Ron Santo Scaling Back Broadcasting Duties

[UMFan83]

In the past 20 years, the teams with the 3 longest pennant droughts are 8-0 in world series games.

 

I guess the weight of the world gets off their shoulders once they win their league.

 

This is confusing....the teams who had the longest pennant droughts in 1990, have gone 8-0 in world series games once they got there?

 

The Cubs (0-0), White Sox (4-0)...and who else? The only other team to make one WS appearance between 1990 and 2010, or sweep their first WS appearance post-1990 was the 1990 Reds, who went 4-0 after a 14 year drought (1976) inbetween pennants. Were the Reds really the 3rd longest pennant drought in the league in 1990?

 

I figured he was talking about the Red Sox and White Sox, not sure why he is using a 20 year time frame, an 8-0 record and a 3 team grouping.

 

Oh and what really threw me off was pennant drought, which historically means winning the league and advancing to the World Series. I should have realized that's what he meant.

[SouthSideRyan]

In the past 20 years, the teams with the 3 longest pennant droughts are 8-0 in world series games.

 

I guess the weight of the world gets off their shoulders once they win their league.

 

This is confusing....the teams who had the longest pennant droughts in 1990, have gone 8-0 in world series games once they got there?

 

The Cubs (0-0), White Sox (4-0)...and who else? The only other team to make one WS appearance between 1990 and 2010, or sweep their first WS appearance post-1990 was the 1990 Reds, who went 4-0 after a 14 year drought (1976) inbetween pennants. Were the Reds really the 3rd longest pennant drought in the league in 1990?

 

I figured he was talking about the Red Sox and White Sox, not sure why he is using a 20 year time frame, an 8-0 record and a 3 team grouping.

 

Because they were the 3 droughts of epic proportions. Nobody cares about the Giants not winning in 50 some years, people knew who Willie Mays was. All the Cubs, Red Sox, and White Sox guys were dead or banned

[UMFan83]

In the past 20 years, the teams with the 3 longest pennant droughts are 8-0 in world series games.

 

I guess the weight of the world gets off their shoulders once they win their league.

 

This is confusing....the teams who had the longest pennant droughts in 1990, have gone 8-0 in world series games once they got there?

 

 

The Red Sox didn't have a drought after they swept in '04, so all that enormous pressure they felt with the curse was gone, allowing them to sweep the '08 world series

 

The Phillies won the 08 World Series? But yeah obviously that's what happened. Cowboy up and Kevin Millar got the Red Sox through it while Don't stop believing and AJ Pierzynski's dropped 3rd strike play got the White Sox through it.

 

I think the Cubs need Joe Esposito's "You're the best around" and Julio Zuleta back as pitching coach with his slump busting techniques to get us over the hump.

[J.R.]

In the past 20 years, the teams with the 3 longest pennant droughts are 8-0 in world series games.

 

I guess the weight of the world gets off their shoulders once they win their league.

 

The atmosphere at New Comiskey is in no way comparable to what has gone on at Wrigley during the playoffs since the Bartman game.

 

I would wager that before 2004, Fenway was every bit the headcase convention Wrigley is.

[SouthSideRyan]

In the past 20 years, the teams with the 3 longest pennant droughts are 8-0 in world series games.

 

I guess the weight of the world gets off their shoulders once they win their league.

 

The atmosphere at New Comiskey is in no way comparable to what has gone on at Wrigley during the playoffs since the Bartman game.

 

I would wager that before 2004, Fenway was every bit the headcase convention Wrigley is.

 

And yet they were down 3-0 and came back and won the ALCS. All this added pressure stuff is whiny excuse making and I'm surprised to see you take this stance. The Cubs haven't won because they haven't been good enough, combined with a little bad luck. Same reason as every other team in baseball that doesn't win in a given year.

[J.R.]

It only serves to make the Red Sox' achievement in 2004 all the more impressive.

 

I am in no way implying that the postseason atmosphere that surrounds our team is an insurmountable obstacle, but I think it's silly to dismiss it.

[jersey cubs fan]

I figured he was talking about the Red Sox and White Sox, not sure why he is using a 20 year time frame, an 8-0 record and a 3 team grouping.

 

Because they were the 3 droughts of epic proportions. Nobody cares about the Giants not winning in 50 some years, people knew who Willie Mays was. All the Cubs, Red Sox, and White Sox guys were dead or banned

 

Doesn't explain why you used a 20 year window, mentioned three teams and an 8-0 record. It's two teams and it all took place within the last 6 years.

[SouthSideRyan]

I figured he was talking about the Red Sox and White Sox, not sure why he is using a 20 year time frame, an 8-0 record and a 3 team grouping.

 

Because they were the 3 droughts of epic proportions. Nobody cares about the Giants not winning in 50 some years, people knew who Willie Mays was. All the Cubs, Red Sox, and White Sox guys were dead or banned

 

Doesn't explain why you used a 20 year window, mentioned three teams and an 8-0 record. It's two teams and it all took place within the last 6 years.

 

Cause 20 sounded better but 25 included Red Sox losses

[UMFan83]

I figured he was talking about the Red Sox and White Sox, not sure why he is using a 20 year time frame, an 8-0 record and a 3 team grouping.

 

Because they were the 3 droughts of epic proportions. Nobody cares about the Giants not winning in 50 some years, people knew who Willie Mays was. All the Cubs, Red Sox, and White Sox guys were dead or banned

 

Doesn't explain why you used a 20 year window, mentioned three teams and an 8-0 record. It's two teams and it all took place within the last 6 years.

 

Cause 20 sounded better but 25 included Red Sox losses

 

24 would have sounded really badass.

[SouthSideRyan]

I figured he was talking about the Red Sox and White Sox, not sure why he is using a 20 year time frame, an 8-0 record and a 3 team grouping.

 

Because they were the 3 droughts of epic proportions. Nobody cares about the Giants not winning in 50 some years, people knew who Willie Mays was. All the Cubs, Red Sox, and White Sox guys were dead or banned

 

Doesn't explain why you used a 20 year window, mentioned three teams and an 8-0 record. It's two teams and it all took place within the last 6 years.

 

Cause 20 sounded better but 25 included Red Sox losses

 

24 would have sounded really badass.

 

Round numbers only you should know that.

 

Anyways, despite my numerous mistakes, my point still stands, pressure don't mean [expletive] if you're good and lucky. If the Cubs had the Cardinals postseason last year, everyone would blame it on too much pressure. If the Cubs were the Mariners under Lou, everyone would blame it on pressure. It makes a nice "baseball is a mystical game that nobody can understand" story after the fact, but that's all it is a story, to try and make something more out of it than it was. A few teams who weren't that good to begin with ('89, 98, '07), a team that got hot and beat a team they shouldn't have, only to get cold and lose to a team they shouldn't have ('03), and a couple teams that went cold at the wrong time to inferior teams ('84, '08)

 

OH THE PRESSURE!!

[davearm2]

How could one accurately say that they KNOW that Cubs players are facing significant more additional pressure (to the point that it can impact their play)

How could one accurately say they KNOW they are not? But yet you are saying just that.

 

All I know is the pressure on the Cubs is a) different, and b) probably greater than that faced by a "typical" team/player.

 

How that does or doesn't impact play is impossible to know.

[abuck1220]

yeah, i kinda doubt kyle farnsworth was thinking about leon durham and what not when he took the mound in the '03 playoffs. you guys are assuming that whatever random players are wearing cub uniforms at any given time give two shits or even know about 1984 or whatever.

[Sammy Sofa]

How could one accurately say that they KNOW that Cubs players are facing significant more additional pressure (to the point that it can impact their play)

How could one accurately say they KNOW they are not? But yet you are saying just that.

 

All I know is the pressure on the Cubs is a) different, and b) probably greater than that faced by a "typical" team/player.

 

How that does or doesn't impact play is impossible to know.

 

Common sense dictates otherwise. Baseball players on playoff teams are under enormous pressure regardless of what team they're on. It's ridiculous to think that in the split second a player has to deal with the play at hand is more likely to fail because they're playing for the Cubs and are inexplicably going to be overloaded by the pressure of playing for them more so than playing for any other team.

[SouthSideRyan]

How could one accurately say that they KNOW that Cubs players are facing significant more additional pressure (to the point that it can impact their play)

How could one accurately say they KNOW they are not? But yet you are saying just that.

 

All I know is the pressure on the Cubs is a) different, and b) probably greater than that faced by a "typical" team/player.

 

 

You don't know either of those things.

 

Sorry to break everyone's hearts, but most players couldn't care less about the history of the Cubs and what winning a title would mean to Cubs fans.

[davearm2]

How could one accurately say that they KNOW that Cubs players are facing significant more additional pressure (to the point that it can impact their play)

How could one accurately say they KNOW they are not? But yet you are saying just that.

 

All I know is the pressure on the Cubs is a) different, and b) probably greater than that faced by a "typical" team/player.

 

How that does or doesn't impact play is impossible to know.

 

Common sense dictates otherwise. Baseball players on playoff teams are under enormous pressure regardless of what team they're on. It's ridiculous to think that in the split second a player has to deal with the play at hand is more likely to fail because they're playing for the Cubs and are inexplicably going to be overloaded by the pressure of playing for them more so than playing for any other team.

But it's reasonable to think that in the split second a player has to deal with the play at hand is more likely to fail because they're playing in October and are inexplicably going to be overloaded by the pressure of playing then more so than playing in June?

 

Basically you're dismissing the notion that pressure of any kind influences on-field play. You could be right but it's the minority opinion.

 

If, on the other hand, one believes pressure can impact play, then it stands to reason that the Cubs players are impacted more than a typical player because of the 100+ year thing.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

If anyone's ever met an athlete of any type, I suspect they'll have trouble believing those guys give two farts about the 100+ year thing. That's a fan issue, not a player issue.

[SouthSideRyan]

That's a lot of thoughts going through a player's head in a split second Edited June 22, 2010 by SouthSideRyan

[treebird]

How could one accurately say that they KNOW that Cubs players are facing significant more additional pressure (to the point that it can impact their play)

How could one accurately say they KNOW they are not? But yet you are saying just that.

 

All I know is the pressure on the Cubs is a) different, and b) probably greater than that faced by a "typical" team/player.

 

How that does or doesn't impact play is impossible to know.

 

Common sense dictates otherwise. Baseball players on playoff teams are under enormous pressure regardless of what team they're on. It's ridiculous to think that in the split second a player has to deal with the play at hand is more likely to fail because they're playing for the Cubs and are inexplicably going to be overloaded by the pressure of playing for them more so than playing for any other team.

But it's reasonable to think that in the split second a player has to deal with the play at hand is more likely to fail because they're playing in October and are inexplicably going to be overloaded by the pressure of playing then more so than playing in June?

 

Basically you're dismissing the notion that pressure of any kind influences on-field play. You could be right but it's the minority opinion.

 

If, on the other hand, one believes pressure can impact play, then it stands to reason that the Cubs players are impacted more than a typical player because of the 100+ year thing.

 

tim's a busy guy so he probably won't be through here to post it, but he used to have a well-phrased reply to this sort of argument about how the real pressure in baseball is in high school and college and the minors when you're trying to establish yourself and scouts are watching. if you do well, you get to be a millionaire; if you do poorly, you get to be a mechanic's assistant.

 

he said it a lot better and more convincingly, but the gist of it is there.

[davearm2]

How could one accurately say that they KNOW that Cubs players are facing significant more additional pressure (to the point that it can impact their play)

How could one accurately say they KNOW they are not? But yet you are saying just that.

 

All I know is the pressure on the Cubs is a) different, and b) probably greater than that faced by a "typical" team/player.

 

 

You don't know either of those things.

 

Sorry to break everyone's hearts, but most players couldn't care less about the history of the Cubs and what winning a title would mean to Cubs fans.

To the extent that the players are reminded of it by the media, and having to answer questions about it, then yes it can and probably does add to their stress or pressure or whatever. If nothing else it's a distraction.

[davearm2]

How could one accurately say that they KNOW that Cubs players are facing significant more additional pressure (to the point that it can impact their play)

How could one accurately say they KNOW they are not? But yet you are saying just that.

 

All I know is the pressure on the Cubs is a) different, and b) probably greater than that faced by a "typical" team/player.

 

How that does or doesn't impact play is impossible to know.

 

Common sense dictates otherwise. Baseball players on playoff teams are under enormous pressure regardless of what team they're on. It's ridiculous to think that in the split second a player has to deal with the play at hand is more likely to fail because they're playing for the Cubs and are inexplicably going to be overloaded by the pressure of playing for them more so than playing for any other team.

But it's reasonable to think that in the split second a player has to deal with the play at hand is more likely to fail because they're playing in October and are inexplicably going to be overloaded by the pressure of playing then more so than playing in June?

 

Basically you're dismissing the notion that pressure of any kind influences on-field play. You could be right but it's the minority opinion.

 

If, on the other hand, one believes pressure can impact play, then it stands to reason that the Cubs players are impacted more than a typical player because of the 100+ year thing.

 

tim's a busy guy so he probably won't be through here to post it, but he used to have a well-phrased reply to this sort of argument about how the real pressure in baseball is in high school and college and the minors when you're trying to establish yourself and scouts are watching. if you do well, you get to be a millionaire; if you do poorly, you get to be a mechanic's assistant.

 

he said it a lot better and more convincingly, but the gist of it is there.

So in essence what you're saying is professional athletes are immune to pressure.

 

As I said earlier, that could be right, but it would be the minority opinion.

[Soul]

How could one accurately say that they KNOW that Cubs players are facing significant more additional pressure (to the point that it can impact their play)

How could one accurately say they KNOW they are not? But yet you are saying just that.

 

All I know is the pressure on the Cubs is a) different, and b) probably greater than that faced by a "typical" team/player.

 

 

You don't know either of those things.

 

Sorry to break everyone's hearts, but most players couldn't care less about the history of the Cubs and what winning a title would mean to Cubs fans.

To the extent that the players are reminded of it by the media, and having to answer questions about it, then yes it can and probably does add to their stress or pressure or whatever. If nothing else it's a distraction.

 

It might be even worse to have to listen to the stupid curse talk over & over again when you don't give a damn.

[fromthestretch]

How could one accurately say that they KNOW that Cubs players are facing significant more additional pressure (to the point that it can impact their play)

How could one accurately say they KNOW they are not? But yet you are saying just that.

 

All I know is the pressure on the Cubs is a) different, and b) probably greater than that faced by a "typical" team/player.

 

 

You don't know either of those things.

 

Sorry to break everyone's hearts, but most players couldn't care less about the history of the Cubs and what winning a title would mean to Cubs fans.

To the extent that the players are reminded of it by the media, and having to answer questions about it, then yes it can and probably does add to their stress or pressure or whatever. If nothing else it's a distraction.

 

A distraction, maybe. But increased pressure? I would think there would be more pressure playing for a team that's expected by its fan base and the media to win each year. Don't win in New York, and you're going to hear about it constantly. Don't win in Chicago? Hell, the fans are used to that.

[SouthSideRyan]

How could one accurately say that they KNOW that Cubs players are facing significant more additional pressure (to the point that it can impact their play)

How could one accurately say they KNOW they are not? But yet you are saying just that.

 

All I know is the pressure on the Cubs is a) different, and b) probably greater than that faced by a "typical" team/player.

 

 

You don't know either of those things.

 

Sorry to break everyone's hearts, but most players couldn't care less about the history of the Cubs and what winning a title would mean to Cubs fans.

To the extent that the players are reminded of it by the media, and having to answer questions about it, then yes it can and probably does add to their stress or pressure or whatever. If nothing else it's a distraction.

 

It might be even worse to have to listen to the stupid curse talk over & over again when you don't give a damn.

 

Well yeah, I find it really annoying, but I wouldn't say it's distracting me.

[Irrelevant Dude]

I was listening to the game this afternoon while walking my dog and Pat mentioned how Wakamatsu came out to talk to the home plate umpire after Piniella's argument with the third base umpire. Moments later, Otto went on to describe that Lou had motioned toward Koyie Hill, which could be interpreted as a 2nd visit and force him to take Marmol out of the game. I guarantee that if Santo had been the analyst, I would never have known why Wakamatsu was out there. That is just one example of the small details that we miss when Santo is in the booth.