Lammycat Posted November 6, 2007 Share Posted November 6, 2007 I've been to almost every Rockies home season-opener since 1996 and if memory serves, it's always been on "Opening Day." The real one when most teams open the season, not the Sunday stuff. Almost always great weather, too. Link to post Share on other sites
bobbob1313 Posted November 6, 2007 Share Posted November 6, 2007 Against MLB rules, if I recall correctly. Yes, but there is a "for the good of baseball" clause that would allow Selig to bend the rules if the team was able to show that it was a special enough situation. An ARod signing might be enough to raise attendance to acceptable levels and might convince the city of Miami that the Marlins are serious about building a stadium. It's extremely unlikely, but there's a lot of buzz about it down here. Link to post Share on other sites
ction Posted November 6, 2007 Share Posted November 6, 2007 Yes, but there is a "for the good of baseball" clause that would allow Selig to bend the rules if the team was able to show that it was a special enough situation. An ARod signing might be enough to raise attendance to acceptable levels and might convince the city of Miami that the Marlins are serious about building a stadium. It's extremely unlikely, but there's a lot of buzz about it down here. I see Ace Ventura isn't the only guy in South Florida who talks out of his ass. Sorry, that belonged in the E-Tuff thread... Link to post Share on other sites
bobbob1313 Posted November 6, 2007 Share Posted November 6, 2007 That was Dennis Miller level funny. Link to post Share on other sites
ction Posted November 6, 2007 Share Posted November 6, 2007 That was Dennis Miller level funny. Dennis Miller now, or Dennis Miller when he was funny and not a creepy conservative guy? Link to post Share on other sites
Oil Can Boyd Posted November 6, 2007 Share Posted November 6, 2007 Red Sox are apparently "close" to signing Schilling to a one year contract. Link to post Share on other sites
ction Posted November 6, 2007 Share Posted November 6, 2007 Red Sox are apparently "close" to signing Schilling to a one year contract. I saw that, and I like it. If they get to the postseason again, that's where he'll earn his money. Hopefully he'll get in better shape this winter. Potential rotation for 08: BeckettDice-KSchillingWakefieldLester/Buchholz Not bad... Link to post Share on other sites
Twisted Acres Posted November 6, 2007 Share Posted November 6, 2007 Nearly always, but there are occasional exceptions. I believe I remember a day many years ago on which I saw the Cubs in the afternoon, then jumped on the el and saw the White Sox that evening. That must've been a lot of fun. Nothing like a full day of baseball. There is the odd exception in NYC as well... always a buzz in town on the rare occasion when one team has a day game and the other is playing at night. What was really cool was when they were playing each other in interleague play a few years back, and they had a day/night doubleheader... the day game at Shea Stadium and the night game at Yankee Stadium. Link to post Share on other sites
Duck-Billed Catechist Posted November 6, 2007 Share Posted November 6, 2007 There have been some ugly incidents at US Cellular owing to Cub day game + White Sox night game = all day drinking for a select few fans. Link to post Share on other sites
MattZ Posted November 6, 2007 Share Posted November 6, 2007 It's extremely unlikely, but there's a lot of buzz about it down here. I do think that some teams do this to generate good will with fans so that teams can throw their hands up when [iNSERT STAR] signs elsewhere and they can say "we did all we could." Even though the team knew they never had a shot or any true interest. I think the Mets did this with ARod back when he signed with the Rangers initially. And I find it happening more and more. Its a no lose situation for teams from a PR perspective. Link to post Share on other sites
Duck-Billed Catechist Posted November 6, 2007 Share Posted November 6, 2007 The Marlins could afford to pay Arod $30 million and not give him a piece of the team. Link to post Share on other sites
jenbobblehead Posted November 6, 2007 Share Posted November 6, 2007 Schilling has weight clauseBy Nick Cafardo, Globe Staff ORLANDO - Curt Schilling's new 1-year, $8 million deal with the Red Sox (which is pending results of a physical) will include $2 million worth of incentives if he meets weight requirements. The team hopes to insure that Schilling will be fit when he comes to spring training, a source close to the negotiations said moments ago. Schilling can earn an additional $3 million in performance bonues, making his total incentive package at a possible $5 million. According to the Associated Press, the performance bonuses are based on innings pitched. Link to post Share on other sites
Sir Stewart Posted November 6, 2007 Share Posted November 6, 2007 Cafardo should know the proper usage of "insure" vs "ensure." Link to post Share on other sites
caliber66 Posted November 6, 2007 Share Posted November 6, 2007 Cafardo should know the proper usage of "insure" vs "ensure." Link to post Share on other sites
Oil Can Boyd Posted November 6, 2007 Share Posted November 6, 2007 Cafardo should know the proper usage of "insure" vs "ensure."Maybe they are going to take out a policy on Schilling's weight to protect their investment ... Link to post Share on other sites
cryptique Posted November 6, 2007 Author Share Posted November 6, 2007 link Baseball general managers recommend instant replay for first time By RONALD BLUM, AP Baseball WriterNovember 6, 2007ORLANDO, Fla. (AP) -- For the first time Tuesday, baseball general managers recommended instant replay be used to help umpires make difficult decisions. The recommendation, by a 25-5 vote, was limited to boundary calls -- whether potential home runs are fair or foul, whether balls go over fences or hit the top and bounce back, and whether fans interfere with possible homers. Baseball commissioner Bud Selig opposes the use of replays but said last month he was willing to let GMs examine the issue. "I don't like instant replay because I don't like all the delays. I think it sometimes creates as many problems or more than it solves," Selig said then. But Jimmie Lee Solomon, an executive vice president in the commissioner's office, thinks Selig's stance has changed a bit recently. "He seemed to be softer, at least on the consideration of the subject," Solomon said Tuesday. He added it was unclear how the proposal will proceed and acknowledged there is "glacier-like movement in baseball" when it comes to innovation. Solomon said if Selig is willing, the commissioner probably would run the idea by owners. The plan needs approval from the players' association and umpires. Solomon said GMs favored having a Major League Baseball official in a central place with access to all camera angles. If there is a disputed call, that official would be contacted and would view the television replay to make a decision. "We have a very technologically savvy group of GMs," Solomon said. "I was surprised that we had five teams that said no." Solomon also said that to speed up games, baseball was considering limiting the number of times a hitter could step out of the batter's box during an at-bat and the number of times any player could visit the mound. Link to post Share on other sites
Lammycat Posted November 6, 2007 Share Posted November 6, 2007 I almost always side with the old-school philosophies on the game but I think this is could be a good thing. I love the human element of having to live with the umpire's ruling called live but if this is used sparingly I see it as a good thing. Even though the umpires get the call right most of the time and have been pretty good about reversing calls when they know they've erred, why not use the technology in tight games/post-season games/etc. where the right call is crucial to the outcome? Questions about home run/fair-foul/etc. only, though, and at the discretion of the umpiring crew, not the manager. Link to post Share on other sites
ZenLunatic Posted November 6, 2007 Share Posted November 6, 2007 link I actually agree with Bud on this one. Feel like it can create as many issues as not having instant replay. Just keep things as is. About the limited of times a batter steps out to speed up the game sounds stupid. The game is fine the way it is, its slow in nature, I dont see a need to change the nature of the game. The pace is what makes it baseball, dont need to turn it into basketball. Things I wanna change: Eliminate the DH. Establish salary caps for teams, solid limit. Also the ability for teams to fire players at any time like in the NFL. Link to post Share on other sites
MrRain422 Posted November 6, 2007 Share Posted November 6, 2007 Also the ability for teams to fire players at any time like in the NFL. Hey, no one is forcing anyone to give a player a guaranteed contract. That's a choice that GMs make to make their offers more attractive. They wouldn't have to do this if they didn't keep offering them. Link to post Share on other sites
boywiththorninside Posted November 6, 2007 Share Posted November 6, 2007 This article blew my mind, man. Everything you thought you knew about A-Rod opting out is wrong. Here's the real deal: NY Times: By Opting Out, A-Rod Really Wants In Link to post Share on other sites
ction Posted November 6, 2007 Share Posted November 6, 2007 So Boras and A-Rod announced during the final game of the world seires that they opted out of the contract as a favor to Joe Girardi? Link to post Share on other sites
boywiththorninside Posted November 6, 2007 Share Posted November 6, 2007 That's what I love about A-Rod. He's always thinking about others. Link to post Share on other sites
MrRain422 Posted November 6, 2007 Share Posted November 6, 2007 This article blew my mind, man. Everything you thought you knew about A-Rod opting out is wrong. Here's the real deal: NY Times: By Opting Out, A-Rod Really Wants In There's been some speculation about that from the start. I mean, obviously the reason he opted out was to get paid more -- that's just good business sense. If he can get the same money elsewhere though, I can't imagine why he'd want to stay in New York, though. Link to post Share on other sites
ZenLunatic Posted November 6, 2007 Share Posted November 6, 2007 Hey, no one is forcing anyone to give a player a guaranteed contract. That's a choice that GMs make to make their offers more attractive. They wouldn't have to do this if they didn't keep offering them. Yeah, thats true. Maybe its because MLB players are more reliable than NFL. Link to post Share on other sites
the_fliz1 Posted November 6, 2007 Share Posted November 6, 2007 Hey, no one is forcing anyone to give a player a guaranteed contract. That's a choice that GMs make to make their offers more attractive. They wouldn't have to do this if they didn't keep offering them. It was in my understanding that the players have it in the their labor contract that their salaries are guaranteed. Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts