USSoccer

Oooooh. I like Swisher.

THIS IS WHAT HAPPENS WHEN OLDE TIMEY BASEBALL MEN BECOME GM'S.

This is one of the dumbest things I've ever read.

Leadoff hitter is not a position. 2-hole hitter is not a position. Power lefty is not a position. The Cubs need good hitters, not players that fit into the Olde Timey molds of perception.

Neither do I, but even still, baseball is really getting on my nerves.

I hate baseball sometimes. It's becoming the EPL.

I'm all for patience, but how long has Pie been in the organization? It's like the Don Baylor Corey Patterson dance all over again. Other than the bunt thing, I don't see anything wrong with Lou stressing OBP to Pie. What's wrong with drag bunting once in a while? I suppose NY's issue is that the whole "long swing guy, needs to bunt more, etc" comments sound exactly like what screwed up Corey from 2002-2004. Pie's supposed to be a middle of the order hitter based on skillset, so from that point of view you probably don't want to be screwing around with his swing. I have more faith in Lou than I did in Dusty to not completely jerk Pie around, but I can see the paralells.

I'm all for patience, but how long has Pie been in the organization? It's like the Don Baylor Corey Patterson dance all over again. Other than the bunt thing, I don't see anything wrong with Lou stressing OBP to Pie.

Theriot is 27, and is likely to be exactly what he was last season. Below replacement level.

If those are the offers, we should be in this, even if it's a one year rental situation.

Because it's irrelevant to the here and now. I would care if a Cub tested positive now, because it would have a direct impact on the team, as well as proving that individual an idiot for taking something now that MLB has a testing program. But revealing who used in the past serves no purpose. Does it have to serve a purpose in the here & now in order to be something that's worthwhile knowing? And what purpose does it serve? How is it worthwhile knowing?

Because it's irrelevant to the here and now. I would care if a Cub tested positive now, because it would have a direct impact on the team, as well as proving that individual an idiot for taking something now that MLB has a testing program. But revealing who used in the past serves no purpose.

I'll agree with you that the casual fan is probably pissed off because of records being broken in part because of PED's, but regardless of records, I still care. I don't want the Cubs to lose or win in part because of a criminal act, which abusing steroids IS. So...presumably you don't want the New Orleans Saints to win because Reggie Bush illegally accepted money and benefits while at USC? Do the Saints win or lose because of that, or even in part of that? Terrible example. Not really. Not only is it an event in the past (as everything in the Mitchell Report will be), but even if all 25 guys on the 2007 Red Sox are on the list, can you definitively say that that's why they won, considering the data will be at least 2 years old? My point is this: Nothing in this report is new. This will be "Who Used PED's", not "Who is using PED's". It has no direct impact on the 2008 season on the field (or at least it shouldn't). This is an attempt at "cleaning up the record of baseball" by exposing people who bent rules that weren't really there when it was happening. It's all after the fact reporting. So, considering that it's all after the fact, ask yourself what the real point is.

I'll agree with you that the casual fan is probably pissed off because of records being broken in part because of PED's, but regardless of records, I still care. I don't want the Cubs to lose or win in part because of a criminal act, which abusing steroids IS. So...presumably you don't want the New Orleans Saints to win because Reggie Bush illegally accepted money and benefits while at USC?

So baseball fans who care if players use/used steroids and other PED's are "stupid" because they care about the history of the game? They're stupid if they think it should make a difference in how they view their sport, especially if they don't apply the same standard to other sports, especially considering that many of the substances abused either weren't against the rules in baseball, or weren't being tested for. It makes ALL THE DIFFERENCE in how I view MLB, not the sport of baseball. Unfortunately, the way MLB and the owners (who did nothing to put restrictions on PED's because the "benefits" put meat in the seats) handled rampant drug abuse indirectly has an affect on the sport of baseball, as Professional baseball players all the way down to High School baseball players are tempted by using drugs so that they can keep up with the standouts who also use. I love the game of baseball. I love the Cubs. I also believe that MLB is corrupt and takes advantage of those who love the game enough to pay the ridiculous prices to watch it professionally. Steriods/PED's are not the only problem with MLB, and I seperate MLB from the game of baseball. The History is affected as the playing field is not level (nor has it ever really been level), and the records are not comparable between eras. It's like apples/oranges if you think about it. One time it was the exclusion of minorities, now it is drugs. We should all care. So...basically you agree with me.

That's completely wrong. The era in which it was created and the fact that the most fundamental aspects of the game haven't changed in 160 years has everything to do with it. The most important example of this is the lack of a game clock. This "old timey" aspect of the game is what creates the most drama, perhaps more than any other sport. In baseball there is no way to run out the clock against an opponent, so to speak; the other team will always get their chance to make a comeback, no matter what. In football and basketball, there is also a play clock, so we essentially know when some dramatic action is about to occur. The beauty of baseball, to me, is in its untimed inaction i.e. the pitcher standing on the mound with the ball, etc. The drama that exists during those suspenseful moments is perhaps greater than in any other sport. You're describing the way the game is played, ie, the basic structure, which has nothing to do with how old it is or how much history is in it. Jon is right. This has everything to do with sportswriters agahst at how their cherished records from when they were a kid are being broken by people (or person) that they don't like. Without the context of records being broken, no one cares, but because baseball records hold a totemlike voodoo power over people, we now have wasted the time of the US Government so people can feel better about what they loved when they were kids.

So baseball fans who care if players use/used steroids and other PED's are "stupid" because they care about the history of the game? They're stupid if they think it should make a difference in how they view their sport, especially if they don't apply the same standard to other sports, especially considering that many of the substances abused either weren't against the rules in baseball, or weren't being tested for. Baseball's special-ness has nothing to do with it's age. I don't care who did what decades ago, and no one else really should. It's not as if rules haven't evolved over the decades in baseball, but no one points out the higher mound that existed as a reason to devalue the dominant pitchers of yesteryear.

For real, I'm really tired of this getting attention. I know I don't care in the slightest. You say that, but I think you might care if somehow Lee, Aram, Z, or Woody showed up on the list. Odds are that one of them will. And I still won't care. Put it another way: Does ESPN rip Rodney Harrison for being suspended for PED's? How is baseball more sacred than football? Old-Timeyness is why. And I don't have a care in the world for Auld Thyme Base-Ball. Because it isn't 1927 anymore. Nor is it 1967. I want to know. What if Mark Priors name is on there. That would shine a lot of light on his career to this point. We just gave an eight year contract out, you wouldn't want to know if we're paying for production that's not there now? In Soriano's case, it's going to happen anyway, PED's or not. And furthermore, all the Mitchell report is going to do is shed light on guys doing things 2+ seasons ago, when the PED's were still probably legal, or when baseball wasn't testing. If a guy fails a test now, he's an idiot and deserves ridicule, because he's hurting the team doing something he knows people are now looking and testing for, but if this reveals that sometime in the past 4 years Derrek Lee took PED's, I fail to see how that matters in the here and now, other than to satsify certain writers' need to cleanse baseball of a percieved blight.

For real, I'm really tired of this getting attention. I know I don't care in the slightest. You say that, but I think you might care if somehow Lee, Aram, Z, or Woody showed up on the list. Odds are that one of them will. And I still won't care. Put it another way: Does ESPN rip Rodney Harrison for being suspended for PED's? How is baseball more sacred than football? Old-Timeyness is why. And I don't have a care in the world for Auld Thyme Base-Ball. Because it isn't 1927 anymore. Nor is it 1967. It is going to be embarrassing to every person listed in the report, and you are crazy if you don't think that it will have an impact on the players. Nobody wants to be labeled as or thought of as a cheater. I doubt that Lee or Ramirez will be on the list, but say if someone like Lee were on the list, it would be a big blow to his image. Unless I'm going to be named in the report, I don't see how this reply has anything to do with what I said. I said that I don't care about it. Of course there will be enough people who do care that whoever's name is on it will take an image hit. And quite frankly, it wouldn't matter if they played any other sport, but Olde Tyme mythos about baseball overrides the thought process applied to other athletes. Did Bears fans give a crap that Jim Miller was suspended for PED's in 2001, as the team drove towards a division title? Do San Diego fans burn Luis Castillo and Shawne Merriman in effigy? Do Boston fans hate Harrison? Seriously, who cares? No one will ever be satisfied until their personal target appears on a list or tests positive. Baseball isn't a morality play. It's a sport.

For real, I'm really tired of this getting attention. I know I don't care in the slightest. You say that, but I think you might care if somehow Lee, Aram, Z, or Woody showed up on the list. Odds are that one of them will. And I still won't care. Put it another way: Does ESPN rip Rodney Harrison for being suspended for PED's? How is baseball more sacred than football? Old-Timeyness is why. And I don't have a care in the world for Auld Thyme Base-Ball. Because it isn't 1927 anymore. Nor is it 1967.

For real, I'm really tired of this getting attention. I know I don't care in the slightest. Oh, they'll do their best to beat the "sanctity of the game" drum and plenty of people will buy it. They'll all be stupid people, but still.

I have a feeling Dempsey might get dumped back onto the wing until Szetela is ready.

I enjoyed Cristiano Ronaldo's post goal celebratory facial expression.

Dammit, he does hit RH. I should not try and post when doing 8 things at once.

-Hendry wants a LH bat -People in Philly probably still hate him The question is, what would Philly want, and how much salary would they eat? Would they take back Dempster, Eyre or Marquis?