Give me the Texas Rangers in six.
I think the Rangers and St. Louis Cardinals are pretty evenly matched––scattered starting pitching, great bullpens, powerful lineups, damn good managers––but the Rangers have the X factor, the bitter taste of defeat from last year's World Series loss to the San Francisco Giants. This year they'll replace that taste with sweet victory and the World Series trophy in hand.
By the way, I'd just like to point out that I made my pick before Nolan Ryan, the Rangers' CEO and president; Dirk Nowitzki, the Dallas Mavericks' all-star forward; and Buster Olney with ESPN all said the Rangers and six. [No big deal.]
Go Rangers!
Wednesday, October 19, 2011
The Dumbest Rule in Sports (Thank You, Bud Selig)
Thank you, Bud Selig. As you carried on as the commissioner of baseball over the years, fighting steroids and swearing to take all performance-enhancing drugs out of the game, you've managed to add more mockery to the game itself.
I.e. Your ridiculous rule that whatever team wins the all-star game––be it the American League or National––the team from that league gets home-field advantage for the World Series.
Seriously, Selig? That has to be one of the dumbest things I've ever heard.
Regardless, let me try to see your point of view anyway, just for the hell of it.
You want to add meaning to the all-star game, a time when the best athletes in the sport come together for an exhibition and fan enjoyment. Instead of keeping it an exhibition and about fun, you want it to be more meaningful so that––most of all––you'll get more money [although you'll probably claim that it's actually more money for the sport. Please.] More meaning to the all-star game means more T.V. viewers, leading to more ad revenue; more in attendance, meaning more ticket and concession sales. Sure, make your additional money, but don't do it where it hurts the integrity of the game.
Look it at this way, Selig, and I mean really hear me out here. What other sports place an emphasis on their all-star games? Basketball, perhaps? While still played halfway through the regular season––like baseball––means nothing, other than a glorified exhibition game, like baseball, for the fans. Football? Its all-star game is held the week before the Super Bowl, when all but two teams are still playing, and players from those two teams hardly ever play to prevent any risk of injury.
So tell me why, Selig, you feel the need to add more emphasis to baseball's all-star game?
It's ridiculous.
Take this year's World Series, for example. The Texas Rangers finished the regular season with a 96-66 record, first in the American League West by 10 games, and so far have cruised through the postseason to clinch their second consecutive American League pennant and World Series trip. Their opponent, the St. Louis Cardinals, is coming off a 90-72 regular season, and a team that pushed its way into the postseason on the season's final day.
Now let's look at this situation, Selig, and please, explain it to me––to all the fans of baseball, in fact––how in the hell does this make sense? Don't worry, we're all waiting.
How can you punish a team like the Rangers, coming off their best season in franchise history, surpassing the most regular-season wins in team history, running away with the AL West, and finishing as the top-team in the postseason with the most regular-season wins, and they don't earn the right to home-field advantage in the World Series?
Horseshit.
Get your head on right, Selig. Otherwise, get out of baseball.
I.e. Your ridiculous rule that whatever team wins the all-star game––be it the American League or National––the team from that league gets home-field advantage for the World Series.
Seriously, Selig? That has to be one of the dumbest things I've ever heard.
Regardless, let me try to see your point of view anyway, just for the hell of it.
You want to add meaning to the all-star game, a time when the best athletes in the sport come together for an exhibition and fan enjoyment. Instead of keeping it an exhibition and about fun, you want it to be more meaningful so that––most of all––you'll get more money [although you'll probably claim that it's actually more money for the sport. Please.] More meaning to the all-star game means more T.V. viewers, leading to more ad revenue; more in attendance, meaning more ticket and concession sales. Sure, make your additional money, but don't do it where it hurts the integrity of the game.
Look it at this way, Selig, and I mean really hear me out here. What other sports place an emphasis on their all-star games? Basketball, perhaps? While still played halfway through the regular season––like baseball––means nothing, other than a glorified exhibition game, like baseball, for the fans. Football? Its all-star game is held the week before the Super Bowl, when all but two teams are still playing, and players from those two teams hardly ever play to prevent any risk of injury.
So tell me why, Selig, you feel the need to add more emphasis to baseball's all-star game?
It's ridiculous.
Take this year's World Series, for example. The Texas Rangers finished the regular season with a 96-66 record, first in the American League West by 10 games, and so far have cruised through the postseason to clinch their second consecutive American League pennant and World Series trip. Their opponent, the St. Louis Cardinals, is coming off a 90-72 regular season, and a team that pushed its way into the postseason on the season's final day.
Now let's look at this situation, Selig, and please, explain it to me––to all the fans of baseball, in fact––how in the hell does this make sense? Don't worry, we're all waiting.
How can you punish a team like the Rangers, coming off their best season in franchise history, surpassing the most regular-season wins in team history, running away with the AL West, and finishing as the top-team in the postseason with the most regular-season wins, and they don't earn the right to home-field advantage in the World Series?
Horseshit.
Get your head on right, Selig. Otherwise, get out of baseball.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)