the ball happens to roll up to his feet. The rest of the time, both of them are picking dandelions.
Soccer definitely isn’t treated as competitively as other US sports. Think about it: basketball – there’s only 5 people on a team on a not-gigantic court at one time and you still can hide a little if you need to. As I’ve said, soccer is mildly interesting if its played by those who aren’t out there to hide.
Batting is a heart-pounding, one-on-one showdown – at all levels – between you and the pitcher. No confusion. No hiding.
I think you must have played in one heck of a little league. I think characterizing anything involving 10-year-olds as a “showdown” is silly.
I went to see my girlfriend’s nieces play fast-pitch softball a little while back. They had to be reminded to go up to the plate, and one of them kept waving to us between pitches.
Reminds me of a Chuck Klosterman essay.
A normal eleven-year-old can play an entire season without placing toe to sphere and nobody would notice, assuming he or she does a proper job of running about and avoiding major collisions. Soccer feels “fun” because it’s not terrifying — it’s the only sport where you can’t f*** up. An outcast can succeed simply by not failing, and public failing is every outcast’s deepest fear. For society’s prepubescent pariahs, soccer represents safety.
by cleveland teamer on Sep 11, 2009 10:24 AM EDT up reply actions
I’m no soccer expert, but this seems like a stretch. Really, every player on these college teams goes onto play pro at MLS level or higher?
No, that was a massive exaggeration on my part. The MLS is basically like watching an Indians farm team. It’s the college and high school players that were good, but not great.
Maybe I am, but he really is just a retread.
by Ryan Kelsey on Sep 11, 2009 10:09 AM EDT up reply actions
Maybe this was true in 1996 when the MLS began. That is not true now by any stretch. I’ve been going to games since the league began and the quality of play is light years better than it was. Nobody is going to mistake it for Euro soccer, but it’s better than college soccer by a goodly margin. Many of the best college players get drafted by MLS every year and don’t make the roster.
"But people are stupid, and their memories are short." - FredOx
by woodsmeister on Sep 11, 2009 9:44 AM EDT up reply actions
wow, a soccer thread broke out. guess I should have emphasized the “or something” part.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=exOxUAntx8I&feature=channel_page
by The Cactus Leaguer on Sep 11, 2009 12:11 AM EDT up reply actions
So about our drafting… Aaron Laffey is basically the onl[truncated,repetition]
Dodgers, Rockies, Giants, Padres and Diamondbacks. Oh my!
People are going to be pretty pissed in the morning when the see all the new comments and it’s about westerns and Star Wars and soccer.
Or delighted. Who knows with us nowadays.
Steel Nick
Yeah, seriously, what the [redacted] happened to this thread?
The once and future
by Manhattan Tribe Fan on Sep 10, 2009 12:05 PM EDT up reply actions
I can’t get too upset about this. It’s possible Marte was a little sore or under the weather. It could also be that Wedge and the organization wanted to reward Romero for being a good employee by giving him a start. Further, Marte isn’t good.
That doesn’t mean that they still don’t do it. Saying they do publicly would cheapen the experience.
I don’t see it that way. I think they don’t do reward callups because it would open up a can of worms, with players feeling that they “deserve” the callup but not getting it. They sidestep that situation by explaining that — here it is again — “deserve’s got nothing to do with it.”
There is nothing terribly reward-worthy about Niuman Romero anyway, and I defy you to show me a reason to think otherwise. The most noteworthy thing that happened to him this season was his being revealed to be three years older.
Sure. but that is an example of a Shapiro-organization’s shortcoming.
by Ryan Kelsey on Sep 11, 2009 12:17 AM EDT up reply actions
Who was that 30-year old we called up in 2004 clearly as a reward-thing? Hey, I used the google to find him. Clearly a reward callup. Meet Ernie Young.
I agree, but that was five years ago. Could be that they’ve changed the policy. Could also be that it doesn’t apply to free agent signings.
This is the thread where I’m supposed to be outraged that an organizational soldier got four plate appearances in a game in a lost season, right?
This is the thread where I’m supposed to be outraged about this because those plate appearance should have gone to Andy Marte, right?
If this is the place, I’m saying I’m not outraged. Part of this is because it’s four plate appearances, and part of it is because I’m not concerned about Marte, and part is because my mind has been made up on Wedge for several months.
You’re lost. This is a thread about movies and soccer.
The once and future
by Manhattan Tribe Fan on Sep 10, 2009 11:01 PM EDT up reply actions
Get out of here, Wedge. You’re no good to anyone back there.
L. Skywalker
"But people are stupid, and their memories are short." - FredOx
by woodsmeister on Sep 11, 2009 9:49 AM EDT up reply actions 2 recs
Oh, my bad. The best western I’ve seen in the last ten years is The Proposition, even if it was an Australian version. I did re-watch The Outlaw Josey Wales recently, and enjoyed it thoroughly.
The last movie I caught in the theatres was District 9. I enjoyed that tremendously.
As for soccer, I don’t really have strong feelings. It wasn’t offered at my school growing up so I never really got into playing it. I’ve always been disinterested in the MLS.
I enjoyed the World Cup in ‘06 but other than that, I haven’t watched much. The Euro leagues seem like a lot of work to get into and I’m not that intrigued.
i appreciated that it was well-made and well-acted, but i can’t say that i enjoyed it. a really rough movie-watching experience, and not one i’d see again.
I reserve the right to complain about Gimenez at 1B and Carroll in the OF, no matter the facts. - FredOx
by DontCallMeJoey on Sep 11, 2009 1:06 PM EDT up reply actions
marte isn’t good … so give some at bats to someone who is demonstrably worse?
I reserve the right to complain about Gimenez at 1B and Carroll in the OF, no matter the facts. - FredOx
by DontCallMeJoey on Sep 11, 2009 1:07 PM EDT up reply actions
Is it ok for me to say that I’m really excited about Carlos Santana…
by Luis (Tribe Fan in London) on Sep 11, 2009 3:47 AM EDT up reply actions
I thought that might be the case…that’s why I chucked in a random soccer comment upthread. Figure I could say plenty about it but don’t want to keep it anymore off topic than it already is!
by Luis (Tribe Fan in London) on Sep 11, 2009 9:44 AM EDT up reply actions
While the movie discussion is lukewarm: anybody see the movie Sugar? (The one about the Dominican kid trying to make the big leagues, not the Canadian kid coming out of the closet.) Pretty good, and according to Dominican players, true to the experience.
by cleveland teamer on Sep 11, 2009 9:18 AM EDT reply actions
brantley cf, cabrera ss, choo rf, peralta 3b, hafner dh, valbuena 2b, laporta lf, marte 1b, marson ca, masterson p
about 1 hour ago from web
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Let's Go Tribe!
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recent FanPosts
Featured Stories
FanShots
Quick hits of video, photos, quotes, chats, links and lists that you find around the web.
Recent FanShots
In Association With
Big League Stew - MLB - Yahoo! Sports
- BIG Series: Padres and Giants set to battle for control of NL West
- The Grandstand: Crunch time in September arrives again
- Hello, Bourjos: Angels rookie plays it fast on both sides of ball
- An off-the-wall take on why the Twins will make the World Series
- John Lindsey couldn't have come any closer to his first at-bat
Certain photos copyright © 2010 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
