Baseball (1 Viewer)

[flapgreen]

No matter what happens in the playoffs, I have no interest in baseball whatsoever. It's a boring sport. In general, the people with the most money have the better teams(I know there are exceptions). People, as myself, have grown tired of the way baseball runs. Yet, if you ever see the higher ups questioned, they go on about some bs how baseball as popular as ever and nothing else needs to be done. blah blah blah. gl as your sport continues to spiral down in its fanbase

I actually remember growing up and watching Pete Rose play. We didn't live far from the Nati and would go up to the games sometimes. Those were good times but that's just not how it is anymore. If you're a smaller market team, you might as well throw in the towel. You have little chance of competing. Again, I know there are exceptions year to year. I guess this will be moved to the baseball forum. Baseball will have a tough time ever changing the current culture, if not impossible.

 

[Chiwawa]

No matter what happens in the playoffs, I have no interest in baseball whatsoever. It's a boring sport. In general, the people with the most money have the better teams(I know there are exceptions). People, as myself, have grown tired of the way baseball runs. Yet, if you ever see the higher ups questioned, they go on about some bs how baseball as popular as ever and nothing else needs to be done. blah blah blah. gl as your sport continues to spiral down in its fanbaseI actually remember growing up and watching Pete Rose play. We didn't live far from the Nati and would go up to the games sometimes. Those were good times but that's just not how it is anymore. If you're a smaller market team, you might as well throw in the towel. You have little chance of competing. Again, I know there are exceptions year to year. I guess this will be moved to the baseball forum. Baseball will have a tough time ever changing the current culture, if not impossible.

:subscribe:Love the sig.

 

[Gigantomachia]

No matter what happens in the playoffs, I have no interest in baseball whatsoever. It's a boring sport. In general, the people with the most money have the better teams(I know there are exceptions). People, as myself, have grown tired of the way baseball runs. Yet, if you ever see the higher ups questioned, they go on about some bs how baseball as popular as ever and nothing else needs to be done. blah blah blah. gl as your sport continues to spiral down in its fanbaseI actually remember growing up and watching Pete Rose play. We didn't live far from the Nati and would go up to the games sometimes. Those were good times but that's just not how it is anymore. If you're a smaller market team, you might as well throw in the towel. You have little chance of competing. Again, I know there are exceptions year to year. I guess this will be moved to the baseball forum. Baseball will have a tough time ever changing the current culture, if not impossible.

Super weak.Who gives a ####

 

[Spartans Rule]

No matter what happens in the playoffs, I have no interest in baseball whatsoever. It's a boring sport. In general, the people with the most money have the better teams(I know there are exceptions). People, as myself, have grown tired of the way baseball runs. Yet, if you ever see the higher ups questioned, they go on about some bs how baseball as popular as ever and nothing else needs to be done. blah blah blah. gl as your sport continues to spiral down in its fanbaseI actually remember growing up and watching Pete Rose play. We didn't live far from the Nati and would go up to the games sometimes. Those were good times but that's just not how it is anymore. If you're a smaller market team, you might as well throw in the towel. You have little chance of competing. Again, I know there are exceptions year to year. I guess this will be moved to the baseball forum. Baseball will have a tough time ever changing the current culture, if not impossible.

Baseball is as popular as ever and nothing else needs to be done.

 

[flapgreen]

No matter what happens in the playoffs, I have no interest in baseball whatsoever. It's a boring sport. In general, the people with the most money have the better teams(I know there are exceptions). People, as myself, have grown tired of the way baseball runs. Yet, if you ever see the higher ups questioned, they go on about some bs how baseball as popular as ever and nothing else needs to be done. blah blah blah. gl as your sport continues to spiral down in its fanbaseI actually remember growing up and watching Pete Rose play. We didn't live far from the Nati and would go up to the games sometimes. Those were good times but that's just not how it is anymore. If you're a smaller market team, you might as well throw in the towel. You have little chance of competing. Again, I know there are exceptions year to year. I guess this will be moved to the baseball forum. Baseball will have a tough time ever changing the current culture, if not impossible.

Baseball is as popular as ever and nothing else needs to be done.

exactly

 

[None_More_Black]

I could not imaging being a KC Royals fan. Chance of them ever winning the world series at this point is close to zero.

 

[flapgreen]

I could not imaging being a KC Royals fan. Chance of them ever winning the world series at this point is close to zero.

ever. And you can't change teams. Doesn't work that way. Total suckage there

 

[SKribbles]

As a Jays fan, I'm excited for the season until June. Then I remember that they're in the richest division in baseball and I quit watching.

 

[flapgreen]

Unless it's on in the background, I'll change the channel, and I, along with most of us, love ESPN. Just unwatchable.

 

[Das Boot]

Someone should start up a Professional Women's Baseball League.

 

[Limp Ditka]

#### Kenny Perry

 

[curta269]

The Rays making the World Series last year should quiet all the posters in this thread.

 

[Doctor Detroit]

The Rays making the World Series last year should quiet all the posters in this thread.

2002 Angels, 2003 Marlins, and 2007 Rockies all had reasonable if not bargain basement payrolls. Twins and A's have also had a lot of success over the past decade with thrifty team management.This year's Rockies and Giants are in the middle of the payroll ladder, Marlins are at the very bottom and were in the playoff chase until today (10 games over .500), and the Rangers are in the bottom third of payroll and were eliminated today. If it was merely based on payroll the Yankees would win every single year and the Mets would be in the NLCS every year. That doesn't happen, you can win in baseball without throwing tons of money at players. Cardinals, Dodgers, Rockies, Braves, and Twins all have payrolls that are at least half of that of the Yankees. At least three, maybe four of those teams will be in the playoffs this year and two of them would have a good chance to beat the Yankees in the WS.

 

[MAC_32]

Unless it's on in the background, I'll change the channel, and I, along with most of us, love ESPN. Just unwatchable.

I won't speak for anyone else but I know there are others like me that hate ESPN. Unless it's a Tigers game or a solid pitching matchup I can't/won't watch any game on ESPN. Subscribing to mlb.tv was definitely the way to go.

 

[Clifton]

Thanks for coming out today

 

[awesomeness]

As a Jays fan, I'm excited for the season until June. Then I remember that they're in the richest division in baseball and I quit watching.

That's pretty much me to a tee. First month i watch every Jays game. After that it becomes certain, that this is not the year, and from that point to the end of the season i don't watch a game for the rest of the season, but i still keep up with box scores as i enjoy fantasy baseball. The big thing that throws me off is the lack of salary cap. People can point to certain low budget teams having a good season, but thats basically as long as it lasts. If you're really lucky and your team happens to be in a crap division as well as having a shrewd manager, your team has a chance to be above average for an extended period, but those examples are few and far between.Sure money doesn't guarantee you a championship, but it does guarantee that your team will compete. The Yankees and Red Sox have a huge competitive advantage over all other teams, its not really up for debate.

 

[Eephus]

Baseball needs to be more xtreme

 

[Greco]

Baseball needs to be more xtreme

Who are you who is so wise in the ways of science?

 

[flapgreen]

Glad to see this was moved to the baseball forum. Now, everyone can see it. Joke.

 

[Tremendous Upside]

That's cool

I don't like salmon

 

[Hov34]

The Rays making the World Series last year should quiet all the posters in this thread.

2002 Angels, 2003 Marlins, and 2007 Rockies all had reasonable if not bargain basement payrolls. Twins and A's have also had a lot of success over the past decade with thrifty team management.This year's Rockies and Giants are in the middle of the payroll ladder, Marlins are at the very bottom and were in the playoff chase until today (10 games over .500), and the Rangers are in the bottom third of payroll and were eliminated today. If it was merely based on payroll the Yankees would win every single year and the Mets would be in the NLCS every year. That doesn't happen, you can win in baseball without throwing tons of money at players. Cardinals, Dodgers, Rockies, Braves, and Twins all have payrolls that are at least half of that of the Yankees. At least three, maybe four of those teams will be in the playoffs this year and two of them would have a good chance to beat the Yankees in the WS.

Last time the Royals were in the playoffs - Ronald Reagan was president.

 

[Jeremy]

Being a fan of a good small market team is a lot like being a kid in mid-August. You try to enjoy the moment, but in the back of your mind, you know the start school is just around the corner.

Putting that in baseball terms...I'm a Brewers fan and Prince Fielder has quietly had a monster year. In a lot of years he might be in the MVP discussion. But instead of marveling at his greatness and looking forward to having that production for years, the discussion in Brewerland is when do you trade him. Not if you trade him, because it's a given that it has to happen sometime. His numbers compare favorably to Mark Texiera (sp?) and Texiera got something like 25 million a year. The Brewers will not be able to afford that. So do you trade him now when a team will control his rights for 2 more years and his trade value is at its highest? Or do you wait a year and sacrifice some trade value for the sake of having him another year. Or maybe you go into his last year and dump him at the deadline if we're not competitive.

We'll go through the same excercize with Yovanni Gallardo in a couple years.

Contrast that with the Yankees. Not only do they never ever have to worry about their Jeters or Riveras, they're probably going to be the team that takes Fielder from us. If not them, then Boston or Los Angelas.

I'm sorry, but that's a rediculous way to run a league. Even if you're able to continue to cycle players through the farm system, you can never get attached to these guys because they're gone in a few years.

 

[Limp Ditka]

The Rays making the World Series last year should quiet all the posters in this thread.

2002 Angels, 2003 Marlins, and 2007 Rockies all had reasonable if not bargain basement payrolls. Twins and A's have also had a lot of success over the past decade with thrifty team management.This year's Rockies and Giants are in the middle of the payroll ladder, Marlins are at the very bottom and were in the playoff chase until today (10 games over .500), and the Rangers are in the bottom third of payroll and were eliminated today. If it was merely based on payroll the Yankees would win every single year and the Mets would be in the NLCS every year. That doesn't happen, you can win in baseball without throwing tons of money at players. Cardinals, Dodgers, Rockies, Braves, and Twins all have payrolls that are at least half of that of the Yankees. At least three, maybe four of those teams will be in the playoffs this year and two of them would have a good chance to beat the Yankees in the WS.

Last time the Royals were in the playoffs - Ronald Reagan was president.

Last time the Cubs were in the World Series - Harry Truman was president

 

[rodg12]

The Rays making the World Series last year should quiet all the posters in this thread.

2002 Angels, 2003 Marlins, and 2007 Rockies all had reasonable if not bargain basement payrolls. Twins and A's have also had a lot of success over the past decade with thrifty team management.This year's Rockies and Giants are in the middle of the payroll ladder, Marlins are at the very bottom and were in the playoff chase until today (10 games over .500), and the Rangers are in the bottom third of payroll and were eliminated today. If it was merely based on payroll the Yankees would win every single year and the Mets would be in the NLCS every year. That doesn't happen, you can win in baseball without throwing tons of money at players. Cardinals, Dodgers, Rockies, Braves, and Twins all have payrolls that are at least half of that of the Yankees. At least three, maybe four of those teams will be in the playoffs this year and two of them would have a good chance to beat the Yankees in the WS.

Last time the Royals were in the playoffs - Ronald Reagan was president.

True, but that has a lot more to do with their incompetent baseball operations staff than it does with their payroll.

 

[Wrigley]

The Rays making the World Series last year should quiet all the posters in this thread.

2002 Angels, 2003 Marlins, and 2007 Rockies all had reasonable if not bargain basement payrolls. Twins and A's have also had a lot of success over the past decade with thrifty team management.This year's Rockies and Giants are in the middle of the payroll ladder, Marlins are at the very bottom and were in the playoff chase until today (10 games over .500), and the Rangers are in the bottom third of payroll and were eliminated today. If it was merely based on payroll the Yankees would win every single year and the Mets would be in the NLCS every year. That doesn't happen, you can win in baseball without throwing tons of money at players. Cardinals, Dodgers, Rockies, Braves, and Twins all have payrolls that are at least half of that of the Yankees. At least three, maybe four of those teams will be in the playoffs this year and two of them would have a good chance to beat the Yankees in the WS.

Last time the Royals were in the playoffs - Ronald Reagan was president.

Last time the Cubs were in the World Series - Harry Truman was president

You never let me downI always equate baseball to fantasy sports.You show up at your draft with $100 to spend on your team, but find out that the guy over in the corner(who no one likes) gets to spend $250 on his.Which team do you think ends up winning more often?

 

[Hov34]

Being a fan of a good small market team is a lot like being a kid in mid-August. You try to enjoy the moment, but in the back of your mind, you know the start school is just around the corner.

Putting that in baseball terms...I'm a Brewers fan and Prince Fielder has quietly had a monster year. In a lot of years he might be in the MVP discussion. But instead of marveling at his greatness and looking forward to having that production for years, the discussion in Brewerland is when do you trade him. Not if you trade him, because it's a given that it has to happen sometime. His numbers compare favorably to Mark Texiera (sp?) and Texiera got something like 25 million a year. The Brewers will not be able to afford that. So do you trade him now when a team will control his rights for 2 more years and his trade value is at its highest? Or do you wait a year and sacrifice some trade value for the sake of having him another year. Or maybe you go into his last year and dump him at the deadline if we're not competitive.

We'll go through the same excercize with Yovanni Gallardo in a couple years.

Contrast that with the Yankees. Not only do they never ever have to worry about their Jeters or Riveras, they're probably going to be the team that takes Fielder from us. If not them, then Boston or Los Angelas.

I'm sorry, but that's a rediculous way to run a league. Even if you're able to continue to cycle players through the farm system, you can never get attached to these guys because they're gone in a few years.

 

[Eephus]

The Rays making the World Series last year should quiet all the posters in this thread.

2002 Angels, 2003 Marlins, and 2007 Rockies all had reasonable if not bargain basement payrolls. Twins and A's have also had a lot of success over the past decade with thrifty team management.This year's Rockies and Giants are in the middle of the payroll ladder, Marlins are at the very bottom and were in the playoff chase until today (10 games over .500), and the Rangers are in the bottom third of payroll and were eliminated today. If it was merely based on payroll the Yankees would win every single year and the Mets would be in the NLCS every year. That doesn't happen, you can win in baseball without throwing tons of money at players. Cardinals, Dodgers, Rockies, Braves, and Twins all have payrolls that are at least half of that of the Yankees. At least three, maybe four of those teams will be in the playoffs this year and two of them would have a good chance to beat the Yankees in the WS.

Last time the Royals were in the playoffs - Ronald Reagan was president.

True, but that has a lot more to do with their incompetent baseball operations staff than it does with their payroll.

Well, the powerhouse AL Central has a lot to do with it too. It's at least as big a factor as the Clinton administration was.

 

[igbomb]

The Rays making the World Series last year should quiet all the posters in this thread.

2002 Angels, 2003 Marlins, and 2007 Rockies all had reasonable if not bargain basement payrolls. Twins and A's have also had a lot of success over the past decade with thrifty team management.This year's Rockies and Giants are in the middle of the payroll ladder, Marlins are at the very bottom and were in the playoff chase until today (10 games over .500), and the Rangers are in the bottom third of payroll and were eliminated today. If it was merely based on payroll the Yankees would win every single year and the Mets would be in the NLCS every year. That doesn't happen, you can win in baseball without throwing tons of money at players. Cardinals, Dodgers, Rockies, Braves, and Twins all have payrolls that are at least half of that of the Yankees. At least three, maybe four of those teams will be in the playoffs this year and two of them would have a good chance to beat the Yankees in the WS.

Last time the Royals were in the playoffs - Ronald Reagan was president.

Last time the Cubs were in the World Series - Harry Truman was president

You never let me downI always equate baseball to fantasy sports.You show up at your draft with $100 to spend on your team, but find out that the guy over in the corner(who no one likes) gets to spend $250 on his.Which team do you think ends up winning more often?

I'm a big fan of implementing a salary cap, but nonetheless there is a big hole in your argument. The only way they would be comparable is if you also had an annual draft with the ability to keep your picks for seven years.While teams like the Yankees do have a decided advantage, teams like the Royals and Pirates don't have as much of an excuse as they claim since teams like the Rays and Marlins are fielding competitive teams. I think that applies especially to the Royals since they are in a division that is year-in and year-out very winnable.Some recent analysis on fangraphs shows that about half of all of the top players in baseball are with the team that drafted them. People discount this too easily.

 

[Limp Ditka]

You never let me down

http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseb...686261.htmlpage

 

[Please See Mine]

Last time the Royals were in the playoffs - Ronald Reagan was president.

Last time the Cubs were in the World Series - Harry Truman was president

You never let me downI always equate baseball to fantasy sports.You show up at your draft with $100 to spend on your team, but find out that the guy over in the corner(who no one likes) gets to spend $250 on his.Which team do you think ends up winning more often?

I'm a big fan of implementing a salary cap, but nonetheless there is a big hole in your argument. The only way they would be comparable is if you also had an annual draft with the ability to keep your picks for seven years.While teams like the Yankees do have a decided advantage, teams like the Royals and Pirates don't have as much of an excuse as they claim since teams like the Rays and Marlins are fielding competitive teams. I think that applies especially to the Royals since they are in a division that is year-in and year-out very winnable.Some recent analysis on fangraphs shows that about half of all of the top players in baseball are with the team that drafted them. People discount this too easily.

Though I think that expanding the draft to include Latin American players would help level the playing field in this regard as well.

 

[Spartans Rule]

The Rays making the World Series last year should quiet all the posters in this thread.

2002 Angels, 2003 Marlins, and 2007 Rockies all had reasonable if not bargain basement payrolls. Twins and A's have also had a lot of success over the past decade with thrifty team management.This year's Rockies and Giants are in the middle of the payroll ladder, Marlins are at the very bottom and were in the playoff chase until today (10 games over .500), and the Rangers are in the bottom third of payroll and were eliminated today. If it was merely based on payroll the Yankees would win every single year and the Mets would be in the NLCS every year. That doesn't happen, you can win in baseball without throwing tons of money at players. Cardinals, Dodgers, Rockies, Braves, and Twins all have payrolls that are at least half of that of the Yankees. At least three, maybe four of those teams will be in the playoffs this year and two of them would have a good chance to beat the Yankees in the WS.

Over the last 9 years, 14 different teams have played in the World Series and 8 different teams have won it. 28 of the 30 teams in baseball have had winning seasons.Plenty of parity in Major League Baseball. Plenty of opportunity for small market teams to compete.

 

[Jeremy]

I heard some guys talking on the radio today. Reportedly the Twins have offer Joe Mauer 7 years for $120 million. 2 teams with aging catchers are said to be offering more. I would give you 3 guesses as to who those teams are, but I don't think you need more than one.

The best thing the MLB ever did was expand the playoffs from 4 teams to 8 teams. With more opportunities there's usually a small market success story in there somewhere. So at least they've got that going for them. That doesn't mean it's an even playing field.

 

[Mr. Know-It-All]

Maybe if you guys would take your Ritalin, you'd be a little more focused and able to enjoy the nuances of America's National Pastime. You dang kids and your brains rotted out by video games.

 

[igbomb]

I heard some guys talking on the radio today. Reportedly the Twins have offer Joe Mauer 7 years for $120 million. 2 teams with aging catchers are said to be offering more. I would give you 3 guesses as to who those teams are, but I don't think you need more than one. The best thing the MLB ever did was expand the playoffs from 4 teams to 8 teams. With more opportunities there's usually a small market success story in there somewhere. So at least they've got that going for them. That doesn't mean it's an even playing field.

Nobody else is offering Mauer anything. No team is allowed to even talk with him until he is a free agent AFTER the 2010 season. Anything you are hearing is either pure speculation or agent posturing.

 

[Eephus]

I heard some guys talking on the radio today. Reportedly the Twins have offer Joe Mauer 7 years for $120 million. 2 teams with aging catchers are said to be offering more. I would give you 3 guesses as to who those teams are, but I don't think you need more than one. The best thing the MLB ever did was expand the playoffs from 4 teams to 8 teams. With more opportunities there's usually a small market success story in there somewhere. So at least they've got that going for them. That doesn't mean it's an even playing field.

Nobody else is offering Mauer anything. No team is allowed to even talk with him until he is a free agent AFTER the 2010 season. Anything you are hearing is either pure speculation or agent posturing.

But it was on the radio While the one way street to big market teams is a baseball-only (or baseball-mostly) problem, increased player mobility is just a fact of modern life that happens in all sports nowadays. It shouldn't affect your enjoyment of sitting in the bleachers on a summer day.

 

[Hov34]

I heard some guys talking on the radio today. Reportedly the Twins have offer Joe Mauer 7 years for $120 million. 2 teams with aging catchers are said to be offering more. I would give you 3 guesses as to who those teams are, but I don't think you need more than one. The best thing the MLB ever did was expand the playoffs from 4 teams to 8 teams. With more opportunities there's usually a small market success story in there somewhere. So at least they've got that going for them. That doesn't mean it's an even playing field.

Nobody else is offering Mauer anything. No team is allowed to even talk with him until he is a free agent AFTER the 2010 season. Anything you are hearing is either pure speculation or agent posturing.

But it was on the radio While the one way street to big market teams is a baseball-only (or baseball-mostly) problem, increased player mobility is just a fact of modern life that happens in all sports nowadays. It shouldn't affect your enjoyment of sitting in the bleachers on a summer day.

I don't think anyone is saying that the "game" of Baseball the problem. I think it's MLB's version of it that has gotten stale.

 

[Eephus]

I heard some guys talking on the radio today. Reportedly the Twins have offer Joe Mauer 7 years for $120 million. 2 teams with aging catchers are said to be offering more. I would give you 3 guesses as to who those teams are, but I don't think you need more than one. The best thing the MLB ever did was expand the playoffs from 4 teams to 8 teams. With more opportunities there's usually a small market success story in there somewhere. So at least they've got that going for them. That doesn't mean it's an even playing field.

Nobody else is offering Mauer anything. No team is allowed to even talk with him until he is a free agent AFTER the 2010 season. Anything you are hearing is either pure speculation or agent posturing.

But it was on the radio While the one way street to big market teams is a baseball-only (or baseball-mostly) problem, increased player mobility is just a fact of modern life that happens in all sports nowadays. It shouldn't affect your enjoyment of sitting in the bleachers on a summer day.

I don't think anyone is saying that the "game" of Baseball the problem. I think it's MLB's version of it that has gotten stale.

Baseball has always been a business to those directly involved but I still try to treat the on-field stuff as a game. The balance of power is arguably fairer than it was in the 50s when the Yankees won the pennant every year and treated the A's as a farm team. Teams like the Pirates, White Sox and Browns had extended runs of hopelessness dating back to the turn of the century. There have been cheats, jerks, racists and greed in the game since Abner Doubleday.If you don't like baseball, that's fine. You can rationalize it however you want, but if it's meaningless to you, don't watch it. I don't like golf but that's about me, not the PGA. Maybe flapgreen is just more mature than the rest of us. Baseball is meaningless. It really doesn't matter in the grand scheme of things if the Rockies make the playoffs or if Alex Rios turns it around. But that's because it's just a game, not because you don't like the direction the business has taken.

 

[Doctor Detroit]

Eephus dropping some knowledge in here.

 

[Eephus]

Eephus dropping some knowledge in here.

I'm in full crotchety old man mode over this thread. It's October. If you like the game but not the business of baseball, now's the time where the business becomes secondary to what happens on the field. The payroll of the Yankees helps them more over the course of the long season than during a single playoff game. The playing field is as level as it can be during a short series. John Henry and Scott Boras become observers just like us (but with better seats). I like the good old days as much as the next guy but we've got the game we've got. If you don't like baseball, you can go enjoy the parity that is college football.

 

[Spartans Rule]

Baseball has always been a business to those directly involved but I still try to treat the on-field stuff as a game.

I don't care if the players are distributed on to teams using the current system, a salary cap system, a European soccer-style transfer system, or by pulling names out of a hat. At some point, they are where they are and you either appreciate what's happening on the field or you don't.

 

[Hov34]

I heard some guys talking on the radio today. Reportedly the Twins have offer Joe Mauer 7 years for $120 million. 2 teams with aging catchers are said to be offering more. I would give you 3 guesses as to who those teams are, but I don't think you need more than one.

The best thing the MLB ever did was expand the playoffs from 4 teams to 8 teams. With more opportunities there's usually a small market success story in there somewhere. So at least they've got that going for them. That doesn't mean it's an even playing field.

Nobody else is offering Mauer anything. No team is allowed to even talk with him until he is a free agent AFTER the 2010 season. Anything you are hearing is either pure speculation or agent posturing.

But it was on the radio While the one way street to big market teams is a baseball-only (or baseball-mostly) problem, increased player mobility is just a fact of modern life that happens in all sports nowadays. It shouldn't affect your enjoyment of sitting in the bleachers on a summer day.

I don't think anyone is saying that the "game" of Baseball the problem. I think it's MLB's version of it that has gotten stale.

Baseball has always been a business to those directly involved but I still try to treat the on-field stuff as a game. The balance of power is arguably fairer than it was in the 50s when the Yankees won the pennant every year and treated the A's as a farm team. Teams like the Pirates, White Sox and Browns had extended runs of hopelessness dating back to the turn of the century. There have been cheats, jerks, racists and greed in the game since Abner Doubleday.If you don't like baseball, that's fine. You can rationalize it however you want, but if it's meaningless to you, don't watch it. I don't like golf but that's about me, not the PGA. Maybe flapgreen is just more mature than the rest of us. Baseball is meaningless. It really doesn't matter in the grand scheme of things if the Rockies make the playoffs or if Alex Rios turns it around. But that's because it's just a game, not because you don't like the direction the business has taken.

But don't you see, it really hasn't changed. The Yankees, and Sox still have the "balance of power". They don't have to alter their pitching staff and put up their best pitcher in game 162 like the tigers (and Twins, even though their best pitcher is a Yankee cast off) They cruise to the playoffs almost every year. And yes, you have a "surprise" team like the Twins or Rays or A's that make the playoffs every so often because of good management, but then the time the players that get them there become free agents those teams can't sign them (Santana). It's become tiresome and you know what? I don't watch. I still go to minor league games and enjoy "the game", but can't get excited about MLB. Why can't they do something like the NFL? Why?

Ps. sorry if this was a rambling mess, I'm pretty drunk right now.