Newgrounds.com — Everything, By Everyone.

33 degrees in Colorado right now. Talk about fucking cold; it's only about 40 here, must suck to play ball in Denver.

Hopin' Happ can keep it together despite the weather and the line drive to the knee recently.

At 10/11/09 10:59 PM, Buddhist wrote: Hopin' Happ can keep it together despite the weather and the line drive to the knee recently.

Well he wasn't exactly himself, but the Phils manage to squeak out an ugly win there and take a 2-1 series lead with Cliff Lee due to start game 4. Had the Phils not won this game, I would've been extremely disappointed in their effort. I mean Colorado pitching was handing out walks like they were going out of style, Hammel issued 3 in 1 inning, which proved vital as it lead to 3 Phils runs (which they should've gotten more - blame Pedro Feliz there for being antsy) and they won by a score of 6-5.

Also, WTF Brad Lidge recorded a save? Astounding! Then again, it was another one of his "get your Tums out" variety.

So let me shift gears here and talk a bit about the time on my clock. As of right now it's after 3 AM EST, and the Phils game ended after 2 AM in regulation 9 innings. That's bullshit. In my opinion MLB and their Television partners really shit the bed so far this postseason in terms of scheduling. Feel free to agree/disagree in this discussion, I'd like to hear your thoughts on this.

First off they had the defending WS winners playing the opening game at home which would've been perfect if it weren't scheduled for 2:30 EST in the afternoon, as well as the following game 2 the next day. I mean I know Coop is a baseball fan, but how many other Europeans really appreciated this early start time accommodation? Philly fans didn't care for it as it was smack dab in the middle of work/school. And what about Rockies fans? They've got to be tuned in for an 11:30 AM game their time. I mean I know Colorado @ Philly isn't exactly their best ratings getter for this years playoffs when you've got teams in the Yankees, Sox, Dodgers, Angels, and Cardinals playing, and they don't want to play one game at the exact time as another, but come on.

Next, the Yankees/Twins series. Granted, everyone was picking the Yankees to win this series pretty handily, but don't expect any common courtesy or decency from the MLB for the Twins and their fans. I mean first they have to play a tie-breaker that had to be pushed back a day because of the madness of Packers @ Vikings and Brett Favre-dom. Then not 24 hours after winning said tie-breaker they had to be in New York playing again, most likely with some of their champagne shower still in their hair. MLB knew this was a possibility and did nothing. I know people make plans and whatnot with their tickets, but MLB knew this days, if not weeks in advance and could've made a slight adjustment. Also, one could argue that the rule where the overall home-field advantage team gets to choose whether or not to have an off day between games favored the Yankees even more. Sure, that's their right for winning home-field, but is in my opinion a bad idea of a perk.

And now we come back to the Phils @ Rockies game 3. Now I know meteorology isn't perfect, as you're, you know, predicting the future, but I'm sure they knew for probably a few days that Denver was going to have a cold snap at around the time that they were due to play. And they scheduled it for an 8:00 PM local start too. Does MLB know it gets colder when the sun goes down? Really though, this is just more of the same bullshit where they don't want to change times and compete with their other series with more marquee teams, or get crushed in the ratings by College Football.

So they canceled it and waited to start it Sunday, as it was a few degrees warmer and just above freezing, so you know, it's was like an Indian summer! Also, they kept the start time the same, which I don't know why, they weren't going to beat the Sunday night football game in ratings. And the fact that it was 10:00 local for me, well what a joke. On Saturday that might've been okay, but I guess MLB doesn't realize Monday comes after Sunday either.

Oh man, I had trouble actually finding this game on television, too. MLB and their TV deals shit the bed once again. So I check the TBS network, which was airing most, if not all Division Series match-ups at the time in which the game is scheduled to start. Not there. They decided that me being in the Philly area would rather watch the Yankees finish off the Twins than switch over feeds to the Philly/Rockies broadcast. So I check ESPN, which usually has Sunday night Baseball during the regular season, but since it's football season now, nah. I check Comcast Sportsnet, which airs most of the regular season games and a local affiliate that airs Sunday afternoon games, zilch and nada. So here I am wondering where in gods name this game is being broadcasted for my area and my buddy finally texts me and tells me its on the TNT network. Yeah, TNT, the network that "knows drama" and doesn't really showcase any sports other than the NBA. So, well done MLB and your TV deal guys, you got me there!

At least the Phils won and they play at a decent time tomorrow for game 4. Then again that's probably only because every other series right now ended in a sweep by one team over their respective opponents. I mean I'd be REALLY angry had they lost. I mean heck, I even used a thread mood angriefaic emoticon, and I never do that.

Anywho, like those dumb Coors light commercials and the fools that drink that swill, I too have vented. </endrant>

Thoughts?

Right, Yanks won - 3 down, 8 to go. No question that the Angels will present more of a test to us.

At 10/12/09 03:14 AM, phileeguy wrote: Also, WTF Brad Lidge recorded a save? Astounding! Then again, it was another one of his "get your Tums out" variety.

Baby steps, philee ;)

So let me shift gears here and talk a bit about the time on my clock. As of right now it's after 3 AM EST, and the Phils game ended after 2 AM in regulation 9 innings. That's bullshit. In my opinion MLB and their Television partners really shit the bed so far this postseason in terms of scheduling. Feel free to agree/disagree in this discussion, I'd like to hear your thoughts on this.

2AM for a finish. Pfft, I've woken up at 5.30am and tuned in to catch the last couple of innings of the Yanks and Mariners before :P

First off they had the defending WS winners playing the opening game at home which would've been perfect if it weren't scheduled for 2:30 EST in the afternoon, as well as the following game 2 the next day. I mean I know Coop is a baseball fan, but how many other Europeans really appreciated this early start time accommodation? Philly fans didn't care for it as it was smack dab in the middle of work/school. And what about Rockies fans? They've got to be tuned in for an 11:30 AM game their time. I mean I know Colorado @ Philly isn't exactly their best ratings getter for this years playoffs when you've got teams in the Yankees, Sox, Dodgers, Angels, and Cardinals playing, and they don't want to play one game at the exact time as another, but come on.

There's a pretty big following for Baseball in the UK - we'd appreciate a little earlier start time, but assuming that all goes well, I'll book the World Series off work, so I can get away with it that way.

If you're talking 3am EST, you're talking 8am UK time for me finally finishing watching the game... I might be able to catch some sleep before the game, so that would suit.

Sure, that's their right for winning home-field, but is in my opinion a bad idea of a perk.

I see where you're coming from with this, but it's not the Yankee's fault. I'm sure that they picked that particular series because they wanted CC fresh for games 1 and 4 if possible. Rest days during the series would have been good for all involved.

And now we come back to the Phils @ Rockies game 3. Now I know meteorology isn't perfect, as you're, you know, predicting the future, but I'm sure they knew for probably a few days that Denver was going to have a cold snap at around the time that they were due to play. And they scheduled it for an 8:00 PM local start too. Does MLB know it gets colder when the sun goes down?

So they made a mistake. You know what I think would help matters? Getting rid of that Twat at the controls, Alan H. 'Bud' Selig. This bumbling idiot makes a mockery of the game with whatever he tries to do. Also, he makes London Mayor, Boris Johnson look like a normal human being.

At 10/12/09 03:14 AM, phileeguy wrote: So let me shift gears here and talk a bit about the time on my clock. As of right now it's after 3 AM EST, and the Phils game ended after 2 AM in regulation 9 innings. That's bullshit. In my opinion MLB and their Television partners really shit the bed so far this postseason in terms of scheduling. Feel free to agree/disagree in this discussion, I'd like to hear your thoughts on this.

I do agree it is a bit of bullshit. I was watching it for a while, but since I had this glorious thing called "work" in the morning, I had to go to bed before it finished. I agree with you that their times are just a bit crazy. There was a huge window of opportunity for them to squeeze the game in between the Angels-Red Sox game and the Yankees-Twins game. Why not seize it?

Next, the Yankees/Twins series. Granted, everyone was picking the Yankees to win this series pretty handily, but don't expect any common courtesy or decency from the MLB for the Twins and their fans.

That much I do agree with. The Yankees were quite rested coming into the ALDS, and the Twins weren't. You heard swears up and down from Twins players that they were ready to go and happy to play, but they sure as hell didn't play like it. It does kinda show, too, since Game 1 was a joke, while Game 2 was a close match. I'm the first guy rooting for a Yankees win, but I don't like the idea that they win due to extraneous circumstances. At least make it a fair fight.

Does MLB know it gets colder when the sun goes down?

This made me laugh. All I know is it was painful to see the players out there in that weather...I can't imagine what it's like to play in temperatures like that.

And the fact that it was 10:00 local for me, well what a joke. On Saturday that might've been okay, but I guess MLB doesn't realize Monday comes after Sunday either.

At least we probably won't need to deal with these stupid start times for the rest of the season. Since there is little overlap of the ALCS and NLCS games, they might get it right for a change.

So, well done MLB and your TV deal guys, you got me there!

Well, to be fair, at the start time of the game on TBS, they cut out temporarily to inform everyone that it was going to be on TNT. Granted, it would've been smart to say something like "Watch on TNT" right next to the Philles-Rockies score they kept nestled at the bottom of the screen, but one can't ask for perfection I guess.

At 10/12/09 08:24 AM, Coop83 wrote: Right, Yanks won - 3 down, 8 to go. No question that the Angels will present more of a test to us.

Well, we'll have to wait to see...go Yanks!

2AM for a finish. Pfft, I've woken up at 5.30am and tuned in to catch the last couple of innings of the Yanks and Mariners before :P

Damn, now that's dedication.

There's a pretty big following for Baseball in the UK - we'd appreciate a little earlier start time, but assuming that all goes well, I'll book the World Series off work, so I can get away with it that way.

I honestly wouldn't have guessed. Most people I speak to from the UK scarcely know about baseball, never mind watch it. But if the following is as large as you say it is, then that makes sense for those earlier times. It only makes sense.

I see where you're coming from with this, but it's not the Yankee's fault. I'm sure that they picked that particular series because they wanted CC fresh for games 1 and 4 if possible. Rest days during the series would have been good for all involved.

Agreed. You can't blame the team for taking advantage of the rule, despite how stupid it might be. The Twins were definitely hurt by the short rest period, and I think it's all due to the MLB timing of the games. Either way, I think it only affected Game 1, but the Twins were swept regardless.

I would like to add, though, that despite all the crap, this postseason has been great to watch so far. Despite having a few one-sided games and quirks, there has been some damn good baseball to watch. So, I can't say I'm really upset.

I just want to say that if any of my teams actually managed to make it to the post-season I would stay up until - whatever it took in the morning to watch the game. That being said, I do agree that the scheduling has seemed pretty retarded. The games have been unnecessarily erratic in their start times: lets randomly throw in an afternoon game here, a 6:30 start there - like they're just making it up as they go along.

I also don't agree with the notion they should make start times cater to the the television audience, be they foreign or domestic. I understand that the TV rights and all that are a big business opportunity, but the first priority should be to the ticket holders/ fans in the city where the game is being played. I mean say you managed to score tickets to that one afternoon game, why should you have to miss work/school or whatever to make a 1 o'clock start just so that some assholes can watch the next game at a more convenient time for them, once the game your team is involved in is over and 'out of the way.'

If you're a devoted enough fan though, you'll watch the game almost no matter what (certain circumstances/situations excluded) and if you're not, well then there is always highlights or tape delay, it's not the end of the world. For instance, I can vaguely recall waking up at ungodly times in the morning to watch the World Junior Hockey Championships and certain Olympic events when they were being played overseas.

At 10/12/09 08:24 AM, Coop83 wrote: So they made a mistake. You know what I think would help matters? Getting rid of that Twat at the controls, Alan H. 'Bud' Selig. This bumbling idiot makes a mockery of the game with whatever he tries to do. Also, he makes London Mayor, Boris Johnson look like a normal human being.

Indeed.

I've agreed with just 1 thing that Selig has done in his tenure, and that's the Wild card, and I think he just sorta went along with that out of necessity. I mean there was what, 28 teams in the league and only 4 going to the playoffs before it was instituted?

Everything else has been pretty much a farce. Inter-league play was nice in the beginning, but now I think everyone has agreed it's novelty phase is over and it needs to be at least trimmed down. The idea of having home-field to the team in the league which wins the All-Star game is absurd. Hey Bud, you instituted inter-league play, how about use that as a measuring stick of which league is better and more deserving of home-field advantage over a glorified, fan-influenced exhibition game? Or you could always you know, use the team with the better record! Hell, the previous rule of alternating between NL/AL each year made more sense. His actions (or lack thereof in the '90s, early 2000) in regards to PEDs was underwhelming, and the fact that Congress had to get involved shows that Selig has lost it.

Selig is a joke, and if he's not careful he's going to sink below Gary Bettman of the NHL in terms of bad commissioners. Actually, since the rule changes in the NHL, the fact that it's a niche sport in the U.S. nowadays and doesn't get as much publicity (good or bad), and is now rebuilding a more exciting game to watch after the lockout, Bettman could arguably be doing a better job than Selig. I frankly am wishing that whoever takes over for Alan immediately makes the All-Star game a pure exhibition again and re-instates Rose just to spite him.

At 10/12/09 01:10 PM, EternitySpent wrote: I also don't agree with the notion they should make start times cater to the the television audience, be they foreign or domestic. I understand that the TV rights and all that are a big business opportunity, but the first priority should be to the ticket holders/ fans in the city where the game is being played. I mean say you managed to score tickets to that one afternoon game, why should you have to miss work/school or whatever to make a 1 o'clock start just so that some assholes can watch the next game at a more convenient time for them, once the game your team is involved in is over and 'out of the way.'

I didn't think of it like that. That's a damn good point. After all, it's the people in the stadium that drop the most dough on the game anyway, they should take the priority. Oh well, let's hope they can figure something out to make it a little less fubar'd next year.

At 10/12/09 01:19 PM, phileeguy wrote: Everything else has been pretty much a farce. Inter-league play was nice in the beginning, but now I think everyone has agreed it's novelty phase is over and it needs to be at least trimmed down. The idea of having home-field to the team in the league which wins the All-Star game is absurd. Hey Bud, you instituted inter-league play, how about use that as a measuring stick of which league is better and more deserving of home-field advantage over a glorified, fan-influenced exhibition game? Or you could always you know, use the team with the better record! Hell, the previous rule of alternating between NL/AL each year made more sense. His actions (or lack thereof in the '90s, early 2000) in regards to PEDs was underwhelming, and the fact that Congress had to get involved shows that Selig has lost it.

That's a really good idea, actually! If inter-league play was integrated a bit more into the postseason, maybe it wouldn't be so trivial in the end. I mean, some of the match-ups are almost necessary (Yankees-Mets...awesome), but some of the matchups (Padres-Mariners???) are paired just for the sake of pairing. I say pair up the rest of the teams and have all the games count towards the total which determines home-team advantage, including the All-Star game. That'll make it a bit more interesting in the end. The only problem is it'll increase the game count overall and possibly make baseball stretch even longer across the year...you'd need to create down-stuffed uniforms to play the postseason... :-)

At 10/12/09 01:38 PM, EagleRock wrote: That's a really good idea, actually! If inter-league play was integrated a bit more into the postseason, maybe it wouldn't be so trivial in the end. I mean, some of the match-ups are almost necessary (Yankees-Mets...awesome), but some of the matchups (Padres-Mariners???) are paired just for the sake of pairing.

Well, a lot of those inter-league rivals like Yanks/Mets, Giants/A's, Dodgers/Angels, etc. make sense because they're cross-town rivals even though they don't usually play each other. They compete over a geographic fan base. Other places, like the aforementioned Padres and Mariners and also the Jays among other clubs don't have natural geographic rivals, and therefore they've got to invent them.

Here are all the natural geographic rivals that I can see that make sense:
Yanks/Mets
Cubs/ChiSox
Dodgers/Angels
Giants/Athletics
Marlins/Rays
Astros/Rangers
Cleveland/Cincinnati
Kansas City/St. Louis
Baltimore/D.C.
Milwaukee/Minnesota

So that leaves out Boston, Toronto, Philly, Atlanta, Detroit, Seattle, Pittsburgh, Colorado, San Diego and Arizona. Boston comes to Philly a lot, I guess they are going for an American Revolutionary theme going there, and sometimes the Phils get Toronto, too. But I think Since the Nats used to be the Expos, I think they should play Toronto more, and Philly should see more of the Orioles. As for the other teams, maybe Pittsburgh and Detroit? Go for a rust-belt theme? Boston should see more of Atlanta I think, since the Atlanta Braves franchise used to be located in Boston decades ago. That's as much as I can come up with for now.

Phils 1, Colorado 0 right now, mid 1st. More bad umpiring already as who else but Angel Hernandez made the wrong call at First Base declaring Howard safe when he wasn't. Didn't cost the Rockies though. Oh bad umpiring, will you ever get tired of your ways this postseason?

This years playoffs have been awesome so far, I can't remember ever being so excited to see who wins.

So

Dodgers vs. Phillies

and

Yankees vs. Angels

Both are going to be great series.

Holy bejesus on that Phils @ Rockies game. Dominating starting pitching pretty much through 7 innings for both sides, then both bullpens give up some runs and it gets way exciting, and eventually heart-breaking for Rockies fans. This makes 2 games so far this postseason where the visiting team has a chance to clinch, are down by 2 runs with 2 strikes and 2 outs in the top of the 9th with the opposing closer on the mound and find a way to score 3 and hold on for the win.

At 10/12/09 10:55 PM, Crashman wrote: This years playoffs have been awesome so far, I can't remember ever being so excited to see who wins.

Awesome? I don't know about awesome. There have definitely been some exciting innings and plays and game changing errors and whatnot, but I don't know if I would say awesome when 3 of the 4 series end in sweeps. I'm sticking with the fact that the umpires have been dreadful so far as the overall sentiment so far this postseason.

So
Dodgers vs. Phillies

Rematch from last year. Dodgers definitely are better than last year and have a revenge factor going for them. Their starting pitching has been good of late and they've hit well. Of course they were in pretty much exactly the same situation last year at this time when they played the Phils. Honestly, if Cole Hamels shows up this series, and Cliff Lee continues to do what he's done so far, I've got to give the starting pitching nod to Philly over LA. Conversely, the Dodger's bullpen has been quite impressive. Dodgers are 4-3 against the Phillies this season, but 2 of those wins came at home on walk-off wins on Brad Lidge blown saves. Who knows if Brad has his confidence back after these last 2 games. This should be an exciting series, but I just don't feel the same about this years Phils compared to last years at this juncture. I wouldn't be surprised if this goes to 4 games or 7. If the Phils can steal 1 or 2 in L.A. at the start of the series, it would be huge.

and
Yankees vs. Angels

Interesting series. Both teams are very much hot, but NYY could arguably have the better pitching staff, and they definitely have shown to be clutch hitters with the most walk-off wins in the Majors. However, the Angels are one of the few teams that the Yanks have struggled with so far this season. I believe they've split 5-5. Home field advantage could play a huge factor here considering each home parks respective dimensions.

Once again though, I'll be a Negative Nelly and I have 1 small complaint about the postseason scheduling. Thursday is the start of the NLCS, and Friday is the start of the ALCS. Why didn't baseball decide to flip-flop these starts? They knew the Phils would be playing a game 4, and possibly a game 5 and would have only 1 off day if it came to that due to the cancellation of game 3 on Saturday night. Whereas both the Yanks and Angels both finished fast and don't exactly need the extra day. MLB's intransigence knows no bounds.

At 10/12/09 11:40 AM, EagleRock wrote:

At 10/12/09 03:14 AM, phileeguy wrote: Does MLB know it gets colder when the sun goes down?

This made me laugh. All I know is it was painful to see the players out there in that weather...I can't imagine what it's like to play in temperatures like that.

Considering how cold my hands got the other day on the coast, I wouldn't like to play a game like that and I've played cricket in heavy drizzle in early April - the hands sting a little all the time and sting a lot when the ball smacks into your palm.

At 10/12/09 08:24 AM, Coop83 wrote: 2AM for a finish. Pfft, I've woken up at 5.30am and tuned in to catch the last couple of innings of the Yanks and Mariners before :P

Damn, now that's dedication.

Let me rephrase that - I was woken up by sirens racing past my window and as it was just starting to get light, I couldn't get back to sleep. I turned on the laptop and checked the portal before mlb.com and was like "Hey, the Yanks are still playing? Let's watch."

There's a pretty big following for Baseball in the UK - we'd appreciate a little earlier start time, but assuming that all goes well, I'll book the World Series off work, so I can get away with it that way.

I honestly wouldn't have guessed. Most people I speak to from the UK scarcely know about baseball, never mind watch it. But if the following is as large as you say it is, then that makes sense for those earlier times. It only makes sense.

When I started watching, it was the student population that kept emailing the studio of 5, with general fan mail and taunts for the host's teams (Atlanta and Boston) I stayed up for the postseason those few years (1999, 2000, 2001) and was rewarded with some pretty good baseball. They always seemed to have quite a large audience, thoroughly justifying not switching off the broadcast when their inevitably ran past 6am (by which point I had long since stuck a tape in the machine, to catch the end.)

At 10/12/09 01:19 PM, phileeguy wrote: Selig is a joke, and if he's not careful he's going to sink below Gary Bettman of the NHL in terms of bad commissioners. Actually, since the rule changes in the NHL, the fact that it's a niche sport in the U.S. nowadays and doesn't get as much publicity (good or bad), and is now rebuilding a more exciting game to watch after the lockout, Bettman could arguably be doing a better job than Selig. I frankly am wishing that whoever takes over for Alan immediately makes the All-Star game a pure exhibition again and re-instates Rose just to spite him.

Yeah, but Bettman almost killed the NHL by doing what he thought was for the good of the game. The whole CBA farce that lost the NHL a season was a complete debarcle that should never have gone that far.

But I digress.

Selig's been commissioner for 11 seasons now. How long have we got to wait for a new guy?

At 10/12/09 11:20 PM, phileeguy wrote: Once again though, I'll be a Negative Nelly

Drop dead, Flanders.

and I have 1 small complaint about the postseason scheduling. Thursday is the start of the NLCS, and Friday is the start of the ALCS. Why didn't baseball decide to flip-flop these starts? They knew the Phils would be playing a game 4, and possibly a game 5 and would have only 1 off day if it came to that due to the cancellation of game 3 on Saturday night. Whereas both the Yanks and Angels both finished fast and don't exactly need the extra day. MLB's intransigence knows no bounds.

I agree - it's been too long since the Yanks beat the Twins and I'm getting antsy for playoff baseball *drum fingers irritably*

So after taking out baseball, the Olympic Committee added golf for 2016 and 2020

Am I missing something?

At 10/13/09 08:55 AM, Coop83 wrote: Drop dead, Flanders.

Okily-Dokily.

At 10/13/09 09:47 AM, Idiot-Finder wrote: So after taking out baseball, the Olympic Committee added golf for 2016 and 2020
Am I missing something?

I don't know. I guess they want a more European kind of a game added to the Olympic roster of events. There are still more Europeans on the committee than any 2 other continents combined. They also have the lowest ratio of population to committee member of all but Australia in the 6 continents that send members (sorry, Antarctic Emperor Penguins!). So until that changes that changes, the Olympics will be steered with Europe at the helm. Which isn't necessarily a bad thing, just a fact.

I'll guess that they'd argue that golf is more international, whereas they'd say that Baseball is mostly an "American" sport. But of course they'd be ignoring Canada, Latin America, and the Far East countries that also love Baseball. Oh yeah and Coop and his U.K. buddies, let's not forget them.

Either that or they really want to see Tiger Woods mop the floor with everyone. Actually, I hope when they implement golf it will be a 2 part event, team and solo. Americans usually tend to not be very consistent in international team play. They're great at the President's Cup, but since 1985 they've lost 8 in 12 meetings with the Europeans in the Ryder Cup.

At 10/13/09 03:58 PM, phileeguy wrote:
Either that or they really want to see Tiger Woods mop the floor with everyone. Actually, I hope when they implement golf it will be a 2 part event, team and solo. Americans usually tend to not be very consistent in international team play. They're great at the President's Cup, but since 1985 they've lost 8 in 12 meetings with the Europeans in the Ryder Cup.

There's no guarantee in the end however as much as I would love to see Tiger Woods dominate the competition in the Olympics, but the question is will he still be at the top of his game by then? Only thing we do know for certain is that everyone can count on Phil Mickelson making stupid mistakes like he did in the 2006 U.S. Open.

At 10/13/09 04:10 PM, Idiot-Finder wrote: There's no guarantee in the end however as much as I would love to see Tiger Woods dominate the competition in the Olympics, but the question is will he still be at the top of his game by then?

Who knows? If I were to guess, I'd say most likely yes. For Tiger, I think the game has boiled down to staying in shape and chasing down Nicklaus and passing him. After that, it's just padding his records until the ability to play the game competitive enough to win Majors leaves him.

Tiger is right now only nearing the age of 34 and has 14 Majors. Nicklaus, who arguably played against better competition, won Majors into his 40s and recorded his last at the age of 46. If Tiger is as good as everyone thinks he is and we all assume that he will pass the Golden Bear as the overall best golfer, I don't see why he couldn't stay on the top of his game for another 10 years.

Only thing we do know for certain is that everyone can count on Phil Mickelson making stupid mistakes like he did in the 2006 U.S. Open.

Ahh Winged Foot. He'll never live that one down.

As much as I don't like the Red Sox, I think people are being too hard on Papelbon and now there's some "geniuses" on bleacherreport who came and suggest that the Red Sox should trade him. I personally don't care if they do trade him but what if Bard sucked? Good closers don't drop from the sky, people have got to realize that. Besides, it's not like he's going to end up like...

Um...would it be considered too soon if I made that reference to you know?

At 10/13/09 08:44 PM, Idiot-Finder wrote: Um...would it be considered too soon if I made that reference to you know?

Who? Mitch Williams? All is forgiven with him after 2008.
Lidge? It's fine, he was a big part of 2008, and he hasn't failed in the post-season yet.

At 10/13/09 09:47 AM, Idiot-Finder wrote: So after taking out baseball, the Olympic Committee added golf for 2016 and 2020

G-A-Y is all I can say. Golf is not a sport. Certainly not an Olympic sport.

I'm actually more disappointed in losing women's softball. Men's Olympic baseball always seemed really sloppily played and poorly managed to me - but the girls really brought their A games. Softball was actually one of the few events I would follow with genuine interest in any regularity at the summer games.

At 10/13/09 08:44 PM, Idiot-Finder wrote: being too hard on Papelbon... suggest that the Red Sox should trade him.

That's retarded. Papelbon didn't lose game 1 or 2 for them and with how anemic their bats looked in the first 3 games odds are they weren't going to win the series even if they took that one game. But shit I'm no Sox fan, let them trade him, though I'm sure they'd regret it if they did.

At 10/13/09 11:22 PM, phileeguy wrote: Who? Mitch Williams?

TOUCH 'EM ALL JOE. Interestingly enough, that was the first baseball game I was actually old enough to remember watching; little did I know it would also be the last time I would watch post-season baseball with any serious interest in the result.

At 10/13/09 11:22 PM, phileeguy wrote:

At 10/13/09 08:44 PM, Idiot-Finder wrote: Um...would it be considered too soon if I made that reference to you know?

Who? Mitch Williams? All is forgiven with him after 2008.
Lidge? It's fine, he was a big part of 2008, and he hasn't failed in the post-season yet.

Actually I was referring to an hero.

At 10/13/09 09:47 AM, Idiot-Finder wrote: So after taking out baseball, the Olympic Committee added golf for 2016 and 2020

Am I missing something?

Yeah, the IOC wanted to include something that takes up a large part of the broadcasting time on PTI, without caving in and adding American Football :P

At 10/13/09 03:58 PM, phileeguy wrote: I'll guess that they'd argue that golf is more international, whereas they'd say that Baseball is mostly an "American" sport. But of course they'd be ignoring Canada, Latin America, and the Far East countries that also love Baseball. Oh yeah and Coop and his U.K. buddies, let's not forget them.

It's a falacy, I'll admit, but the problem is that the people that make these decisions don't really have much of a clue as to what people these days want to watch.

At 10/14/09 02:39 AM, EternitySpent wrote:

At 10/13/09 09:47 AM, Idiot-Finder wrote: So after taking out baseball, the Olympic Committee added golf for 2016 and 2020

G-A-Y is all I can say. Golf is not a sport. Certainly not an Olympic sport.

Good As You? Maybe I'm losing something in translation here...

Mind you, Golf is a good walk spoiled. We played mini golf at Blackpool and that was fun, but other than that, I think that it's not a real sport.

At 10/14/09 08:12 AM, Coop83 wrote: Mind you, Golf is a good walk spoiled. We played mini golf at Blackpool and that was fun, but other than that, I think that it's not a real sport.

Were you there when they turned on the lights? Or would you rather just stay away from that mob scene?

But back to golf, I agree, I wouldn't qualify Golf as a real sport. It's a competitive game that takes skill, but if you can play it by yourself and/or your actions don't directly affect your opponents actions, then it's not really a sport to me. Bowling would fall in this category in my opinion as well, and most people regard bowling as a game that is fun with a few beers, not particularly a sport.

I also don't like how some people regard events like hunting and fishing as sports. Is it really a sport if your opponent doesn't know they're playing? The traditional practice of survival skills? Yes. Sport? Nah.

At 10/14/09 07:55 PM, phileeguy wrote:

At 10/14/09 08:12 AM, Coop83 wrote: Mind you, Golf is a good walk spoiled. We played mini golf at Blackpool and that was fun, but other than that, I think that it's not a real sport.

Were you there when they turned on the lights? Or would you rather just stay away from that mob scene?

What, at Blackpool? Well, the illuminations were on when we were there, but you've got to wait about another 6-8 weeks until the official Xmas lighting up ceremony, which is mental.

But back to golf, I agree, I wouldn't qualify Golf as a real sport. It's a competitive game that takes skill, but if you can play it by yourself and/or your actions don't directly affect your opponents actions, then it's not really a sport to me. Bowling would fall in this category in my opinion as well, and most people regard bowling as a game that is fun with a few beers, not particularly a sport.

Yeah, it's a hobby, like Darts and Snooker. But then again, if you take that attitude to it, Archery has to drop from the olympic calendar, which is the only reason that shooting is there, along with modern pentathlon.

Dear Bud,

See what taking a break in the middle of the playoffs does to Baseball fans. We talk about things other than real sports.

Talking of real sports, check out the Avs, making a stamp on the NHL early on - not bad for a team that was 28th of 30 teams last term.

I'm so happy FOX is doing baseball again.

At 10/16/09 12:04 PM, Molotov wrote: I'm so happy FOX is doing baseball again.

Lackey adds and subtracts, lol. But that sign could've also went with "Lackey: he's going to have fun in his 80's!"

Really, if MLB and Fox want to get new viewers to baseball, they've got to stop throwing things up there that without explanation make the unknowing viewer go "WTF?" I mean it's not hard to add "Pitches/Velocity" or w/e they were going for in that second statement, and make the third statement "Great late movement/speed."

At 10/16/09 07:31 PM, phileeguy wrote:

Lackey adds and subtracts, lol. But that sign could've also went with "Lackey: he's going to have fun in his 80's!"

Subracts*

TBS needs to read this book.

Lol errors.

Yankee Stadium: King's court.

Angels: Court jester.

At 10/16/09 10:58 PM, MultiCanimefan wrote: Lol errors.

no excuses

At 10/17/09 12:12 AM, Molotov wrote:

At 10/16/09 10:58 PM, MultiCanimefan wrote: Lol errors.

no excuses

Lackey can add and subtract, but the Yanks can divide, particularly with the way that they started the game. Clearly 1 (ball) does go into 2 (fielders) and Damon's hard running means 1 (run) goes into two (runs)

Okay, enough maths puns for now, CC wasn't exactly lights out, but I'd like to think that he's keeping something in the bag for game 4 time for him to make the most of his rest, while the rest of the team go out looking to put the Angels down 2-0 as we board the plane to head to California.

At 10/16/09 12:04 PM, Molotov wrote: I'm so happy FOX is doing baseball again.

I'm surprised they didn't put something up there like "He eats when he's hungry." or "He breathes."

And I'm sure good ole John Buck is being retarded as usual. And is Piazza and/or Boomer guest announcing this year, because all together they are quite possibly the worst announcing team ever and the games are worthy of being watched just to hear their crack pot analysis on the game at hand.

At 10/17/09 10:12 AM, 36Holla wrote:

At 10/16/09 12:04 PM, Molotov wrote:

And is Piazza and/or Boomer guest announcing this year, because all together they are quite possibly the worst announcing team ever and the games are worthy of being watched just to hear their crack pot analysis on the game at hand.

Boomer should get drunk again so he can be an awesome analyst. Hey, it worked for his perfect game.