I'm shocked that I had no idea who won until school was over. o_o You'd think that since I live in New Hampshire every class would be shouting "YEAH, THE RED SOX ROCK!" and there would be confetti raining down from the sky, and they would make an annoucment about it over the intercom...

I'm severely disappointed in sports fans. D:

Oh, yeah, I nearly forgot that that one furniture store "felt so confident that the Red Sox would win that anyone who bought furniture on a certain day would get it for free." Of course, their marketing scheme was probably hoping that the Red Sox wouldn't win, since that means that they're out of a ton of money now. I heard that one guy bought about $4,000 worth of furniture.

Also, I was actually disappointed that I was feeling too sick to go to school this morning because I was looking forward to hearing what everyone had to say. Apparently I didn't miss out on much.

Cerise wrote:

College Softball World Series (FAVORITE!)

Mmm, I like this just for the girls   Except, I think the pitching circle is too close to the batter.  Those games are always so pitching dominated, it's not one team winning the CWS, it's one pitcher.  Especially since the same pitcher can pitch so long in softball as opposed to baseball.  They need to push back the pitcher a little.  Otherwise I like it.  I can't say the same for Men's College World Series.  I need wooden bats to make it feel right. If there were a higher form of Softball (besides the World Cup every once in a while now that there's only one more Olympics for it) then I probably wouldn't care about the College Women either.  I hate the corporation that is MLB and the networks that produce the games, but I just can't not like it because it is the top 1% of the top 1% of players.  It's wonderful

The one that really drives me up the wall is (American) football.  Somebody drops the ball?  Stop.  Somebody does something with the ball?  Stop.  Somebody looks like they're thinking about the ball?  Sto... well, it's not quite that bad, but really, it just makes rugby or soccer (um, real football?) look so much more appealing.  Godzilla could spontaneously awaken from beneath Waikato Stadium during a match and it'd be insisted everybody keep playing.

Of course, I can watch people throw darts or play pool on television, so I shouldn't really talk too much.

Lissa wrote:

Baseball does seem to take a long time, but in reality, it doesn't take much longer than most other sports. For example, the Packers/Broncos game tonight took a bit longer than 3 hours. Most baseball games are shorter than that. What people consider "delays" is actually part of the strategy.

I completely agree. Everyone talks about the wasted time in baseball when the ball is in play for most of the time (except the few dead balls from fouls or hit batsmen), and anything can happen at any time.  Hidden ball trick, anyone?  Whereas American football, there is always, always downtime.  The clock is always running, and what are the teams doing? Running on and off the field doing nothing.  But that sport never gets people complaining.

Lissa wrote:

Although, I'm sad that in two years (is it?) they're eliminating having pitchers hit in the National League. After that, they might as well merge the two leagues into one and change the divisions so that they are similar to how the NBA and NHL sort their conferences.

Sounds like a dirty rumor to me.  There'd be a huge uproar, and it would not go over well.  Although with Bud "Weasel" Selig, anything is possible.  He already has merged the two leagues into one, and he when he did that he wanted to mirror the NBA/NHL East/West conferences.

mazoboom wrote:

I completely agree. Everyone talks about the wasted time in baseball when the ball is in play for most of the time (except the few dead balls from fouls or hit batsmen), and anything can happen at any time.  Hidden ball trick, anyone?  Whereas American football, there is always, always downtime.  The clock is always running, and what are the teams doing? Running on and off the field doing nothing.  But that sport never gets people complaining.

For me, the difference is at least something on the television is moving.  Even if it's running on and off the field, there is something going on.  But when it comes to baseball, everyone stands still, all of the attention is only in one place, etc.  I mean, if the ball gets hit, the other 7 players on the field get to do something, but if not....they stand and wait.  And this isn't that I don't like baseball, I just get kind of bored watching it when all it consists of is walks and strikeouts (plus, Indiana doesn't have a MLB team--if that changed, I might start getting more into it).  I realize the strategy to it, but unfortunately, watching people strategize isn't nearly as exciting as watching people do something more exciting.

But the funny thing is, for me, this only applies to MLB.  Even the CWS doesn't bother me, because it doesn't feel like there is quite the number of delays.  Then again, with the aluminum bats, any decent swing has a chance of being much bigger than it would be with a wooden bat, right?  I'd like to see them get rid of the aluminum bats as well, just so they transition better into MLB. 

Ooo...rumor has it that the CWS might move to Indianapolis in a few years.  Might.  That would be so friggin' awesome!  I've got to remember that some of the regional action for the LLWS takes place in a town just outside of Indy and check it out too.

Of course, my favorite sport to watch is tennis, which I know many (most?) people think is about as boring to watch as paint drying, but damn...there's some lovely action there.  Get a match up of Fabrice Santoro and Roger Federer and you've got the coolest match in the planet going on.  Just because even Federer can't figure out what the heck to do with Frabrice "The Magician" Santoro. 

Last edited by Cerise (10-30-2007 06:10:32 AM)

Selig is so pro-owner, it's frustrating. I hate most of the things he's done to MLB.  He's such a weasel who only wants to give money to the owners.  There's a reason that all the owners love him (as a former owner, he knows what they want).   The combination of interleague play, wild card, and unbalanced schedules all work together to make things bad.  You can't have all those at once. Anyway, I could go on forever about him, but he'd never allow DH in the National League because the NL owners don't want it.  They like not having to raise their payroll.

I like the non-DH because baseball is a logical, pure game.  It makes sense to have the 9 people on the field being the 9 people who bat.  The DH introduces an impurity.  I personally think pitchers should learn how to hit. There's nothing better than a Zambrano or Owings hitting a ball a long way. Or a Matsuzaka getting a World Series hit.

mazoboom wrote:

Selig is so pro-owner, it's frustrating. I hate most of the things he's done to MLB.

I know I'm beating a dead horse *bam bam!* but it was just as frustrating, if not more so, to have him own and run my Brewers, knowing we were in a shitty stadium and that the only reason we were getting a new stadium was because he couldn't sell the Brewers with how bad they were doing in the late nineties and, well...up until the end of the season before this. His daughter didn't have a clue what she was doing, either. I was happier to see players I liked leave the Brewers and do well than stay with them.

I think I figured out the problem. Roger Goddell, Gary Bettman, Selig, hell, even the France family (the people who run NASCAR) are all trying to run their leagues in the same way that David Stern did when he walked into the NBA and overhauled it and turned it into what it is today. Of course, the fact that he came in just as Michael Jordan and Phil Jackson were starting to turn the Bulls into the powerhouse that they were in the 1990's is a large chunk of that, too. They don't realize that not every league is the National Basketball Association. NASCAR doesn't need a playoff. The NHL doesn't need a balanced schedule. The NFL needs to have the Packers, Bears, and Vikings in the same division as the Buccaneers. MLB NEEDS TO HAVE A DH IN ONE OF THE LEAGUES!!!

No, I'm not overly vocal on this. Not at all.

I don't mind the general idea of the DH. BUT...you shouldn't need to use it for the pitcher. If I have a guy who's got a hot glove, but can't hit his way out of a paper bag, I should be able to use the designated hitter for him if I got a pitcher who's starting on a certain day who is an amazing hitter.

Besides, there's nothing funnier than seeing Randy Johnson hit a home run. Seriously. Except if it's his first ever home run, and it's against your home team, and you're at that game.