Soul

I'm gonna go ahead and guess that audio won't be showing up on http://www.cincinnatireds.com

I know I'm playing semantics, but it isn't racist. It's stereotypical and insensitive, but it doesn't espouse the idea that races have different abilities and some races are more valuable than others. xenophobic, maybe? After seeing it for myself, certainly idiotic.

That's the first time I'd actually seen the image. What a joke. Either someone's a flat out racist, or they have a really, really bad sense of humor. What bothers me most is that most people won't care that it isn't everyone -- to them we all just became trailer trash.

The posting of this new Brennaman tirade needs to be top priorty, clearly. I can't find it on google.

I'd say it's pretty close with catchers. Of course it probably won't happen anytime soon but I could see a time when they added a 2nd DH so that Catchers didn't have to hit. Actually that would be a lot more interesting than 1 DH for the pitcher if you allowed the team to choose which position didn't have to hit that day. Mike Piazza and Jason Kendall say hello. Catcher is a highly defensively prioritized position, sure, but when will we ever see the Mike Piazza of pitchers? A guy who is kept at pitcher because he can be barely functional at the position while providing a big plus bat? There have been pitchers who put up some pretty good numbers. Look at Gibson's year in 1970, Don Drysdale in '65, Newcombe in '59, '58, '55 (114, 122, 165 OPS+ respectively). I agree it's not going to be like a Piazza, especially since there aren't enough ABs, but the point is valid IMO. Nearly every catcher is offensively weak. The few exceptions don't uproot the general rule, just as the few pitcher exceptions don't. Catcher would be a very logical extension of the DH, and something could easily be seen as viable down the line if the whole league went to a DH format.

I know I'm playing semantics, but it isn't racist. It's stereotypical and insensitive, but it doesn't espouse the idea that races have different abilities and some races are more valuable than others. I see your point, but if the only way to defend something is by saying "it's not technically racist," it's not a battle worth fighting. The shirt sucks. To get into a semantical argument over whether or not it's racist isn't really the point. Well I was trying to figure out whether the person who designed it was just stupid, or if he/she was really trying to attack the race. Intent means something to me when trying to determine that. I totally agree the end result is crappy either way. Worse -- a guy like Brennaman can point to this and go "see? Cub fans really are the worst." I don't like being painted with a broad brush, even by a jerk like Marty.

LMAO. I'm always out and doing work/errands when the Cubs explode on offense. Tomorrow I'm home. You can bet your bottom dollar we won't score much. SUCKS!

Maybe so, but the guy was selling Cub merchandise without the organization permission, not to mention alot of fans found it offensive. I mean the vendor said it was his highest selling shirt, which means there are alot of people who didn't find it offensive. But there were prolly as many, or more people who found it offensive, thus they call the Cubs org, and the org decide to confront the vendor, and forced him to stop selling the shirt. I don't found it offensive, a lack of taste, sure, but offensive no. Would I buy it? No. I haven't seen the shirt, but it sounds more like a really bad attempt at making money off being cute/funny than actual racism. Are we talking about the "horry cow" t-shirt? I heard there was one that had Harry Carey with slanted eyes. That is the Horry Cow shirt. And it was offensive, at least to me. It was basically the equivalent to having a big-lipped, Bright white eyed, watermelon eating Sambo on, say, a Derrek Lee shirt. I was amazed that people actually bought it. OK. But do you think the intention of the person who created them was to disparage the race, or was it just a really stupid, bad attempt at humor without thinking of the consequences? Like I said, I didn't even see the shirt or the vendors selling them. I'll be glad if they never see the light of day again.

Maybe so, but the guy was selling Cub merchandise without the organization permission, not to mention alot of fans found it offensive. I mean the vendor said it was his highest selling shirt, which means there are alot of people who didn't find it offensive. But there were prolly as many, or more people who found it offensive, thus they call the Cubs org, and the org decide to confront the vendor, and forced him to stop selling the shirt. I don't found it offensive, a lack of taste, sure, but offensive no. Would I buy it? No. I haven't seen the shirt, but it sounds more like a really bad attempt at making money off being cute/funny than actual racism. Are we talking about the "horry cow" t-shirt? I heard there was one that had Harry Carey with slanted eyes.

Maybe so, but the guy was selling Cub merchandise without the organization permission, not to mention alot of fans found it offensive. I mean the vendor said it was his highest selling shirt, which means there are alot of people who didn't find it offensive. But there were prolly as many, or more people who found it offensive, thus they call the Cubs org, and the org decide to confront the vendor, and forced him to stop selling the shirt. I don't found it offensive, a lack of taste, sure, but offensive no. Would I buy it? No. I haven't seen the shirt, but it sounds more like a really bad attempt at making money off being cute/funny than actual racism.

You're wrong, and most of your posts are awful. It's a shame you're here. It's difficult to imagine anyone thinking Marty was "right on" after he boldly proclaimed the Cubs wouldn't win the division because "they are the Cubs".........and of course we are reigning division champs. Oops. :blush:

On the other hand, Cubs are 4-0 against the Pirates and 6-6 against everyone else. Nothing wrong with that! And, to be fair, we've gone (by series): 1-2 vs. Brewers 2-1 vs. Astros 3-0 vs. Pirates 1-2 vs. Phillies 2-1 vs. Reds 1-0 vs. Pirates That is pretty decent. The Phillies and the Brewers are both good teams and will be in playoff contention; the Reds aren't bad and are expected to be quite good -- maybe even contend. Think of it another way and we are 6-1 vs. the lesser teams and 4-5 vs. the better teams. That's how you make the playoffs... play .500 against the good teams and dominate the bad teams. Exactly. The past few years we've seemed to struggle against the Reds and Pirates, it's good to start whipping them right off the bat. That seems to be a good sign. Z's strong start is another. Let's see where it leads.

I'm glad we're all finally on the same page, here. Cute. I suppose I did leave myself wide open for that.

It's interesting that every time someone who loves the DH tries to explain why NL baseball sucks, they have to resort to belittling the decision-making process and the strategy that goes along with it by coming up with some hyperbolic scenario and then making a wise crack about it. I find these late-inning decisions in the NL to be fun, and interesting to watch. And yes -- SHOCK -- I enjoy debating about them afterwards. I guess the millions of fans who enjoy this are just a bunch of idiots though, right?

The funny thing to me is that he talks about how the Cubs won't win the division because they always seem to find a way to screw it up. That is so true......wait.....what? They are the defending NL Central champs? How did this happen without the rest of the world knowing? Wait, the rest of the world does know? :shock: So I guess Marty and I are the idiots here? As for the actions of a few idiots. There are bound to be a few idiots in a crowd of 40,000+, but I guess Marty and Reds fans wouldn't know anything about large crowds, would they? What a joke. Exactly. As if Reds fans would be any different if they could consistenty draw a full house.

Yeah, I see a lot of Cubs fans that are tools. But like i said, the vast majority don't fall into that category. The perception arises from the few that congregate in the bleachers closest to the field, and that many fans of less popular teams that have had more success can't stand that the Cubs have a fan base that puts theirs to shame (size wise). It's akin to the red headed stepchild syndrome Sox fans have. I can empathize with it, but it's still transparent BS. As for the most obnoxious, I can name a few teams with more obnoxious fans, but not a lot. Probably. At least there are enough Cub fans to form an actual rowdy crowd though. In the case of some of these teams, "nice fans" = nobody coming to games.

THEN SHOW UP TO VOLUNTARY WORKOUTS AND PROVE THAT YOU ARE HEALTHY YOU IDIOT. I'd rather he not. Not exactly a surprise that it was contract talk posturing and RotoWorld guessing about stuff. I was going to say....rotoworld should probably start checking their sources better.

The chess match aspect that doesn't actually exist anywhere but in people's imaginations? Ah yes, that double switch, that's like watching Deep Blue vs. Kasparov, I'm just stunned at the amount of strategy going on there. So it's in my imagination but you just came up with an example yourself? How does that work? I get that you don't care about it. I do.

That's a relief.

This is starting to irk me, as well. It's likely just posturing, but Jesus. I'm not in the mood to countenance any of these guys after an extremely lackluster, 7-9, non-playoff season. They just weren't all that great. More money? How about a better performance first?

It isn't that, it is the fact we like the chess match of the NL, where overall talent is important and the manager plays a hand in the games outcome, compared to the the AL that demands barely anything out of the manager and reduces one player to knowing only one skill. Most "chess match" decisions in baseball are 51/49 type decisions. There are very few, if any, game-changing decisions based on matchups. I haven't run the stats but I don't really care. I enjoy the "chess match" aspect, especially in the later innings, and I find AL baseball to be less enjoyable because it has less of it. And I'm too old to change ;)

It will only get worse if they call his bluff and he actually sits out of these practices. Chad's crazy enough to sit out and not get paid in order to get what he wants. That said, sadly acquiring Chad Johnson is not a Bears-type move. It would seem to be out of character for Angelo, agreed.

It's hard to let go but at some point we should think about getting something for Murton if he's never going to get an opportunity here.

What if it took Hester, for example?

Actually yeah, it was. GJ ralph