Moe_Syzlak Posted September 24, 2008 Share Posted September 24, 2008 What is factually incorrect about it? Better teams miss the playoffs all of the time, and it is happening right now. There's no point in saying it, though.He said it is bad system, right? That reminds me of the Churchill quote, "Many forms of Government have been tried and will be tried in this world of sin and woe. No one pretends that democracy is perfect or all-wise. Indeed, it has been said that democracy is the worst form of government except all those other forms that have been tried from time to time." Link to post Share on other sites
cryptique Posted September 24, 2008 Share Posted September 24, 2008 What is factually incorrect about it? Better teams miss the playoffs all of the time, and it is happening right now.It's his opinion that the Yankees are better than the Dodgers. His entire judgment of a team's quality is its won-loss record. The Yankees play in the American League, the Dodgers in the National League. They do not play the same competition. He's comparing records of teams that don't play the same opponents, so like it or not, it's apples and oranges. It is his subjective opinion that the Yankees are better than the Dodgers. It can be fairly argued that this is true, but it cannot be established as a incontrovertible fact. Ergo, he is factually incorrect. Link to post Share on other sites
bobbob1313 Posted September 24, 2008 Share Posted September 24, 2008 So his opinion is wrong? Link to post Share on other sites
caliber66 Posted September 24, 2008 Share Posted September 24, 2008 So his opinion is wrong?Is his opinion factually correct? Link to post Share on other sites
bobbob1313 Posted September 24, 2008 Share Posted September 24, 2008 I would argue it is. Link to post Share on other sites
caliber66 Posted September 24, 2008 Share Posted September 24, 2008 I would argue it is.It is a fact that the Yankees are a better team than the Dodgers? Link to post Share on other sites
bobbob1313 Posted September 24, 2008 Share Posted September 24, 2008 It is a fact that the Yankees are a better team than the Dodgers? No. I was saying more that his statement that good teams often miss the playoffs while bad or mediocre teams sneak in is factually true. Whether this applies to the Yankees and Dodgers is opinion, though I would argue it is true. Link to post Share on other sites
Moe_Syzlak Posted September 24, 2008 Share Posted September 24, 2008 In case you missed it the first time: I have an idea! Why doesn't MLB employ a system that combines the opinions of sportswriters, the League's managers, computer rankings, records and strength of schedule to determine the two best teams at the end of the regular season. Those two teams then compete in the WS. Who could possibly have a problem with that!?! Steinbrenner should shut his pie hole. The playoff system we have now was put in place by ownership to maximize profit. There is no perfect system and his opinion that "it isn't fair" is his opinion -- which he entitled to -- but you can't say it is "factually correct" unless you can produce a system that IS fair to everyone. If we go back to the pre-'70 system, you could argue, perhaps, that the Angles and Ray are better than the Cubs, but the WS would be Cubs/Angels. Link to post Share on other sites
cryptique Posted September 24, 2008 Share Posted September 24, 2008 I was saying more that his statement that good teams often miss the playoffs while bad or mediocre teams sneak in is factually true.But this is not what Steinbrenner said. He never called the Dodgers or any other playoff team "bad" or "mediocre." He merely referenced the difference in records between the Yankees and Dodgers. Link to post Share on other sites
bjorn_skurj Posted September 24, 2008 Share Posted September 24, 2008 Hank Steinbrenner is perhaps the ugliest man ever seen regularly on TV. He really needs an iron mask treatment. Link to post Share on other sites
jenbobblehead Posted September 24, 2008 Share Posted September 24, 2008 I still like my idea of sending them to Fresno. Or Las Vegas. Link to post Share on other sites
caliber66 Posted September 24, 2008 Share Posted September 24, 2008 Hank Steinbrenner is perhaps the ugliest man ever seen regularly on TV. He really needs an iron mask treatment.He's using some industrial strength Just For Men. Link to post Share on other sites
MattZ Posted September 24, 2008 Share Posted September 24, 2008 Hey Beltmann -- may the best team win the wildcard. I take comfort knowing that if (when?) the Mets blow it again this year, that (hopefully) will mean Milwaukee gets some playoff baseball for the first time in a lonnnng time. Here's to a crazy 5 days of baseball. Link to post Share on other sites
MrRain422 Posted September 25, 2008 Share Posted September 25, 2008 Looks like the Tigers are ending the season the same way they started it. Link to post Share on other sites
OOO Posted September 25, 2008 Share Posted September 25, 2008 White Sox, determined to make things interesting... Link to post Share on other sites
Moe_Syzlak Posted September 25, 2008 Share Posted September 25, 2008 Man, the Cubs didn't even look like they were trying tonight. I feel bad for the Mets and their fans. That is crushing. Two years in a row!?! I still hope the Mets make it! Link to post Share on other sites
tugmoose Posted September 25, 2008 Share Posted September 25, 2008 Phils look pretty safe. Will have at least 1-game lead over Mets (div) and Milwaukee (wild) heading into final weekend. Play Washington, worst team in NL, at home - should be no prob. Brews have 1 game left vs. Bucs (good) and 3 vs. Cubs (not so much, but again the Cubs didn't look real interested tonight). Mets have another vs. Cubs (ugh, after tonight) and 3 at home vs. Fla. the team that killed 'em at Shea last season. I've been pulling for the Mets to make it, just so Shea and not Yankee Stadium would get the Oct. love, but it's looking like Cubs-Dodgers and Phils-Brewers. Also, do the ChiSox have a makeup vs. Tigers they might need to play? Link to post Share on other sites
bjorn_skurj Posted September 25, 2008 Share Posted September 25, 2008 I am all out of angry things to say about the Mets. They just don't have it. A lot of talent on that team, but very little grit. Link to post Share on other sites
bobbob1313 Posted September 25, 2008 Share Posted September 25, 2008 Well, we were mathematically eliminated yesterday. Can't say I'm not dissapointed, though if we make some smart moves this offseason this team could take the division next year. We have the pitching now, and if our offense can avoid slumps (which would mean ridding ourselves of Jacobs, Uggla, and maybe Cantu which would also improve defense) we'll be a 90+ win team. I'm still kicking myself over not putting any money on the marlins at +-68.5. That was easy money. Link to post Share on other sites
jenbobblehead Posted September 25, 2008 Share Posted September 25, 2008 I'm sure that the new stadium will help. Just look what it did for the Nationals! Link to post Share on other sites
Lammycat Posted September 25, 2008 Author Share Posted September 25, 2008 Speaking of new stadiums, there was a piece on ESPN last Sunday about how the mostly city/people-subsidized new Yankee Stadium is an unfair shake in many ways towards the people of NY and the denizens of the immediate area, let alone a sham in terms of how the money/loans were aquired and expected to be paid back. I think there is an investigation going on. Anybody else see this/shed light on it? I didn't catch the whole piece. Link to post Share on other sites
myboyblue Posted September 25, 2008 Share Posted September 25, 2008 White Sox are going to blow it. Link to post Share on other sites
Smokestack Joe Posted September 25, 2008 Share Posted September 25, 2008 go Brewers! got my playoff tickets yesterday! Link to post Share on other sites
MrRain422 Posted September 25, 2008 Share Posted September 25, 2008 Speaking of new stadiums, there was a piece on ESPN last Sunday about how the mostly city/people-subsidized new Yankee Stadium is an unfair shake in many ways towards the people of NY and the denizens of the immediate area, let alone a sham in terms of how the money/loans were aquired and expected to be paid back. I think there is an investigation going on. Anybody else see this/shed light on it? I didn't catch the whole piece. I did not see the article you're referencing, but I think this has been a problem for quite a while. The reason the Yankees were able to get so much taxpayer money is because so many other teams have gotten tax money for their stadiums in the last 10-15 years. It's become standard, even though in every single instance, it doesn't benefit the city in the way that was promised -- the only one really benefiting is team ownership. Link to post Share on other sites
quarter23cd Posted September 25, 2008 Share Posted September 25, 2008 In terms of taxpayer-funded parks, I think Baltimore was one instance that actually worked out pretty well for the city, mostly because it was part of a larger effort to revitalize an area of town. That stadium became the blueprint (sometimes literally) for a lot of the stadiums that followed, but I don't know how well most of them worked out for their neighborhoods on the whole. I don't know that dropping a new stadium anywhere will, by itself, necessarily work wonders for its surrounding area unless it is part of larger effort. Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts