PDA

View Full Version : Chris Rongey Interviewed in Today's Sun-Times


PaleHoser
06-11-2009, 11:12 AM
Link (http://www.suntimes.com/business/lazare/1617737,CST-SPT-lew11.article)

Lip Man 1
06-11-2009, 12:33 PM
Here's a more detailed interview with him:

http://www.whitesoxinteractive.com/rwas/index.php?category=11&id=3703

Has some interesting words about Josh Fields.

Lip

drewcifer
06-11-2009, 12:46 PM
Wow, the comments are brutal.

Ranger
06-11-2009, 01:06 PM
Wow, the comments are brutal.

Comments after columns and stories on newspaper websites are always brutal. A lot of mouth-breathers out there...

KenBerryGrab
06-11-2009, 01:18 PM
Comments after columns and stories on newspaper websites are always brutal. A lot of mouth-breathers out there...

Great attitude, Ranger! We're happy you're on the air for us.

wsf4l
06-11-2009, 01:45 PM
Here's a more detailed interview with him:

http://www.whitesoxinteractive.com/rwas/index.php?category=11&id=3703

Has some interesting words about Josh Fields.

Lip


Wow great work Lip, that was an excellent read.

Ranger
06-11-2009, 01:47 PM
Great attitude, Ranger! We're happy you're on the air for us.

I love being on the air for you. I just wish this team would play better. They're giving me a permanent headache.

RedHeadPaleHoser
06-11-2009, 01:49 PM
I love being on the air for you. I just wish this team would play better. They're giving me a permanent headache.

Headaches, stomach acid, anger outbursts...

"The 2009 White Sox. We came, we saw.......ehh."

WhiteSox5187
06-11-2009, 01:52 PM
I love being on the air for you. I just wish this team would play better. They're giving me a permanent headache.

If it's any consolation this team is making what is an already miserable summer for me even worse.

TornLabrum
06-11-2009, 02:45 PM
If it's any consolation this team is making what is an already miserable summer for me even worse.

Ranger is a media whore. He even did TWO interviews for the Windy City Sox Fans newsletter. BTW, Ranger, I wouldn't have the patience to deal with the idiots you have to listen to day in and day out.

Now back to my response, already in progress: If you want to make your summer a little more exciting, head out to Kane County. Right now they're in first place (by 1 game) in the Midwest League, and their defense is probably better than the Sox defense.

You can also catch Jesse Barfield's son Jeremy, who made the MWL All-Star team this year (if you're interested in sons of former major leaguers who might also have a shot at the show).

WhiteSoxFTW
06-11-2009, 03:01 PM
I love being on the air for you. I just wish this team would play better. They're giving me a permanent headache.

I recommend Excedrin migraine...it has caffeine in it already so you can stay awake during boring rain delays.

PhillipsBubba
06-11-2009, 03:06 PM
It's not his job to admonish fans who go off the deep end...it's not his job to see the bright side whenever things suck...if a fan cares enough to wait on hold to get his thirty seconds of catharsis...he should step aside and let it happen...as long as they are not disrespectful to him.

Most times he talks in circles and has trouble molding his jumbled thoughts into a meaningful conclusion.

That said...I understand the team wants a guy on the post game to paint a rosy picture when things turn to feces and he does that in a workmanlike way

Finally....I give the kid credit for pursuing his dream job...

Ranger
06-11-2009, 03:36 PM
It's not his job to admonish fans who go off the deep end...it's not his job to see the bright side whenever things suck...if a fan cares enough to wait on hold to get his thirty seconds of catharsis...he should step aside and let it happen...as long as they are not disrespectful to him.

Most times he talks in circles and has trouble molding his jumbled thoughts into a meaningful conclusion.

That said...I understand the team wants a guy on the post game to paint a rosy picture when things turn to feces and he does that in a workmanlike way

Finally....I give the kid credit for pursuing his dream job...

Needless to say, I completely disagree with you. It is not my job to allow people to rant without them thinking first. The vast majority of people do not want to hear that.

And I don't JUST see the bright side to everything. I also see the other side, and people that aren't selective in hearing will hear me give both sides to just about everything. But there are a lot of fans that, when they are angry, only want to hear negative venting...and anything else is "Polyanna". Like I said, though, people will hear what they want to hear.

And I certainly do not have difficulty in reaching a coherent, meaningful conclusion. You just don't agree with me. Fine. But don't say my thoughts are jumbled, because they are not. Let's not get out of hand here, guy.

BadBobbyJenks
06-11-2009, 03:42 PM
Otherwise, it's dead silence. I mean, it might be dead silence anyway, but at least I would know for sure.You said it.:redneck


Edit: I have said it before, but I am not sure I could handle the callers Chris deals with on a daily basis. I screened calls for a couple of nights and these maniacs were yelling at me before they were even put on air.

southside rocks
06-11-2009, 04:04 PM
It's not his job to admonish fans who go off the deep end...it's not his job to see the bright side whenever things suck...if a fan cares enough to wait on hold to get his thirty seconds of catharsis...he should step aside and let it happen...as long as they are not disrespectful to him.



That would produce a radio show that a lot fewer people would listen to.

I've been a Sox fan since before Ranger was born and I'm a woman, so both those things influence my listening choices. I don't want to hear one angry, bombastic caller after another just verbally puke out "his thirty seconds of catharsis" -- I'll turn off the radio really quickly at that.

I want to hear discussion of baseball and of the Sox in particular. I don't care what opinions are held, but they should be opinions -- based on facts and reasons -- and not just reactions.

BainesHOF
06-11-2009, 04:29 PM
I wish Ranger was able to better separate the idiots from the venting fans with legitimate points. I think the root of this problem is that his own baseball knowledge is modest. On a scale of 1 to 10, I'd rate it a 5. A host of baseball show in a major market should have much more.

Ranger is pretty good on the pregame show when the format is programmed, but the quality of hosting goes way down on the postgame show when he has to improvise and talk baseball off the top of his head. That's when his lack of knowledge is exposed.

Having to deal with the idiots that call in the postgame game is a thankless part of the job. But the sympathy anyone deserves for having to deal with that does not make them a good host.

spawn
06-11-2009, 04:34 PM
I wish Ranger was able to better separate the idiots from the venting fans with legitimate points.
Well, the problem with that is the idiot posters far surpass the ones with legitimate points...by a wide margin. He's a better man than me. After a couple of losses in a row, I wouldn't be able to hold back on tellnig these idiots what I think of their calls.

I think the root of this problem is that his own baseball knowledge is modest.

And those calling his show are more knowlegeable? Please.

Quentin4prez
06-11-2009, 04:35 PM
ranger i love listening to your postgame despite what some are saying i think you do a very good job at being unbiased. I also think you do a fantastic job at analyzing moves made in the game. Sometimes when I'm very angry about a call in game you help me make some sense out of it.

BleacherBandit
06-11-2009, 04:36 PM
I wish Ranger was able to better separate the idiots from the venting fans with legitimate points. I think the root of this problem is that his own baseball knowledge is modest. On a scale of 1 to 10, I'd rate it a 5. A host of baseball show in a major market should have much more.



If Rongey has a baseball knowledge around 5, then most of us on WSI have one of around 1-2...Seriously, he knows a whole lot. And that isn't just because he's the pre/post-game guy. I mean he spends a whole crap-load of time around the White Sox personell, I assume.

The only reason I can't stand to listen to the post-game sometimes is because of the people calling in. There is always at least one complete bone-head that calls in after every loss. Rongey does an OK job dealing with him, but after a while, there's not much you can do to defend against somebody's idiocy. When these people are allowed on-air, sorry Ranger---I just can't listen...I know you probably have some quota of calls you have to answer, but sometimes it might help to kick somebody off if they have no idea what they're talking about, or are to irate to form complete sentences.

Big D
06-11-2009, 04:39 PM
One or two crazy ranters per show might be amusing after a tough loss (like the Tom Glavine guy), but a whole show with one idiot after another calling in would quickly get annoying. It's a delicate balance you have to maintain.

WhiteSoxFTW
06-11-2009, 04:42 PM
One or two crazy ranters per show might be amusing after a tough loss (like the Tom Glavine guy), but a whole show with one idiot after another calling in would quickly get annoying. It's a delicate balance you have to maintain.

I think that maybe the pure irrational, emotional thoughts that those types of callers have is what drives them to call in the first place.

Ranger
06-11-2009, 04:44 PM
I wish Ranger was able to better separate the idiots from the venting fans with legitimate points. I think the root of this problem is that his own baseball knowledge is modest. On a scale of 1 to 10, I'd rate it a 5. A host of baseball show in a major market should have much more.

Ranger is pretty good on the pregame show when the format is programmed, but the quality of hosting goes way down on the postgame show when he has to improvise and talk baseball off the top of his head. That's when his lack of knowledge is exposed.

Having to deal with the idiots that call in the postgame game is a thankless part of the job. But the sympathy anyone deserves for having to deal with that does not make them a good host.

Give me a break, dude. You, like the guy earlier in the thread, just don't like me...probably because you disagree with what I have to say (though I will debate you on any topic regarding this team and strategy of the game any day). That's alright, but to say I'm a 5 out of 10? Come on. I may not have been a major leaguer, but I get this game.

Risk
06-11-2009, 04:44 PM
I think that Ranger does a pretty good job. Its certainly not a job I would want b/c I've come to the conclusion that you waste your time and energy when you argue with the stupid (the "damn you and your facts, I know what I know and thats it" types), and the post game show seems to be overrun with that.

Risk

thomas35forever
06-11-2009, 05:21 PM
That was a good interview in today's paper. I've always wondered how he shows such restraint by dealing with the idiots who call night in and night out. I would've most definitely snapped by now and be out of a job.

Dan H
06-11-2009, 06:30 PM
I am not a big fan of talk radio in general. Many people who call in have nothing to say or rant on irrationally. It makes us thoughtful fans look bad. Not all of us are stupid loud mouths.

Having said that, the 2009 White Sox are enough to make anyone crazy.

TornLabrum
06-11-2009, 06:39 PM
Give me a break, dude. You, like the guy earlier in the thread, just don't like me...probably because you disagree with what I have to say (though I will debate you on any topic regarding this team and strategy of the game any day). That's alright, but to say I'm a 5 out of 10? Come on. I may not have been a major leaguer, but I get this game.

Here's something to remember when you listen to the people around here who tell you you don't know what you're doing on the postgame show. They said the same damn thing about Dave Wills and Brian Dolgin. Before Dave Wills there was no WSI, so I have no idea what these people said about whoever it was who came before him.

My comment to those of you who question Ranger's baseball knowledge, etc., "If you're so damn good, audition for the job yourself."

BainesHOF
06-11-2009, 07:12 PM
It's nothing personal, Ranger. I'm just talking about your baseball knowledge and how it affects your hosting. Just because you don't like my opinion, don't assume it's personal. It's not. You do the same with some callers and that's why some people get aggravated with you.

A couple things I'll be happy to debate you on. The thing that sticks out most is an example I've used here before. You once said Bobby Jenks doesn't throw close to 100 mph like he used to because he doesn't want to. That's ludicrous. And you said it, saying that he's throwing slower because it brings him better results. While I have no problem with Jenks' results, the reason he doesn't throw as hard as he used to is simply because he can't for whatever reason. His weight might have something to do with it. Maybe his arm/shoulder isn't in the same condition it once was.

A more recent example...your total defense of Greg Walker and your refusal to allow even for the possibility that someone else might do a better job is comical. Sure, the hitters are ultimately responsible for themselves. That's a given. But to blindly say that Walker doesn't have any role in the team's miserable offense is ignorant of the impact a coach can have on players. I'm not even saying Walker is to blame. I'm allowing for the fact that he might not be, even though odds and the role of a coach by definition suggest that he does have a certain influence. Your reactionary defense of Walker and refusual to allow for the possibility that he might be part of the problem is insulting. Such amateurism makes the show hard to listen to at times.

For the record, many people on this site have a high degree of baseball intelligence.

And Dave Wills knows his baseball.

Quentin4prez
06-11-2009, 07:40 PM
It's nothing personal, Ranger. I'm just talking about your baseball knowledge and how it affects your hosting. Just because you don't like my opinion, don't assume it's personal. It's not. You do the same with some callers and that's why some people get aggravated with you.

A couple things I'll be happy to debate you on. The thing that sticks out most is an example I've used here before. You once said Bobby Jenks doesn't throw close to 100 mph like he used to because he doesn't want to. That's ludicrous. And you said it, saying that he's throwing slower because it brings him better results. While I have no problem with Jenks' results, the reason he doesn't throw as hard as he used to is simply because he can't for whatever reason. His weight might have something to do with it. Maybe his arm/shoulder isn't in the same condition it once was.

A more recent example...your total defense of Greg Walker and your refusal to allow even for the possibility that someone else might do a better job is comical. Sure, the hitters are ultimately responsible for themselves. That's a given. But to blindly say that Walker doesn't have any role in the team's miserable offense is ignorant of the impact a coach can have on players. I'm not even saying Walker is to blame. I'm allowing for the fact that he might not be, even though odds and the role of a coach by definition suggest that he does have a certain influence. Your reactionary defense of Walker and refusual to allow for the possibility that he might be part of the problem is insulting. Such amateurism makes the show hard to listen to at times.

For the record, many people on this site have a high degree of baseball intelligence.

And Dave Wills knows his baseball.
you act like both of what you just said are facts.... i for one don't blame Greg walker for the players not hitting on this team all these players are streaky and guys like Dye have never done better. Also did you miss the fact that in big situations jenks was able to throw 100 again which would lead me to believe that ranger is right and he doesn't use it as much because he is more effective by having more precise fastballs than being able to throw them faster.

BadBobbyJenks
06-11-2009, 07:42 PM
Did you catch a Pods foul ball in the 9th Rongey?

BainesHOF
06-11-2009, 08:03 PM
you act like both of what you just said are facts.... i for one don't blame Greg walker for the players not hitting on this team all these players are streaky and guys like Dye have never done better. Also did you miss the fact that in big situations jenks was able to throw 100 again which would lead me to believe that ranger is right and he doesn't use it as much because he is more effective by having more precise fastballs than being able to throw them faster.

It's fact how Ranger has responded to those questioning Walker. It's debatable if/how much at fault Walker is for the team's offensive struggles. That's the point.

It's fact that Jenks does not throw as hard as he used to. It's fact that Cooper dismissed Ranger's theory that Jenks simply doesn't want to throw as hard as he used to.

tebman
06-11-2009, 08:07 PM
I enjoy Chris's work. Always have. He knows this team and he knows the rest of the league and that allows him to discuss and debate with callers, even those who have a hard time connecting a subject and a verb.

He's a real Broadcaster and that's a genuine skill. I'm one who's glad he stumbled into that radio gig when he was in college.

Brian26
06-11-2009, 08:21 PM
I wish Ranger was able to better separate the idiots from the venting fans with legitimate points. I think the root of this problem is that his own baseball knowledge is modest. On a scale of 1 to 10, I'd rate it a 5. A host of baseball show in a major market should have much more.

I disagree with this quite a bit. I've been quite impressed with his knowledge over the past few years. He's one of the few guys in town I actually enjoy listening to on sports radio.

Frater Perdurabo
06-11-2009, 08:54 PM
Not to suck up, but I think you're a damn good broadcaster and know a heck of a lot about baseball, Ranger, even if we do disagree on some points. :cool:

whitesoxfan
06-11-2009, 09:07 PM
I think Ranger does a good job, all things considered. The most maddening thing though is the Walker defense and the defense that is given each and every time when it's debated. Of course that's the "these hitters are professional" argument that is used time after time. My only response to that is a hitting coach isn't really necessary then if all of these hitters are professional.

Oh well, not everyone can be perfect. Just keep doing what you're doing.

TornLabrum
06-11-2009, 09:18 PM
The Sox have gone the route of blaming poor hitting on the hitting coaches. Old hitting coaches were fired and new ones who replaced them were fired. Maybe it's the type of hitters the Sox have had over the years. You know, streaky power hitters.

whitesoxfan
06-11-2009, 09:20 PM
Maybe we should replace Greg Walker with Von Joshua...oh, yeah, he was responsible for the Sox not being able to hit, too.

Not saying that's the sole reason, but sometimes you have to make a move just for the sake of making one. This guy hasn't been getting it done for quite some time. I'm beginning to think he has some interesting photos of Kenny and/or Ozzie.

Frater Perdurabo
06-11-2009, 09:25 PM
The Sox have gone the route of blaming poor hitting on the pitching coaches. Old hitting coaches were fired and new ones who replaced them were fired. Maybe it's the type of hitters the Sox have had over the years. You know, streaky power hitters.

Maybe it's their overall organizational philosophy. Fill the roster with streaky power hitters, and hire a hitting coach who as a player also was a streaky power hitter.

Sargeant79
06-11-2009, 09:34 PM
I'll probably get attacked for saying this, but have we noticed in all the threads that Rongey posts in that the people who say that he is lousy on the radio and disagree with the way he handles nonsensical rants also tend to be the same people that come on this board and spew off nonsensical rants?

I'm just sayin'...

JB98
06-11-2009, 11:10 PM
I don't like to listen to the postgame show. It has nothing to do with Chris. I just think the people who call his show are dumb.

People have often told me that I should get into radio, presumably because I have strong opinions about the Sox and baseball in general. I could never do that, because I'd be swearing at the people who call in.

drewcifer
06-11-2009, 11:13 PM
The Sox have gone the route of blaming poor hitting on the hitting coaches. Old hitting coaches were fired and new ones who replaced them were fired. Maybe it's the type of hitters the Sox have had over the years. You know, streaky power hitters.

What the ass are you talking about?

...
06-11-2009, 11:51 PM
What the ass are you talking about?

By pitching coach, he meant hitting coach. This is not ass surgery.

TornLabrum
06-12-2009, 12:30 AM
What the ass are you talking about?

I made the change.

Nellie_Fox
06-12-2009, 02:51 AM
The thing that sticks out most is an example I've used here before. You once said Bobby Jenks doesn't throw close to 100 mph like he used to because he doesn't want to. That's ludicrous. And you said it, saying that he's throwing slower because it brings him better results. While I have no problem with Jenks' results, the reason he doesn't throw as hard as he used to is simply because he can't for whatever reason. And you are wrong. I've seen Bobby crack 98-99 when the occasion calls for it, or when he's pissed (like the next time he pitched to Gomez in game 163 after Gomez hot dogged scoring the winning run in the last game at the Metrodome last season.)

WhiteSox5187
06-12-2009, 03:10 AM
And you are wrong. I've seen Bobby crack 98-99 when the occasion calls for it, or when he's pissed (like the next time he pitched to Gomez in game 163 after Gomez hot dogged scoring the winning run in the last game at the Metrodome last season.)

He as consistently reaching 99-100 in game 163 and in the Cubs series too that year. I've seen him hit 97-98 this year, but not consistently. I've noticed that when he throws 93-94 the ball has a lot more movement to it.

Nellie_Fox
06-12-2009, 03:29 AM
He as consistently reaching 99-100 in game 163 and in the Cubs series too that year. I've seen him hit 97-98 this year, but not consistently. I've noticed that when he throws 93-94 the ball has a lot more movement to it.That's been my observation as well. Ergo, the contention that he can't throw hard any more is simply not true, argument lost without Ranger even having to engage in it.

whitesoxfan
06-12-2009, 04:22 AM
He as consistently reaching 99-100 in game 163 and in the Cubs series too that year. I've seen him hit 97-98 this year, but not consistently. I've noticed that when he throws 93-94 the ball has a lot more movement to it.

I've also noticed when he's throwing 93-94 he usually has his worst outings; today being one of them for example.

WhiteSox5187
06-12-2009, 07:11 AM
I've also noticed when he's throwing 93-94 he usually has his worst outings; today being one of them for example.

It has nothing to do with speed it has everything to do with location. His pitch to Granderson was just flat out bad! It broke right over the heart of the plate. But when he was setting down, what was it, 46 guys in a row? he was consistently around 93-95. He threw some nasty pitches to Cabera (who struck out if I recall) that were around 93-95 because at that speed he gets the ball to almost act like a cutter. When he is throwing it 96+ it doesn't move, it's straight and it's job is to just get past the hitter (but a good hitter will hit that pitch if it's not located right). So again, with Bobby it's more about location than velocity. He can still blow it by you, but I would imagine that puts a bit of strain on his arm and I'd rather have Bobby get guys out with 93 mph stuff that is well located and have a low K:9 while getting at least 30 saves rather than him blowing guys away and spending months on the DL every year.

Long story short, if Bobby was still throwing 97+ every time out, he wouldn't be pitching right now. He would have blown out his elbow a long time ago.

southside rocks
06-12-2009, 09:29 AM
Long story short, if Bobby was still throwing 97+ every time out, he wouldn't be pitching right now. He would have blown out his elbow a long time ago.

And that is what most hard-throwing kids figure out and when they do, they become pitchers, if they can.

Pitching is about so much more than the speed you can put on a thrown baseball.

JB98
06-12-2009, 01:33 PM
I thought location was a bigger problem for Jenks yesterday than velocity. Granderson is a dead low-ball hitter. Look where that pitch that got hit out of the ballpark was.

It was a sloppy pitch by Jenks, opposite of what you need to throw to get Granderson out.

Ranger
06-12-2009, 08:43 PM
It's nothing personal, Ranger. I'm just talking about your baseball knowledge and how it affects your hosting. Just because you don't like my opinion, don't assume it's personal. It's not. You do the same with some callers and that's why some people get aggravated with you.

A couple things I'll be happy to debate you on. The thing that sticks out most is an example I've used here before. You once said Bobby Jenks doesn't throw close to 100 mph like he used to because he doesn't want to. That's ludicrous. And you said it, saying that he's throwing slower because it brings him better results. While I have no problem with Jenks' results, the reason he doesn't throw as hard as he used to is simply because he can't for whatever reason. His weight might have something to do with it. Maybe his arm/shoulder isn't in the same condition it once was.

A more recent example...your total defense of Greg Walker and your refusal to allow even for the possibility that someone else might do a better job is comical. Sure, the hitters are ultimately responsible for themselves. That's a given. But to blindly say that Walker doesn't have any role in the team's miserable offense is ignorant of the impact a coach can have on players. I'm not even saying Walker is to blame. I'm allowing for the fact that he might not be, even though odds and the role of a coach by definition suggest that he does have a certain influence. Your reactionary defense of Walker and refusual to allow for the possibility that he might be part of the problem is insulting. Such amateurism makes the show hard to listen to at times.

For the record, many people on this site have a high degree of baseball intelligence.

And Dave Wills knows his baseball.

I don't care if it's personal or not, but don't tell me I don't know the game or don't understand it. You won't win that battle.

So, onto the debate about Jenks...do you know this for a fact that he doesn't throw 100 and doesn't because he is unable to? Because, if you've read the responses to your post, you'll see that a lot of other people have noticed that Jenks has, in fact, thrown 98+ on a few occasions in the last year or so. Game 163 is an example. Game 4 against Tampa is another. This would lead a normal person to believe that Jenks still has the ability to throw that hard. Something you have apparently not figured out about many hard-throwing pitchers is that they get to a point where they realize that if they want a long career, they will find ways to get outs without having to throw 100. Not to say that he hasn't had soreness/tightness, but it doesn't seem debatable that he is still CAPABALE of throwing 99-100.

Regarding Walker, I fully understand that a coach can have an impact, but his impact with this club is going to be limited. If you can explain, in detail, how a different hitting coach would be able to make his guys perform better in the clutch, then I'll be happy to listen. However, you won't be able to, because there is nothing he can do about it. Some of those guys need a psychologist, not a hitting coach.

oeo
06-12-2009, 08:50 PM
Regarding Walker, I fully understand that a coach can have an impact, but his impact with this club is going to be limited. If you can explain, in detail, how a different hitting coach would be able to make his guys perform better in the clutch, then I'll be happy to listen. However, you won't be able to, because there is nothing he can do about it. Some of those guys need a psychologist, not a hitting coach.

Getz and Fields most certainly need mechanical changes. Fields' problems are fixable, but changes likely won't happen here.

Ranger
06-12-2009, 10:12 PM
Getz and Fields most certainly need mechanical changes. Fields' problems are fixable, but changes likely won't happen here.

Then what about Dye's .224 average with RISP? Or AJ's RISP that is 120 points worse than his overall average? That's Walker's fault? Dye is the same now as he was 3 years ago, as far as his mechanics. Same with AJ. This team's issue is with runners in scoring position, not necessarily with overall batting. Their problems lie in several guys on the team that have the TBS (Tight Backside Syndrome). They get into RBI situations and try to do too much. A hitting coach ain't gonna fix that. Maybe a therapist would.

You'll find no team, by the way, where every player is simultaneously mechanically sound at the plate. There is always someone out of whack. And it often takes time to get them back to where they need to be...even when the problem is known.

Brian26
06-12-2009, 10:14 PM
He as consistently reaching 99-100 in game 163 and in the Cubs series too that year. I've seen him hit 97-98 this year, but not consistently. I've noticed that when he throws 93-94 the ball has a lot more movement to it.

He was hitting 98 on the gun in KC a couple of weekends back, but there was some speculation that the Royals' gun is running fast.

BainesHOF
06-13-2009, 01:52 PM
I watch the games. I know how hard Jenks throws. He doesn't throw as consistently hard nor does he top out as high as he used to. Ranger, feel free to ask Cooper why. I'm sure he'll give you the same answer as he has in the past.

Ranger, there's plenty you don't know about the game. I know there's plenty about the game that I don't know. That's why I love listening to our four games announcers on TV and the radio. Their knowledge rates a 10. My problem is not what you know, but what you don't know and still talk about anyway. It's an odd trait. It makes for an aggravating listen when you do it.

Part of being a hitting coach is being a psychologist.

A new hitting coach could have the same impact on our hitters as Cooper has had on many of our pitchers. It's not the same sport, but today I just heard Kobe mention four of five of his coaches by name who help him improve. It's an example of one of the best players in the world saying how much coaching helps him. Certainly our veteran hitters are not beyond help. Who's job is it to help them? Obviously the hitting coach. When the hitters don't improve or even regress...

Ranger
06-13-2009, 03:51 PM
I watch the games. I know how hard Jenks throws. He doesn't throw as consistently hard nor does he top out as high as he used to. Ranger, feel free to ask Cooper why. I'm sure he'll give you the same answer as he has in the past.

Ranger, there's plenty you don't know about the game. I know there's plenty about the game that I don't know. That's why I love listening to our four games announcers on TV and the radio. Their knowledge rates a 10. My problem is not what you know, but what you don't know and still talk about anyway. It's an odd trait. It makes for an aggravating listen when you do it.

Part of being a hitting coach is being a psychologist.

A new hitting coach could have the same impact on our hitters as Cooper has had on many of our pitchers. It's not the same sport, but today I just heard Kobe mention four of five of his coaches by name who help him improve. It's an example of one of the best players in the world saying how much coaching helps him. Certainly our veteran hitters are not beyond help. Who's job is it to help them? Obviously the hitting coach. When the hitters don't improve or even regress...

First, don't compare Kobe Bryant and the NBA to a hitter and MLB. It's not the same.

Second, even though you don't agree with what I'm saying, I know what I'm talking about. If I don't have an answer for something, I will tell you I don't know. If I have an answer, it's because I know what I'm talking about. I don't pull things out of my backside and tell you it's fact. If I speculate, I'll tell you I'm speculating. Just because you don't agree, doesn't mean I'm wrong.

By the way, many of those hitters (and even former Sox players) think Greg Walker helps/has helped them greatly. So, if they think he helped them, I guess he did. The fact that nobody blames the players themselves is mind-boggling and shows a lack of understanding of what a hitting coach is really supposed to do.

TornLabrum
06-13-2009, 04:33 PM
First, don't compare Kobe Bryant and the NBA to a hitter and MLB. It's not the same.

Second, even though you don't agree with what I'm saying, I know what I'm talking about. If I don't have an answer for something, I will tell you I don't know. If I have an answer, it's because I know what I'm talking about. I don't pull things out of my backside and tell you it's fact. If I speculate, I'll tell you I'm speculating. Just because you don't agree, doesn't mean I'm wrong.

By the way, many of those hitters (and even former Sox players) think Greg Walker helps/has helped them greatly. So, if they think he helped them, I guess he did. The fact that nobody blames the players themselves is mind-boggling and shows a lack of understanding of what a hitting coach is really supposed to do.

Didn't you know? The hitting coach is supposed to go out there and swing the bat for them. When he doesn't do that, he's supposed to make sure they don't swing at bad pitches or hit the ball on the left side of the infield with a runner on first.

And what makes you think shooting a basketball is any different than hitting a baseball. It just shows your lack of knowledge of the game!

I've been here since before the ESPN board people came over, and I'm still amazed at some of the stuff that people try to pass off as rational thought around here.

southside rocks
06-13-2009, 06:39 PM
" Believe me, the farther you sit from the plate, the smarter you get."

https://www.playboy.co.uk/life-and-style/interview/78346/1/Playboy-Interview-Ozzie-Guillen/commentsPage/1/contentPage/0

Pear-Zin-Ski
06-13-2009, 07:05 PM
In case anyone missed that....

Then what about Dye's .224 average with RISP? Or AJ's RISP that is 120 points worse than his overall average? That's Walker's fault? Dye is the same now as he was 3 years ago, as far as his mechanics. Same with AJ. This team's issue is with runners in scoring position, not necessarily with overall batting. Their problems lie in several guys on the team that have the TBS (Tight Backside Syndrome). They get into RBI situations and try to do too much. A hitting coach ain't gonna fix that. Maybe a therapist would.

BainesHOF
06-13-2009, 07:48 PM
I know most of you understand the point I made regarding Kobe: That even a veteran superstar can be helped by a coach. I made it for those who have said or insinuated that a coach doesn't have much of an impact on veterans. Nobody compared playing basketball to baseball, but I guess that's one way to divert an argument.

With regard to an impact of a coach in general and Walker specifically, there can come a time when a guy who's been productive/helpful in the past comes to a point where he becomes less effective for whatever reason. Coaches and managers get fired all the time for a myriad of reasons, and their replacements sometimes do lead to an overall improvement. I'm not even advocating that Walker should be fired. I'm just being critical of the thought some hold that it'd be pointless to fire Walker. Many coaches have been fired for far less.

Of course players are responsible for their performance. That should be an understandable given in this discussion and others.

Ranger, you had a good day on the air Saturday. That's meant to be a sincere compliment. Your observation that Getz hits too many fly balls was particularly astute.

TornLabrum
06-13-2009, 08:07 PM
I know most of you understand the point I made regarding Kobe: That even a veteran superstar can be helped by a coach. I made it for those who have said or insinuated that a coach doesn't have much of an impact on veterans. Nobody compared playing basketball to baseball, but I guess that's one way to divert an argument.

With regard to an impact of a coach in general and Walker specifically, there can come a time when a guy who's been productive/helpful in the past comes to a point where he becomes less effective for whatever reason. Coaches and managers get fired all the time for a myriad of reasons, and their replacements sometimes do lead to an overall improvement. I'm not even advocating that Walker should be fired. I'm just being critical of the thought some hold that it'd be pointless to fire Walker. Many coaches have been fired for far less.

Of course players are responsible for their performance. That should be an understandable given in this discussion and others.

Ranger, you had a good day on the air Saturday. That's meant to be a sincere compliment. Your observation that Getz hits too many fly balls was particularly astute.

I'll quote what Ranger had to say about Walker and what players have said about him:

By the way, many of those hitters (and even former Sox players) think Greg Walker helps/has helped them greatly. So, if they think he helped them, I guess he did. The fact that nobody blames the players themselves is mind-boggling and shows a lack of understanding of what a hitting coach is really supposed to do.I think he addressed what you had to say. Personally I remember how important it was to fire Von Joshua, and how much that helped the Sox offense.

PhillipsBubba
06-13-2009, 08:45 PM
I've been here since before the ESPN board people came over, and I'm still amazed at some of the stuff that people try to pass off as rational thought around here.


Hey we are fans (derived from the word fanatic)...who says we should be rational.

We love the White Sox...are thrilled when they win and disappointed when they lose...and because fans pay the freight (along with advertisers) the opinions expressed here should be considered somewhat important no matter how far afield they seem.

Nobody on this board need apologize for the opinions they express because in the end, all they want is White Sox to win.

I'm no baseball expert...never played organized ball (sand lot...yes) but I've been watching and rooting for the Sox for 50 years. One thing I can say with certainty...I know the difference between good and bad baseball because I've seen both. When I watch a game, I don't need Ken Harrelson, Steve Stone or for that matter the uber sensitive Chris Rongey (lighten up young fella) to tell me what I just saw.

I read and sometimes post here because like everyone I love the Sox and like to see what the fans are thinking. I value all the opinions...doesn't mean I agree with them. I always take a bit of knowledge from my visits (and sometimes a belly laugh):D:

PS...Now is the time to trade Contreras...another good start (against the Cubs perhaps) and his value will skyrocket...there is going to be a contender looking for stretch run pitching who will pay handsomely.

Ranger
06-13-2009, 09:31 PM
Hey we are fans (derived from the word fanatic)...who says we should be rational.

We love the White Sox...are thrilled when they win and disappointed when they lose...and because fans pay the freight (along with advertisers) the opinions expressed here should be considered somewhat important no matter how far afield they seem.

Nobody on this board need apologize for the opinions they express because in the end, all they want is White Sox to win.

I'm no baseball expert...never played organized ball (sand lot...yes) but I've been watching and rooting for the Sox for 50 years. One thing I can say with certainty...I know the difference between good and bad baseball because I've seen both. When I watch a game, I don't need Ken Harrelson, Steve Stone or for that matter the uber sensitive Chris Rongey (lighten up young fella) to tell me what I just saw.



Just answering the critics, man. If you'd prefer, I'll take the other route other hosts take and tell you I don't care what anyone says about me and that I'm above responding to your criticisms. However, that's not me.

And just because you're passionate, doesn't mean you can't be intelligent. I'm not in the position to be an irrational fan. I'm in the position to be fair.

Ranger
06-13-2009, 09:32 PM
Ranger, you had a good day on the air Saturday. That's meant to be a sincere compliment. Your observation that Getz hits too many fly balls was particularly astute.

Nice observation from someone who's a 5 out of 10 on the knowledge and understanding scale.

Daver
06-13-2009, 09:41 PM
A couple things I'll be happy to debate you on. The thing that sticks out most is an example I've used here before. You once said Bobby Jenks doesn't throw close to 100 mph like he used to because he doesn't want to. That's ludicrous. And you said it, saying that he's throwing slower because it brings him better results. While I have no problem with Jenks' results, the reason he doesn't throw as hard as he used to is simply because he can't for whatever reason.

You base this pure speculation on what, exactly?

There is a huge difference between throwing and pitching, you do grasp that concept, right?

drewcifer
06-13-2009, 09:57 PM
Hopefully we trade Jenks before he's a worthless pitcher/thrower anyway.

We need the pieces.

BainesHOF
06-15-2009, 03:24 AM
There is a huge difference between throwing and pitching, you do grasp that concept, right?

Of course.

My posts have been about Jenks' velocity, not his effectiveness.

Nellie_Fox
06-15-2009, 03:48 AM
Of course.

My posts have been about Jenks' velocity, not his effectiveness.And you have not addressed the posts that prove you wrong. He has shown he can still throw in the upper 90's if he wants to.

DonnieDarko
06-15-2009, 03:56 AM
As he did today, throwing 97 at one point. The dude can go that high if he wants to. He just doesn't.

BainesHOF
06-16-2009, 10:05 AM
As he did today, throwing 97 at one point. The dude can go that high if he wants to. He just doesn't.

LOL!

FYI...he used to regularly top out at more than 97.

PhillipsBubba
06-16-2009, 11:55 AM
LOL!

FYI...he used to regularly top out at more than 97.

I agree...Jenks' velocity is down since the 2005 glory days.

If a power pitcher has the ability to hit the high nineties consistently...he'd be a fool not too.

Jenks can't do it with regularity. Yes...he can reach back for it when he's in trouble.

If he could still bring it in the high nineties, he'd be untouchable with that great curve he has.

I also agree with you that he is not in the best of shape and his legs have probably suffered a bit which translates into reduced flexibility and power.

I wouldn't be upset if KW moved him before the deadline.

spawn
06-16-2009, 12:13 PM
I agree...Jenks' velocity is down since the 2005 glory days.

If a power pitcher has the ability to hit the high nineties consistently...he'd be a fool not too.

Tell that to Justin Verlander. The guy can get it over 95+ consistently, but chooses his spots to do so, as evident when he pitched against the Sox last week. As far as a power pitcher being a fool not to pitch if he can get it in the high nineties consistently, that doesn't work well when you can't throw it for a strike consistently.

PhillipsBubba
06-16-2009, 12:29 PM
Tell that to Justin Verlander....

You example doesn't work...JV is a starter.

Historically..the best closers have been power pitchers (Bruce Gossage). Of course guys like Hoyt Wilhelm (knuckleball) or Bruce Sutter (split finger) enjoyed success with "trick" pitches.

Verlander was getting the Sox out the other day in the early innings with a devastating curve...then for reason he lost control of it so when he got in trouble, he reached back a blew guys way with his fastball. But he can't do that for seven or eight innings.

So IF Jenks can still bring it consistently...why doesn't he? He's in there to face three guys...

Remember the 2005 playoffs when he came in and was throwing 97-100 MPH.

Those days are gone...for whatever reason:(:

spawn
06-16-2009, 12:43 PM
You example doesn't work...JV is a starter.

So what if he's a starter? The reason Bobby doesn't throw 95+ is becasue he doesn't have to. Also, because he was falling behind guys because he didn't have consistent command of the fast ball. But you'll see what you want to I guess. :shrug:

Ranger
06-16-2009, 01:13 PM
So IF Jenks can still bring it consistently...why doesn't he? He's in there to face three guys...



That question was answered 3 pages ago. The less he reaches back to throw that hard, the greater the likelihood he will extend his career. Reliever or not.

That's his thinking.

cards press box
06-16-2009, 01:31 PM
Comments after columns and stories on newspaper websites are always brutal. A lot of mouth-breathers out there...

Ranger, the Sox are going to be fine. As you have said, they may be on a permanent rollercoaster this season but, in the long run, they are making progress.

It seems that the Sox are playing for this year and making sure that they continue to add the young talent from their system (e.g., Gordon Beckham and Aaron Poreda) to the major league roster. The Sox are also finding out whether certain players -- like Josh Fields, for example -- have a future with the team.

The Sox are going to be fine.

Jim Shorts
06-16-2009, 02:35 PM
If a power pitcher has the ability to hit the high nineties consistently...he'd be a fool not too.




Evidently, you don't grasp the difference between throwing and pitching

Dick Allen
06-16-2009, 04:00 PM
Historically..the best closers have been power pitchers (Bruce Gossage).

:(:
Who?

eriqjaffe
06-16-2009, 04:05 PM
Who?How could you forget? He and Goose Sutter were two of the top closers of their era!

spawn
06-16-2009, 04:08 PM
How could you forget? He and Goose Sutter were two of the top closers of their era!
I always thought Lee Eckersley was a pretty damn good reliever...him and Dennis Thigpen.

TornLabrum
06-16-2009, 09:43 PM
I always thought Lee Eckersley was a pretty damn good reliever...him and Dennis Thigpen.

You forgot to mention Bobby Smith.

DSpivack
06-16-2009, 09:48 PM
You forgot to mention Bobby Smith.

I had forgotten about good ol' Robert Smith. Even he wasn't The Cure for the Vikings woes.

Nellie_Fox
06-17-2009, 02:03 AM
Historically..the best closers have been power pitchers (Bruce Gossage). Of course guys like Hoyt Wilhelm (knuckleball) or Bruce Sutter (split finger) enjoyed success with "trick" pitches.Not this nonsense again. It's been years since we've had this argument. You name one who was a power pitcher and two who weren't, and think you've won the argument. Eckersly was the best of his era, and he wasn't a power pitcher. Thigpen was in the mid-nineties, but had great movement. Mariano Rivera's best pitch is his unhittable cutter.

Yes, there have been great closers who were power guys. But there were a whole lot who weren't.

So IF Jenks can still bring it consistently...why doesn't he? He's in there to face three guys...

Remember the 2005 playoffs when he came in and was throwing 97-100 MPH.

Those days are gone...for whatever reason:(:Because his fastball has more movement in the low to mid-nineties. Major league hitters will catch up with anything short of a Syd Finch fastball if it's straight.

BainesHOF was arguing that he can't do it. He has shown that he can. The argument is lost. He doesn't have to do it all the time for BainesHOF to be wrong, he just has to be able to still do it, and he can.

PhillipsBubba
06-17-2009, 02:20 AM
Historically..the best closers have been power pitchers (Bruce Gossage).....


I was close...Bruce SOUNDS like Goose...:tongue:

DonnieDarko
06-17-2009, 02:39 AM
Because his fastball has more movement in the low to mid-nineties. Major league hitters will catch up with anything short of a Syd Finch fastball if it's straight.

Curious. What is a Syd Finch fastball?

Nellie_Fox
06-17-2009, 02:44 AM
Curious. What is a Syd Finch fastball?I hate to cite Wikipedia for anything, but this article (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sidd_Finch) is correct. I even got his first name wrong, it was Sidd, not Syd.

Sports Illustrated did an April Fools article, written by George Plimpton, about a Mets prospect who could throw 160 MPH, and pitched in bare feet, and a whole lot of people believed the article.

DonnieDarko
06-17-2009, 02:52 AM
Hah! I had never heard of that. One year before my time. Still pretty funny that people would actually believe that stuff, though. XD

Nellie_Fox
06-17-2009, 03:48 AM
Hah! I had never heard of that. One year before my time. Still pretty funny that people would actually believe that stuff, though. XD1985 Seems like yesterday. *heavy sigh*

DonnieDarko
06-17-2009, 04:08 AM
Aw. Come on, now. It can't be that bad. Surely, you're not like...in your 60s or something, right?

...right? >_>

Nellie_Fox
06-17-2009, 04:17 AM
Aw. Come on, now. It can't be that bad. Surely, you're not like...in your 60s or something, right?

...right? >_>You sure know how to hurt a guy. I'm mere weeks away from 60. None of my "landmark" birthdays bothered me before, but this one does.

DonnieDarko
06-17-2009, 04:21 AM
You sure know how to hurt a guy. I'm mere weeks away from 60. None of my "landmark" birthdays bothered me before, but this one does.

:o:

...

...

...

Well, uh...with age comes wisdom? ^_^;

TornLabrum
06-17-2009, 08:38 AM
:o:

...

...

...

Well, uh...with age comes wisdom? ^_^;

And creaky bones and joints unfortunately.

Paulwny
06-17-2009, 12:07 PM
You sure know how to hurt a guy. I'm mere weeks away from 60. None of my "landmark" birthdays bothered me before, but this one does.


You can't imagine the feeling when the medicare card shows up in the mail, at least you still have 5 years before this happens.
I was depressed for a week. :whiner:

DonnieDarko
06-17-2009, 01:01 PM
...wow, really? There's a large older crowd here. And many who can type well and apparently know how to use the internet. You'll have to excuse my surprise here, but the only other people I know within this age range that can do that are my mom and her boyfriend.

spawn
06-17-2009, 01:26 PM
...wow, really? There's a large older crowd here. And many who can type well and apparently know how to use the internet. You'll have to excuse my surprise here, but the only other people I know within this age range that can do that are my mom and her boyfriend.
And they walk upright as well, which is unheard of in the species...

DonnieDarko
06-17-2009, 01:26 PM
And they walk upright as well, which is unheard of in the species...

no wai! :o:

TornLabrum
06-17-2009, 03:18 PM
And they walk upright as well, which is unheard of in the species...

Not I! I'm a knuckle walker.

spawn
06-17-2009, 03:29 PM
Not I! I'm a knuckle walker.
I didn't know you were a Cubs fan...


:duck:

WhiteSoxFTW
06-17-2009, 05:41 PM
Ranger, we were talking about something in the post game thread relating to Jenk's speed. I dont' really have an opinion on the previous argument between others on this thread, but I'd still like to know how fast he really is throwing. I watched the game on MLB Gameday (the free one) and it showed his pitches today between 93-96. Apparently, the WGN feed showed him hitting 99. And CBS Sports showed him consistently 96-97mph according to another poster here.

I assume the media outlets are relying on different radar guns? Is MLB Gameday probably the most accurate? It seem really sophisticated showing the release speed, the result speed, and the break of the pitch.

Just interested in your take. :smile:

roylestillman
06-17-2009, 05:56 PM
...wow, really? There's a large older crowd here. And many who can type well and apparently know how to use the internet. You'll have to excuse my surprise here, but the only other people I know within this age range that can do that are my mom and her boyfriend.

Actually when this all started we just used to send letters to one another....

DonnieDarko
06-17-2009, 10:31 PM
Actually when this all started we just used to send letters to one another....

"Letters"? What are these..."letters" you speak of? Do you mean the things that make up words?

Nellie_Fox
06-18-2009, 01:41 AM
Actually when this all started we just used to send letters to one another....

"Letters"? What are these..."letters" you speak of? Do you mean the things that make up words?Well, you see, we'd take a clay tablet, and using a stick that we'd sharpen by rubbing it on a rock, we'd scrape special signs into the clay. After a day in the sun, it would be dry enough that we could wrap it in leaves and put it in a pouch which we would leave hanging from a tree limb.

Then, if anyone decided to go on a walkabout, they'd take the pouch with them and drop it off as close to its intended destination as they would come, where it would wait for the next person who came by. It would get there eventually.

http://tbn1.google.com/images?q=tbn:S7zZLYuBS0ZTVM:http://www.simpsoncrazy.com/content/pictures/regulars/Grampa4.gif

Nellie_Fox
06-18-2009, 01:48 AM
Oh, and by the way Ranger, you've earned one of these:

:tomatoaward:

BainesHOF
06-26-2009, 07:36 PM
The postgame show was a tough listen today. Ranger didn't know the rules of pinch-hitting. Everybody's allowed to make mistakes, but this was less of a mistake than a lack of basic knowledge about the game.

Then Ranger played his role of Ozzie apologist. I'm not saying A.J. shouldn't have pinch hit. However, whether the matchup of A.J. vs. Marshall in that situation was the most ideal for us is certainly debatable...unless you're an Ozzie apologist. The callers questioning Ozzie's tactic in that situation didn't deserve to be dismissed.

skobabe8
06-26-2009, 07:45 PM
The postgame show was a tough listen today. Ranger didn't know the rules of pinch-hitting. Everybody's allowed to make mistakes, but this was less of a mistake than a lack of basic knowledge about the game.

Then Ranger played his role of Ozzie apologist. I'm not saying A.J. shouldn't have pinch hit. However, whether the matchup of A.J. vs. Marshall in that situation was the most ideal for us is certainly debatable...unless you're an Ozzie apologist. The callers questioning Ozzie's tactic in that situation didn't deserve to be dismissed.

You don't like Rongey, we get it.

Move on.

spawn
06-26-2009, 09:50 PM
Then Ranger played his role of Ozzie apologist. I'm not saying A.J. shouldn't have pinch hit. However, whether the matchup of A.J. vs. Marshall in that situation was the most ideal for us is certainly debatable...unless you're an Ozzie apologist. The callers questioning Ozzie's tactic in that situation didn't deserve to be dismissed.
Yes they did, because they were idiots...two in particluar:

1. The guy who thought Ozzie was outmanaged because he pinch hit AJ because he hates the Cubs and the reason he pinch hit AJ was AJ has a grudge agains the Cubs as well. So his reasoning for subbing AJ was out of spite.

2. The guy who said with Marshall warming, Ozzie should've pinch hit Nix (who was pinch running for Thome), even though doing so would've allowed Marmol to stay in the game. However, if Marshall were to come out, then Wise should be sent in to pinch hit. In other words, Ozzie should've burned 3 players for one AB.

Ranger never said Ozzie was beyond reproach or criticism. But the criticism was pretty damn stupid. And he was 100% on the money when he said if Ozzie hadn't sent AJ in to pinch hit, he would've been ripped for that. As skobabe says, we know you don't like Rongey. But he was 100% correct for dismissing these idiots.

JB98
06-26-2009, 09:54 PM
I can't believe people were arguing that the decision to pinch-hit AJ was a bad move.

That was a ****ing no-brainer if there ever was one. It just didn't work.

The choices are stick with Castro, use AJ, or pinch-hit with Wise or Fields. How hard is it to pick the best hitter out of those four players? Even dogs know you use AJ in that spot.

spawn
06-26-2009, 09:56 PM
I can't believe people were arguing that the decision pinch-hit AJ was a bad move.

That was a ****ing no-brainer if there ever was one. It just didn't work.

The choices are stick with Castro, use AJ, or pinch-hit with Wise or Fields. How hard is it to pick the best hitter out of those four players? Even dogs know you use AJ in that spot.
It was ridiculous. I couldn't believe these idiots were arguing that. It was the ultimate no-brainer. The dumbass saying Ozzie did it out of spite was unbelieveable.

BainesHOF
06-27-2009, 01:25 AM
Yes they did, because they were idiots...two in particluar:

1. The guy who thought Ozzie was outmanaged because he pinch hit AJ because he hates the Cubs and the reason he pinch hit AJ was AJ has a grudge agains the Cubs as well. So his reasoning for subbing AJ was out of spite.

2. The guy who said with Marshall warming, Ozzie should've pinch hit Nix (who was pinch running for Thome), even though doing so would've allowed Marmol to stay in the game. However, if Marshall were to come out, then Wise should be sent in to pinch hit. In other words, Ozzie should've burned 3 players for one AB.

Ranger never said Ozzie was beyond reproach or criticism. But the criticism was pretty damn stupid. And he was 100% on the money when he said if Ozzie hadn't sent AJ in to pinch hit, he would've been ripped for that. As skobabe says, we know you don't like Rongey. But he was 100% correct for dismissing these idiots.

I'm not defending what every caller precisely says. God knows some of what is said is indefensible. My point is that some stuff can indeed be up for discussion, but Ranger reactively dismisses it out of hand. Again, I'm not even saying AJ should not have pinch hit. But you can at least allow for the discussion that it may not have been the best matchup for us. AJ was 0 for 6 lifetime vs. Marshall, who can be tough on lefties with his big curveball.

And to make this perfectly clear once again, it's not that I don't like Ranger. However, I do dislike when he doesn't have a clue about basic baseball such as a routine pinch-hitting rule. It's weird to hear that kind of stuff from a host of a Major League Baseball postgame show.

Ranger
06-27-2009, 01:44 AM
I'm not defending what every caller precisely says. God knows some of what is said is indefensible. My point is that some stuff can indeed be up for discussion, but Ranger reactively dismisses it out of hand. Again, I'm not even saying AJ should not have pinch hit. But you can at least allow for the discussion that it may not have been the best matchup for us. AJ was 0 for 6 lifetime vs. Marshall, who can be tough on lefties with his big curveball.

And to make this perfectly clear once again, it's not that I don't like Ranger. However, I do dislike when he doesn't have a clue about basic baseball such as a routine pinch-hitting rule. It's weird to hear that kind of stuff from a host of a Major League Baseball postgame show.


Baines, give it a rest. I made a mistake and I corrected it on the air. You will not win the "Rongey doesn't know enough about MLB" argument, so you might as well just stop with it. I have more than a clue about this game. Well more than a clue.

It's pretty pathetic you had to go digging up an old thread to attempt to prove a point. Where you failed miserably is in your defense of idiotic suggestions that AJ shouldn't have pinch-hit yesterday. Those people deserved to be dismissed...with authority. They were ridiculous assertions that Ozzie somehow blew the game because he substituted for his best-hitting catcher in a game situation with the bases loaded in the 8th inning. And not just his best-hitting catcher, but his best HITTER available on the bench. If you stand with those people, you are beyond assistance.

Ranger
06-27-2009, 01:49 AM
Ranger never said Ozzie was beyond reproach or criticism. But the criticism was pretty damn stupid. And he was 100% on the money when he said if Ozzie hadn't sent AJ in to pinch hit, he would've been ripped for that. As skobabe says, we know you don't like Rongey. But he was 100% correct for dismissing these idiots.


I think everyone knows this to be true and if they don't, they're in some sort of fantasyland. Ozzie would have been absolutely leveled if he had not pinch-hit AJ in that situation. I mean, it's a such a laughable no-brainer that I can't believe anyone (BainesHOF) would even attempt a weak defense of it. I refuse to believe they (BainesHOF included) are that stupid.

I usually know just about every call we're gonna get before we get it on a given day. But I could not believe that more than one person thought pinch-hitting him was a bad idea. It's appalling, actually.

TommyJohn
06-27-2009, 10:44 AM
I think everyone knows this to be true and if they don't, they're in some sort of fantasyland. Ozzie would have been absolutely leveled if he had not pinch-hit AJ in that situation. I mean, it's a such a laughable no-brainer that I can't believe anyone (BainesHOF) would even attempt a weak defense of it. I refuse to believe they (BainesHOF included) are that stupid.

I usually know just about every call we're gonna get before we get it on a given day. But I could not believe that more than one person thought pinch-hitting him was a bad idea. It's appalling, actually.

And if AJ hit a grand slam, Oz would have been a genius.

PhillipsBubba
06-27-2009, 11:31 AM
Baines, give it a rest. I made a mistake and I corrected it on the air. You will not win the "Rongey doesn't know enough about MLB" argument, so you might as well just stop with it. I have more than a clue about this game. Well more than a clue.


I'm curious...did you get the pre and post game gig because of your expansive baseball acumen?

Do you have a clue?:scratch:

Yes, a modest clue...

Here is a suggestion to make you sound like a professional...when a caller makes a comment you find foolish, silly or unfounded...hold his or her feet to the fire...ask for examples or specifics to back up their argument.

If they are totally off base, their responses will be far for more laughable than your insulting, brutish treatment of them.

Of course, you are a seasoned baseball expert and I a mere "fan":(:

spawn
06-27-2009, 12:13 PM
I'm curious...did you get the pre and post game gig because of your expansive baseball acumen?

Do you have a clue?:scratch:

Yes, a modest clue...

Here is a suggestion to make you sound like a professional...when a caller makes a comment you find foolish, silly or unfounded...hold his or her feet to the fire...ask for examples or specifics to back up their argument.

If they are totally off base, their responses will be far for more laughable than your insulting, brutish treatment of them.

Of course, you are a seasoned baseball expert and I a mere "fan":(:
Here's an idea. Work to get your own pre and post game show since it's so easy. :rolleyes:

Ranger
06-27-2009, 10:10 PM
I'm curious...did you get the pre and post game gig because of your expansive baseball acumen?

Do you have a clue?:scratch:

Yes, a modest clue...

Here is a suggestion to make you sound like a professional...when a caller makes a comment you find foolish, silly or unfounded...hold his or her feet to the fire...ask for examples or specifics to back up their argument.

If they are totally off base, their responses will be far for more laughable than your insulting, brutish treatment of them.

Of course, you are a seasoned baseball expert and I a mere "fan":(:

Thanks for the advice.

Daver
06-27-2009, 10:13 PM
I'm curious...did you get the pre and post game gig because of your expansive baseball acumen?

Do you have a clue?:scratch:

Yes, a modest clue...

Here is a suggestion to make you sound like a professional...when a caller makes a comment you find foolish, silly or unfounded...hold his or her feet to the fire...ask for examples or specifics to back up their argument.

If they are totally off base, their responses will be far for more laughable than your insulting, brutish treatment of them.

Of course, you are a seasoned baseball expert and I a mere "fan":(:

This is the funniest post I have seen here in a long time.

Ranger
06-27-2009, 10:21 PM
This is the funniest post I have seen here in a long time.

Is the comedy that bad around here?

ZombieRob
06-27-2009, 10:24 PM
Is the comedy that bad around here?
No worse than at your station at times. Just have to go with it.

skobabe8
06-27-2009, 11:22 PM
I'm curious...did you get the pre and post game gig because of your expansive baseball acumen?

Do you have a clue?:scratch:

Yes, a modest clue...

Here is a suggestion to make you sound like a professional...when a caller makes a comment you find foolish, silly or unfounded...hold his or her feet to the fire...ask for examples or specifics to back up their argument.

If they are totally off base, their responses will be far for more laughable than your insulting, brutish treatment of them.

Of course, you are a seasoned baseball expert and I a mere "fan":(:

Which postgame show did you get laughed off of the air this year?

Daver
06-27-2009, 11:34 PM
Is the comedy that bad around here?
It's common knowledge I know nothing about baseball, so my opinion should be taken with a grain of salt.

Bump34
06-28-2009, 01:05 AM
Things have gotten a little rough around here in 5 years!!!

thedudeabides
06-28-2009, 01:10 AM
Is the comedy that bad around here?

No, the comedy around here has been near an all time high. Unfortunately, it's mostly unintentional comedy. Just check out a gameday thread while the Sox are losing. If everyone was actually cut or traded, that has been suggested the last month, the Sox would have to field a team of little leaguers, by now.

jabrch
06-28-2009, 01:14 AM
Things have gotten a little rough around here in 5 years!!!

That's the understatement of the year Dave. I wouldn't say "rough" - I have other words for it.

CLR01
06-28-2009, 02:45 AM
Things have gotten a little rough around here in 5 years!!!


That's because we are all lost without you, Dave. Come back and take Hawk's place. :praying:

BleacherBandit
06-28-2009, 02:52 AM
Here's an idea. Work to get your own pre and post game show since it's so easy. :rolleyes:

No, I agree with that post a bit. Rongey does come off as being a bit mean on air sometimes. Maybe it's just me, but I don't really enjoy listening to what seems like non-stop argument.

That said, I do acknowledge that sometimes there isn't much that can be done with some of the idiots that call in.

chisoxfanatic
06-28-2009, 03:03 AM
I don't listen to Rongey very often, as I'm usually watching White Sox Post on CSN; but, what I do hear from the postgame show seems to be just one dark cloud after another. I commend Rongey for keeping his cool most of the time.

Brian26
06-28-2009, 10:01 AM
No, I agree with that post a bit. Rongey does come off as being a bit mean on air sometimes. Maybe it's just me, but I don't really enjoy listening to what seems like non-stop argument.

That said, I do acknowledge that sometimes there isn't much that can be done with some of the idiots that call in.

Then you must not like sports radio at all, because that's what 99% of it already is. Ranger does a fine job on the air, and I commend him for stopping by here on a daily basis.

The Ranger-bashing is going to stop. People who want to criticize him will do so at their own risk. If it's warranted constructive criticism, we'll let the conversation continue. If it's hateful trolling, those posters are going to be shown the exit door.

Chris is a fairly important cog in the Sox "family" who is a visitor in our "house". We will extend to him the proper respect as such a visitor should be shown. Any problems with that, send me a PM. End of discussion.

voodoochile
06-28-2009, 10:23 AM
Then you must not like sports radio at all, because that's what 99% of it already is. Ranger does a fine job on the air, and I commend him for stopping by here on a daily basis.

The Ranger-bashing is going to stop. People who want to criticize him will do so at their own risk. If it's warranted constructive criticism, we'll let the conversation continue. If it's hateful trolling, those posters are going to be shown the exit door.

Chris is a fairly important cog in the Sox "family" who is a visitor in our "house". We will extend to him the proper respect as such a visitor should be shown. Any problems with that, send me a PM. End of discussion.

Ditto. In addition, I'd like to add, constructive criticism isn't really that necessary, feel free to talk Sox baseball with Ranger, he certainly adds an insider perspective that is welcome, but if you want to give advice on his show, apply for a job at the station...

FarWestChicago
06-28-2009, 10:51 AM
I'll probably get attacked for saying this, but have we noticed in all the threads that Rongey posts in that the people who say that he is lousy on the radio and disagree with the way he handles nonsensical rants also tend to be the same people that come on this board and spew off nonsensical rants?

I'm just sayin'...You are correct, sir. :yup:

TornLabrum
06-28-2009, 06:18 PM
After reading this thread, I think I'm glad I was incommunicado most of the weekend...all except for the visit by Dave. Hey, Dave, see you at the July luncheon!

PhillipsBubba
06-28-2009, 06:48 PM
....I was incommunicado most of the weekend...

A shot of penicillin should fix you right up.

BleacherBandit
06-28-2009, 07:07 PM
Then you must not like sports radio at all, because that's what 99% of it already is. Ranger does a fine job on the air, and I commend him for stopping by here on a daily basis.

The Ranger-bashing is going to stop. People who want to criticize him will do so at their own risk. If it's warranted constructive criticism, we'll let the conversation continue. If it's hateful trolling, those posters are going to be shown the exit door.

Chris is a fairly important cog in the Sox "family" who is a visitor in our "house". We will extend to him the proper respect as such a visitor should be shown. Any problems with that, send me a PM. End of discussion.

Bingo. I don't. While I agree that nobody should be attacked personally online on the forums, I do have to say that if you have a job where complete strangers get to listen to you behind a wall of anonymity, you have to be open to constructive cricicism. I am trying to treat the Chris Rongey who comes here as a WSI user with respect, but I believe that being honest about the way I feel about his show resides within those actions.

That's all I was saying. Rongey could be a little less harsh on some of his callers. I also think that he should respond to this post (if he choses so) in a manner that doesn't seem like he thinks he was slighted. That should be his responsibility.

whtsox13
06-28-2009, 07:21 PM
If "Chris is a fairly important cog in the Sox "family"" then he needs to represent the White Sox in a professional manner and not call the callers names. A couple of weeks ago he called someone a name on air that was totally inappropriate and not a good reflection of this organization.

PhillipsBubba
06-28-2009, 07:23 PM
If it's hateful trolling, those posters are going to be shown the exit door.

I haven't seen or participated in any personal attacks against CR. I have written and read frank and thoughtful crticism of his style.

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_6zH7tdatQUA/SYydhfb9AQI/AAAAAAAAERs/mzCEyaeKkdI/s400/FreeSpeechZone.jpg

Daver
06-28-2009, 07:23 PM
If "Chris is a fairly important cog in the Sox "family"" then he needs to represent the White Sox in a professional manner and not call the callers names. A couple of weeks ago he called someone a name on air that was totally inappropriate and not a good reflection of this orgamization.

Chris does not work for the White Sox.

whtsox13
06-28-2009, 07:29 PM
Chris does not work for the White Sox.

Brian26 made that statement about him being part of the family.

If he is doing their pre and post game show then he is representing the Sox even if he doesn't work for them. He's part of the game broadcast.

BleacherBandit
06-28-2009, 07:31 PM
Chris does not work for the White Sox.

Yeah. He works for WSCR. Which is the "Official Radio Home of the Chicago White Sox".

Daver
06-28-2009, 07:31 PM
I haven't seen or participated in any personal attacks against CR. I have written and read frank and thoughtful crticism of his style.

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_6zH7tdatQUA/SYydhfb9AQI/AAAAAAAAERs/mzCEyaeKkdI/s400/FreeSpeechZone.jpg


This is not a democracy, as such there is no such thing as free speech here.

HomeFish
06-28-2009, 07:34 PM
I often disagree with Ranger because he is am optimist and I am, well, HomeFish.

But I think its super cool that he comes and posts here. And I think it is really sad that we are treating him like crap. I hope we didn't scare him away.

SoxandtheCityTee
06-28-2009, 07:40 PM
I've met Rongey several times and he knows and likes quite a few WSIers from events at bars etc. I'm sure we'll see him here again.

Hope you had a long, fun day at Mitchell's today, Ranger!

PhillipsBubba
06-28-2009, 07:54 PM
This is not a democracy, as such there is no such thing as free speech here.

Interesting...:scratch:

Daver
06-28-2009, 08:14 PM
Interesting...:scratch:

What part of the fact that this is a privately owned forum is so difficult for you to grasp?

You are a guest here, and are allowed to post at the whim of the forum owner and the people the owner sees fit to oversee the forum, and your posting privileges can be removed at any time.

Ranger
06-28-2009, 08:52 PM
Looks, like there are a few posts to which I'd like to respond, so I'll start here:

I often disagree with Ranger because he is am optimist and I am, well, HomeFish.

But I think its super cool that he comes and posts here. And I think it is really sad that we are treating him like crap. I hope we didn't scare him away.

I'm really not an optimist. I don't always think everything's great. It's just that I don't think everything is awful either...which is a common attitude around here. It seems like to be a "realist" in these parts, people think you constantly need to believe the worst possible scenario will always come to fruition. Hate to break it to those people, but that's not realism...that's pessimism.

Ranger
06-28-2009, 08:53 PM
If "Chris is a fairly important cog in the Sox "family"" then he needs to represent the White Sox in a professional manner and not call the callers names. A couple of weeks ago he called someone a name on air that was totally inappropriate and not a good reflection of this orgamization.


What name was that?

Ranger
06-28-2009, 08:55 PM
Then you must not like sports radio at all, because that's what 99% of it already is. Ranger does a fine job on the air, and I commend him for stopping by here on a daily basis.

The Ranger-bashing is going to stop. People who want to criticize him will do so at their own risk. If it's warranted constructive criticism, we'll let the conversation continue. If it's hateful trolling, those posters are going to be shown the exit door.

Chris is a fairly important cog in the Sox "family" who is a visitor in our "house". We will extend to him the proper respect as such a visitor should be shown. Any problems with that, send me a PM. End of discussion.

Hey, people are free to think and say whatever they want about me. However, don't expect me to let them get away with nonsense, either.

whtsox13
06-28-2009, 09:00 PM
What name was that?

An A followed by a hole.

Mod edit: Spell the word out next time and let the language filters do their job.

Ranger
06-28-2009, 09:05 PM
Bingo. I don't. While I agree that nobody should be attacked personally online on the forums, I do have to say that if you have a job where complete strangers get to listen to you behind a wall of anonymity, you have to be open to constructive cricicism. I am trying to treat the Chris Rongey who comes here as a WSI user with respect, but I believe that being honest about the way I feel about his show resides within those actions.

That's all I was saying. Rongey could be a little less harsh on some of his callers. I also think that he should respond to this post (if he choses so) in a manner that doesn't seem like he thinks he was slighted. That should be his responsibility.


My impression is that there are a handful of people that think the postgame show should be a series of calls (usually of a ranting nature) while I just say, "thanks for the call...that's a great point," and then move directly on to the next.

Well, that's not how it's supposed to be. Not every point is a great point. And some points are so damn absurd, they need to be put down. You have to realize that when somebody calls in with nonsense like, "Jim Thome needs to bunt more," there are several hundred people (at least) that are screaming at the radios in their cars because the idiocy is causing them to.

This is talk radio and my job is to host and have an opinion. So, if I think you have an outlandish opinion, I'm going to tell you that you have an outlandish opinion. I refuse to let people get away with thoughtless ranting. And, if you notice, I really don't raise my voice at all unless the caller starts in with the attitude. Many people that call me have a point with which they know I will disagree, and they're prepared to jump all over me the moment I do. I don't let those people get away with it.

Ranger
06-28-2009, 09:05 PM
An A followed by a hole.

Mod edit: Spell the word out next time and let the language filters do their job.



Was he?

whtsox13
06-28-2009, 09:13 PM
Was he?

Maybe. Maybe not. But you should hold yourself to higher standards. You're representing the White Sox doing the pre and post. Other sports talk shows aren't attached to the game like yours is.

spawn
06-28-2009, 09:16 PM
Maybe. Maybe not. But you should hold yourself to higher standards. You're representing the White Sox doing the pre and post. Other sports talk shows aren't attached to the game like yours is.
I have no problem with Ranger calling someone an ******* if he/she is being an *******.

Ranger
06-28-2009, 09:21 PM
I have no problem with Ranger calling someone an ******* if he/she is being an *******.

I've never said the word "*******" on the air. It was probably just "a-hole".

SoxGirl4Life
06-28-2009, 09:23 PM
Ranger, there are some of us that appreciate the work you do on the postgame. Lord knows I wouldn't have the patience to put up with some of that crap.

The Immigrant
06-28-2009, 09:23 PM
Rock on, Ranger. Don't let the haters drag you down. I don't always agree with you, but I always enjoy your shows.

whtsox13
06-28-2009, 09:26 PM
I've never said the word "*******" on the air. It was probably just "a-hole".

That's what it was. Still means the same thing.

Daver
06-28-2009, 09:27 PM
That's what it was. Still means the same thing.

Sometimes the truth hurts.

Brian26
06-28-2009, 09:44 PM
If "Chris is a fairly important cog in the Sox "family"" then he needs to represent the White Sox in a professional manner and not call the callers names. A couple of weeks ago he called someone a name on air that was totally inappropriate and not a good reflection of this organization.

You've got 24 lousy posts here, and I quickly calculate 25% are anti-Rongey. That ratio doesn't cut it, especially after my request earlier in the day.

tebman
06-28-2009, 09:46 PM
Ranger, for what it's worth, I think you're a talented broadcaster. I'm glad you do what you do before and after White Sox games because I've listened to the radio for many years and heard some real blowhards and vacuous babblers do these kinds of programs.

I don't always agree, but I always want to hear what you have to say. That's the difference between a Broadcaster and a noisemaker.

voodoochile
06-28-2009, 09:59 PM
You've got 24 lousy posts here, and I quickly calculate 25% are anti-Rongey. That ratio doesn't cut it, especially after my request earlier in the day.

Maybe that poster is the ******* in question... :dunno:

Brian26
06-28-2009, 10:04 PM
Maybe that poster is the ******* in question... :dunno:

That's a brilliant observation. Considering he's the only person here who remembers the supposed call (Ranger included), I think you've hit the nail on the head.

ChicagoG19
06-28-2009, 10:05 PM
I know this is a little off-topic, but how come there was no Coop at the Cork tonight?

chisoxfanatic
06-28-2009, 10:13 PM
I know this is a little off-topic, but how come there was no Coop at the Cork tonight?
The Sox have to board a charter to Cleveland.

ChicagoG19
06-28-2009, 10:22 PM
The Sox have to board a charter to Cleveland.

thanks

Standing Ovation
06-28-2009, 10:46 PM
Sometimes the truth hurts.


So it's okay for "Ranger" to criticize callers, but it sure as hell doesn't seem okay for WSI posters to criticize him back. Makes sense to me.

spawn
06-28-2009, 10:54 PM
So it's okay for "Ranger" to criticize callers, but it sure as hell doesn't seem okay for WSI posters to criticize him back. Makes sense to me.
Well, one of the posting rules is no attacks against members are allowed, so no, you aren't allowed to criticize him. If you want to criticize his posts, feel free. But intentionally trolling and posting so you can get a free shot at Ranger will not be allowed. If he were attacking posters here, then he'd be under the same posting rules as everyone else. His calling people out on his radio show do not count as personal attacks on this forum.

Standing Ovation
06-28-2009, 11:03 PM
Well, one of the posting rules is no attacks against members are allowed, so no, you aren't allowed to criticize him. If you want to criticize his posts, feel free. But intentionally trolling and posting so you can get a free shot at Ranger will not be allowed. If he were attacking posters here, then he'd be under the same posting rules as everyone else. His calling people out on his radio show do not count as personal attacks on this forum.


Please show me an instance of a poster "attacking" Ranger. The irony in this thread in funny to me.

Brian26
06-28-2009, 11:08 PM
Please show me an instance of a poster "attacking" Ranger. The irony in this thread in funny to me.

Please don't question the mods here who are busting their asses this weekend to keep this place civilized. Spawn just explained rather articulately the difference between an internet forum and a radio show. Take a couple of weeks to try to let that sink in.

TornLabrum
06-29-2009, 12:06 AM
I often disagree with Ranger because he is am optimist and I am, well, HomeFish.

But I think its super cool that he comes and posts here. And I think it is really sad that we are treating him like crap. I hope we didn't scare him away.

I'd like to point out that "we" are not treating Ranger like crap. A few loudmouths who are the same types who call his show and make asses of themselves are treating him like crap.

BleacherBandit
06-29-2009, 01:36 AM
My impression is that there are a handful of people that think the postgame show should be a series of calls (usually of a ranting nature) while I just say, "thanks for the call...that's a great point," and then move directly on to the next.

Well, that's not how it's supposed to be. Not every point is a great point. And some points are so damn absurd, they need to be put down. You have to realize that when somebody calls in with nonsense like, "Jim Thome needs to bunt more," there are several hundred people (at least) that are screaming at the radios in their cars because the idiocy is causing them to.

This is talk radio and my job is to host and have an opinion. So, if I think you have an outlandish opinion, I'm going to tell you that you have an outlandish opinion. I refuse to let people get away with thoughtless ranting. And, if you notice, I really don't raise my voice at all unless the caller starts in with the attitude. Many people that call me have a point with which they know I will disagree, and they're prepared to jump all over me the moment I do. I don't let those people get away with it.

I sort of understand where you're coming from. I've listened to the post-game show, and it always seems (especially after a loss) that the majority of the calls come from irate absurdist Sox fans that don't know what they're talking about because they are so mad. And I acknowledge that you have no way to control the rationale of these people. But I do believe that your producers should devise a way to limit these idiotic callers--because I'll be the first to tell you--it often isn't pretty listening to the arguments you're forced to engage in (and you know because you're having them), but then again no man on earth is gifted enought to calm some of the fans calling in. You can't do it sometimes, and you have to eject them. But overall, I think there should be more attention payed to some of the calling and arguments. This isn't harsh cricitism of you or of your program, just of the situation at hand. It's inevitble.

Redus Redux
06-29-2009, 01:47 AM
Just throwing my two cents in--b/c of my Belleville IL connection they could be seen as biased.... but it's great to have a postgame show that pushes you to think and debate.

There's plenty of other options for those who are unnerved by that. For one, just go to Comcast when available.

If people dont like it, they shouldnt tune in (or for godsakes CALL). Heck even posting about it here gives the object of yr scorn free advertising that reaches an ideal target audience.




Please show me an instance of a poster "attacking" Ranger. The irony in this thread in funny to me.

As a co-worker of Rongey's would say, irony is the firehouse burning down. Not that.

Nellie_Fox
06-29-2009, 02:32 AM
Ranger's "public persona" is on his radio show. If you want to attack him, call the show.

When he's on here, he's a guest. We don't allow our guests to be abused by other guests. That's the end of the story.

For those who don't understand the Bill of Rights, your Freedom of Speech secured under the Constitution has to do with the government limiting your speech. The Bill of Rights has nothing whatever to do with your relations with other citizens. It is not a constitutional violation for us to limit your speech.

spawn
06-29-2009, 09:23 AM
Please show me an instance of a poster "attacking" Ranger. The irony in this thread in funny to me.
Well, this thread was resurrected after an 8 day layoff so the poster could bitch about the post game show after the Sox lost to the Cubs on Friday. IMO, he was trolling. He knows Ranger posts here, and he wanted to get in his little cheap shots and used this thread to do so. We will not allow that here. As Nellie said, if you want to bitch about him, call the post game show. Don't do it here.

TomBradley72
06-29-2009, 10:24 AM
I think it would be a good idea to add some real "post game analysis" to the Ranger's show. Maybe have a former Sox player, or Farmio/DJ join the show for 10-15 minutes of post game analysis over key decisions, plays, calls, etc. before we hear what "Bob from Schaumburg" has to say.

Jumping right into the sea of knuckleheads has to say seems to be asking for trouble. But it IS becoming almost legendary how these callers handle themselves.

Martinigirl
06-29-2009, 11:02 AM
I really believe, after a Sox loss or series of losses, dealing with the callers to Ranger's show might be one of the most frustrating jobs in Chicago, because I am sure he would like to say many, many things to some of the callers and he doesn't.

After every loss, there are callers that are totally and completely irrational. They flip out over everything and truly believe they know how to fix the team, and seemingly Ozzie, Kenny, the players, et al are too stupid to do it themselves.

I have found that Rongey tries to be diplomatic but there are just some people that are too far in the deep end. They don't listen to reason, may or may not be drinking and are just nuts.

I have listened to other sports radio hosts that are just mean and condescending to their listeners, like Boers and Bernstein. They truly believe they are smarter than the vast majority of their listeners and then take great pleasure in mocking the callers. This in NOT the case with Rongey. He doesn't condescend to the people who call in with viable comments and concerns but he also doesn't feel a need to placate the lunatics that believe the sky is falling - on a daily basis.

I think he should be congratulated on his self control for not telling off more people.

dickallen15
06-29-2009, 11:25 AM
What I don't understand is the majority of calls into sports radio are ill-informed people with ridiculous comments, however the stations still give these bufoons a forum to display their ignorance, in fact, many believe some shows actually screen callers and dump the ones who have anything intelligent to say. What does that say about the radio programs and/or the state of sports radio? If the calls are harsh and stupid, stop taking them, or do a better job of screening them. Why can't a screener tell someone what he's going to say on the air is dumb so the station isn't even going to give them the chance to do it?

Jim Shorts
06-29-2009, 11:56 AM
I'm of the opinion that Ranger should be harder on the idiots and call them such.

If someone is going to call the post-game show, wait on hold for 20 minutes then spew nonsensical idiocy, the only cure for them is to be called out. Which is precisely the problem, idiots don't know they are stupid, so they should be told.

You're a bigger person for posting here, Ranger...while your critics hide behind anonymity.

dickallen15
06-29-2009, 12:00 PM
I'm of the opinion that Ranger should be harder on the idiots and call them such.

If someone is going to call the post-game show, wait on hold for 20 minutes then spew nonsensical idiocy, the only cure for them is to be called out. Which is precisely the problem, idiots don't know they are stupid, so they should be told.

You're a bigger person for posting here, Ranger...while your critics hide behind anonymity.

I believe they shouldn't be allowed on the air. If you have a call-in show you better expect the calls to be mostly idiotic.

Lip Man 1
06-29-2009, 04:47 PM
Two words in this discussion regarding why those type callers are allowed on the air:

Controversy sells.

Lip

BainesHOF
06-30-2009, 01:10 AM
Well, this thread was resurrected after an 8 day layoff so the poster could bitch about the post game show after the Sox lost to the Cubs on Friday. IMO, he was trolling. He knows Ranger posts here, and he wanted to get in his little cheap shots and used this thread to do so. We will not allow that here. As Nellie said, if you want to bitch about him, call the post game show. Don't do it here.

I made the post. What's the limit for continuing a thread? A day? Three days? Five days? Seven? Two weeks? Let me know and I'll try to stick to it. My comments were a continuation of the discussion found in the thread. I remembered the thread because I made some previous posts in it. I thought it was the logical place to put the post. Moderators routinely throw a new thread into an older one that continues the same subject.

Yet, the continuing of a recent discussion was called "pathetic."

You do have a point about calling the postgame show if I don't like it. However, I thought this was a good place to have a discussion about it for obvious reasons.

I've tried to back up my points, some of which have been disputed, with facts and specific examples. That elicited name-calling from some quarters instead of addressing the points. It's also resulted in a bunch of comments that were oblivious to the main points of the discussion.

I'll play along and go off-topic a bit, and be positive in doing so. In all seriousness, I thought Comcast did an outstanding job in its pregame show on Sunday (outside of a couple microphone issues, which can be half expected in a live, outside setting). The regular hosts were outstanding to a man. Chuck Garfein in particular did an outstanding job, as he usually does. He's knowledgable and understands the role of a host. And long live Bill Melton! His analysis is consistently excellent.

One of the things I love about Chuck and Bill is while they have personality, they don't try to be bigger than the show. They keep the focus on the Sox, as opposed to so many of the clowns on ESPN who consider the anchor desk as their chance to put themselves in the spotlight instead of the people they're supposed to cover.

Kudos to the Comcast crew!

TornLabrum
06-30-2009, 08:37 AM
I made the post. What's the limit for continuing a thread? A day? Three days? Five days? Seven? Two weeks? Let me know and I'll try to stick to it. My comments were a continuation of the discussion found in the thread. I remembered the thread because I made some previous posts in it. I thought it was the logical place to put the post. Moderators routinely throw a new thread into an older one that continues the same subject.

Yet, the continuing of a recent discussion was called "pathetic."

I can think of one difference right off the bat. You're not a mod.

Oh, and I thought of another difference. You've had it out for Ranger from the get-go.

You do have a point about calling the postgame show if I don't like it. However, I thought this was a good place to have a discussion about it for obvious reasons.There's a difference between discussing and trashing people who are our guests here. Apparently you have trouble figuring out that difference.

I've tried to back up my points, some of which have been disputed, with facts and specific examples. That elicited name-calling from some quarters instead of addressing the points. It's also resulted in a bunch of comments that were oblivious to the main points of the discussion.

I'll play along and go off-topic a bit, and be positive in doing so. In all seriousness, I thought Comcast did an outstanding job in its pregame show on Sunday (outside of a couple microphone issues, which can be half expected in a live, outside setting). The regular hosts were outstanding to a man. Chuck Garfein in particular did an outstanding job, as he usually does. He's knowledgable and understands the role of a host. And long live Bill Melton! His analysis is consistently excellent.

One of the things I love about Chuck and Bill is while they have personality, they don't try to be bigger than the show. They keep the focus on the Sox, as opposed to so many of the clowns on ESPN who consider the anchor desk as their chance to put themselves in the spotlight instead of the people they're supposed to cover.

Kudos to the Comcast crew!Play along? Is this a game? That might be a nice topic for a new thread. I think we'd accept your apology for abusing a thread if there had been an apology there somewhere. Instead all we got is a defense of your actions.