Jump to content
North Side Baseball

Sammy Sofa

Old-Timey Member
  • Posts

    98,114
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    207

 Content Type 

Profiles

Joomla Posts 1

Chicago Cubs Videos

Chicago Cubs Free Agent & Trade Rumors, Notes, & Tidbits

2026 Chicago Cubs Top Prospects Ranking

News

2023 Chicago Cubs Draft Picks

Guides & Resources

2024 Chicago Cubs Draft Picks

The Chicago Cubs Players Project

2025 Chicago Cubs Draft Pick Tracker

2026 Chicago Cubs Draft Pick Tracker

Blogs

Events

Forums

Store

Gallery

Everything posted by Sammy Sofa

  1. Turns out I was quite wrong, This is the most segregated city But just as I suspected, Chicago isn't even in the top five. It took me all of 30 key strokes to find this out. Can we put this nonsense to bed now? It's not nonsense. It's a well-established historical and sociological idea. Like I said, look at how many links have Chicago at the top. I never said all studies would have Chicago at the top. If the city has fallen from the top in recent years (even though I know many studies and experts still feel it's up there), hey great...that doesn't erase the better part of a century where it was the most visibly segregated major city in America. The social rammifications of such a situation doesnt just vanish. You're ignoring all the other links for the sake of one (from 2002) that backs up your point. Take this for what it's worth, but I took some education classes at Marquette, where they emphasize urban education. I believe I remember hearing that, depending on the year, that Milwaukee, St. Louis, and Detroit are the most segregated. Again, that's just going off of memory, but the professor taught in both St. Louis and Milwaukee. As for Chicago, there is no doubt in my mind that we are 'up there,' if only historically. But I'd make the argument that the larger the city, the more likely it is to make the segregation list. Again, just a theory, but it seems like a product of the system. It wouldn't surprise me if Chicago has fallen off the top, but from the 1920's up into the 1990's it was typically the undisputed champ. My point is that even if it's not at the very top, it's still incredibly segregated (I can't imgine anyone who has been here or lived here would deny that) and that its history as arguably THE most segregated major American city for the betetr part of a century is going to define its racial dynamics to this day. I guess we're coming down to dueling urban history classes, since mine have typically talked about Chicago as being at the top during the 20th Century.
  2. Turns out I was quite wrong, This is the most segregated city But just as I suspected, Chicago isn't even in the top five. It took me all of 30 key strokes to find this out. Can we put this nonsense to bed now? It's not nonsense. It's a well-established historical and sociological idea. Like I said, look at how many links have Chicago at the top. I never said all studies would have Chicago at the top. If the city has fallen from the top in recent years (even though I know many studies and experts still feel it's up there), hey great...that doesn't erase the better part of a century where it was the most visibly segregated major city in America. The social ramifications of such a situation doesnt just vanish. You're ignoring all the other links for the sake of one (from 2002) that backs up your point. I really don't know why you're acting like this is some insulting revelation. Chicago has never made any effort to hide how segregated it is, and this goes beyond just blacks and whites.
  3. For Cubs starters it probably goes: Dempster, Z, Marshall, Harden, Lilly For the Cardinals it's probably this (for the 3 starters that we know): Wainwright, Wellemeyer, Lohse Tomorrow's probably the best day, although I think it will partially depend on the wind. Lou won't want to put Micah out there on a day where the wind is playing tricks on the ball like it has the last 2 games. Definitely not.
  4. Not even close. Chicago being the most segregated major city in America has been a well-established point for quite some time now. That's BS and big load of it. I'd like to see a link or something. I mean it's just completely ridiculous when until very recently the entire South was completely segregated. You can take your pick of the following cities and see less integration Atlanta Charlotte Montgomery Miami Jacksonville Dallas Houston Memphis Nashville Don't give me the crap that none of the above are "major" cities. Have you ever been to Boston or Philly? In Boston and Philly they had to bus in kids from the burbs to integrate the schools systems. NYC isn't terribly integrated either but I would imagine it's better than Chicago. I've never been to LA but I could imagine that LA is less integrated than Chicago. Just Google search "most segregated city Chicago" and look at how many links have Chicago at the top. I'm surprised that you hadn't heard this before. As QMG just pointed out, it's not like the city planners and government have been subtle or discreet about it. You also keep pointing out Southern cities as if they must automatically be more segregated. Southern and Northern racism/segregation were very different things. Ghettos, "black belts," "Bronzevilles" and sundown towns were very much the product of the North as opposed to the South. The South had Jim Crow, but didn't even come close to the degree of purposeful physical seperation (blacks kept out of or driven out of entire towns and cities and the creation of urban ghettos, the latter which basically did not exist in the South before they showed up in the North, primarily in Chicago, Detroit and New York) of whites and blacks that originated in the North in the wake of the first Great Migration due to WW1. Blacks certainly had their own neighborhoods in the South, but interaction between whites and blacks was an every day thing, socially and due to work. Northern cities after the Great Migration attempted to completely seperate whites and blacks in all walks of life, hence the massive and obvious segregation in Chicago that continues to this day.
  5. I'm hoping today's loss plus Aramis back in the lineup puts the Cubs over the top. I'd like to see Hoff get a RF start before Bradley comes back. Which starting pitcher would be best suited for that?
  6. Gotta PH Aramis for Miles and shift Fontenot back to 2nd.
  7. Not even close. Chicago being the most segregated major city in America has been a well-established point for quite some time now.
  8. Honestly, is anyone really surprised to find race and racism being a sticking point with Chicago sports fans? The sad fact is that Chicago is the most segregated major city in America. That's going to fuel a lot of ignorance.
  9. It would be nice if Micah did something awesome here.
  10. I'm starting to think maybe Harden *was* tipping his pitches. I like Patton, but Harden getting battered around and then a minor-leaguer shutting them down like that? That seems very weird. Yeah, I'm not sure how Harden was tipping, but I'm thinking he must have been. The Rockies were laying off way too many nasty borderline pitches after getting owned by him. Then they get marched over by Patton?
  11. Nice to see 2 very good 2-inning outings by Patton thus far this year.
  12. I understand that Theriot can be a valuable player, but damn, I HATE him batting at the top of the order.
  13. How are they laying off of these pitches?!?
  14. http://www.armscontrolwonk.com/images/300.jpg
  15. Oh God, I want to make love to those pitches.
  16. I don't think the artcles or the players say they were taunted because they were black...just that when they were taunted, many of those attacks came in the forms of racist ones because they were back.
  17. I don't see anything "clearly" about it. It is listed as both April 13 and April 15. Why would he post this note after the Cubs game anyway (7:26 pm)? He says "again", and he references Cubs officials saying 3-5 days, something that was not discussed Monday. So he wrote the article for today, but it was dated for the 13th and posted at the latest as of 3:30 PM yesterday. April 15, 11:00 AM. It doesn't make any sense that he would have posted that on April 13 at 7:26. The most likely explanation is the timestamp is screwed up and it is today. Nah, I think I figured it out. They or he just updated an injury-themed entry by Levine from the 13th to include info about today. Hence the original time stamp and the comment from the 14th.
×
×
  • Create New...