The World Series - St Louis & Boston

[GePap]

Originally posted by The Emperor Fabulous
I called you for what you were. You couldn't get over your elitist attitude. Four others pointed it out, wasn't just me. We all got pissed at you trying to urinate on our parade. And I know plenty about the Yankees. I know all about Mantle and Gerhig and DiMaggio and The House Ruth Built and the Bronx Bombers and all that.

I begun by congratulating the Red Soxs- it was you who instead of saying "thanks", decided to make the issue of pissing on the Yankees.

And I stand by my claim that they will be most remembered team in Baseball. Just like the 1980 Hockey Team, Knute Rockney's Fighting Irish, and yes, the Yankees dynasty (not specific team, but dynasty) of the 50s. I give due were due is owed - Which is why the 2004 Red Sox will be the most remembered single team in history. Its just a fact.

You say I am arrogant, and then you say this?

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Arrian
For now, anyway. Some future Cubs team might eventually claim that title. But for the foreseable future, the '04 Sox are it.

-Arrian

'69 Mets. No dynasty there, but still the most incredible story. Out of nowhere, completely out of nowhere.

[Arrian]

For Mets fans, anyway.

There is something more universal about this one, I think. The storyline goes beyond what the '69 Mets did. The Sox beat the Yankees (who everyone but we Yankees fans hate) and then won the WS for the first time in 86 years. After all the buildup about "the Curse" ( ) and what happened last year (Aaron bleepin' Boone) and the way it happened (down 0-3, trailing in the 9th inning of game 4 and again in the 8th inning of game 5, to come roaring back and win it all)... I think Emp Fab has a point.

-Arrian

[GePap]

Originally posted by Arrian
For now, anyway. Some future Cubs team might eventually claim that title. But for the foreseable future, the '04 Sox are it.

-Arrian

The White Soxs have had as long a drought as the Red Soxs. , and obviously theSox have had a longer one- as Apocalypse showed, the Astros have never done it, and the Indians have been without a championship for almost 50 years, while the Cubs top all.

So any of these team winning will be an accomplishment- obviously a Chicago team winning will be as big if not bigger.

[Arrian]

I don't think the White Sox fan base is nearly as into it as the Red Sox fan base. Further, I think the whole Black Sox scandal puts a damper on people's sympathy for that franchise.

The Cubs, followed by the Indians, I'd say. For sympathy factor. Then maybe the Astros, then the White Sox.

-Arrian

[GePap]

Yes, but the Boston redsox were expected to be a contendor, giving their aquisitions and spending- besides, the whole league championship series is what, 20 years old? So how can we compare this era to that in which the only post season series was the WS?

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by GePap
Yes, but the Boston redsox were expected to be a contendor, giving their aquisitions and spending- besides, the whole league championship series is what, 20 years old? So how can we compare this era to that in which the only post season series was the WS?

at least 35 years old. There were two divisions, and a 3 out of 5 LCS in 1969, IIRC. A single league with no division, no LCS puts you at least back to 1968 Im pretty sure.

[GePap]

So whom did the '69 Mets play

[Arrian]

Baseball is full of stuff like that. Pre-DH, Post-DH (AL only). 154-game schedule, 162-game schedule. WS only, CS -> WS, and now DS -> CS -> WS, with the addition of Wild Cards (who, as pointed out, have won that last three WS).

I mean, the idjit Fox announcers like to bring up that Bernie Williams has the most "post-season" home runs and Jeter has the most hits (I think)... but that's because they've played on great Yankees teams in the three-tiered playoff era. The Babe, Joe D., The Mick... they did it in WS only.

You compare the best you can...

-Arrian

[GePap]

required reading:

http://msn.foxsports.com/story/3116686

[Arrian]

I've read similar articles before (at the time, they were predicting what would happen *if* the Sox won).

While I generally agree that sooner or later, Sox fans will adjust to "life without the Curse" I'm really not sure they'll mind at all.

Those not named "Dan Shaunessey" anyway...

-Arrian

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by GePap
So whom did the '69 Mets play

In the NLCS? I think the Pirates, who were actually in the western division at the time. And in the World Series, the Orioles of course. But most famously they came from behind to beat the Cubs in the NL East pennant race.

[The Emperor Fabulous]

Actually, GePap, I was replying to many many of your earlier posts.

But come on...lets give it a rest. After all, we'll be celebrating again in a week when Boston has another winner

[MichaeltheGreat]

Originally posted by GePap




I didn't begin with the name calling- if someone wants to be confrontational, then I will give them what they want

If someone just makes a celebratory comment, then good for them.

The real ones celebrating aren;t doing it by posting on Poly.

Naaah, I'm doing it by booking vacation plans and buying tickets to opening day, April 11, 2005, to see the Sox (a) raise the WS pennant over Fenway, (b) welcome the MFY back to Fenway, and (c) watch the Sox kick MFY ass.

[MichaeltheGreat]

Originally posted by GePap
required reading:

http://msn.foxsports.com/story/3116686

Yeah, no underdog when outspent by 60 million on payroll.

And yeah, it'll just be no fun beating the MFY again.