PDA

View Full Version : Sox On Opening In Cleveland


Lip Man 1
03-31-2011, 03:33 PM
"Very stupid..." ---Ozzie Guillen

http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/breaking/cbsports-snow-no-friend-of-sox-in-cleveland-20110331,0,2187713.story

Buehrle's comments are right on the money.

Lip

Fenway
03-31-2011, 03:41 PM
Brewers opening on the road makes no sense either...

soltrain21
03-31-2011, 03:44 PM
First sentence has a typo in it. Bang up job, Mark!

DumpJerry
03-31-2011, 03:50 PM
First sentence has a typo in it. Bang up job, Mark!
The Trib reporter was in shock that he had to actually cover the White Sox.

Huisj
03-31-2011, 03:52 PM
I disagree with the idea that teams should always open in warm weather areas. It's not like northern teams are going to go on the road for some crazy 3 week road trip before playing their home openers; they'd be gone for at most a week or so. How much difference does a week make in the type of weather? Not much at all really.

Every time there's bad weather in April on the opening week, this argument comes up. It disappears in years when the weather is nice. For every season where there's a bad cold weather system that comes through the first week of April, there's another season where it's 65 and sunny the first week of April (last year it was 75 degrees in mid Michigan on March 31). And heck, chances are it'll be freezing cold and crappy on April 15.

Delaying the start of the games in northern cities by a week or two would hardly make a lick of difference in the number of games cancelled in April.

sox1970
03-31-2011, 04:08 PM
I disagree with the idea that teams should always open in warm weather areas. It's not like northern teams are going to go on the road for some crazy 3 week road trip before playing their home openers; they'd be gone for at most a week or so. How much difference does a week make in the type of weather? Not much at all really.

Every time there's bad weather in April on the opening week, this argument comes up. It disappears in years when the weather is nice. For every season where there's a bad cold weather system that comes through the first week of April, there's another season where it's 65 and sunny the first week of April (last year it was 75 degrees in mid Michigan on March 31). And heck, chances are it'll be freezing cold and crappy on April 15.

Delaying the start of the games in northern cities by a week or two would hardly make a lick of difference in the number of games cancelled in April.

I completely agree. Good post.

TomBradley72
03-31-2011, 04:22 PM
I disagree with the idea that teams should always open in warm weather areas. It's not like northern teams are going to go on the road for some crazy 3 week road trip before playing their home openers; they'd be gone for at most a week or so. How much difference does a week make in the type of weather? Not much at all really.

Every time there's bad weather in April on the opening week, this argument comes up. It disappears in years when the weather is nice. For every season where there's a bad cold weather system that comes through the first week of April, there's another season where it's 65 and sunny the first week of April (last year it was 75 degrees in mid Michigan on March 31). And heck, chances are it'll be freezing cold and crappy on April 15.

Delaying the start of the games in northern cities by a week or two would hardly make a lick of difference in the number of games cancelled in April.

Completely disagree. A week or two can make all the difference in April. It's just common sense to start in the warmer cities/domes for a week to 10 days then shift to the other cities.

It's not going to eliminate the problem (I went to a game at old Comiskey in June of 84- it was 40 degrees)- but it would reduce it- and it doesn't cause any harm/damage.

Huisj
03-31-2011, 04:28 PM
Completely disagree. A week or two can make all the difference in April. It's just common sense to start in the warmer cities/domes for a week to 10 days then shift to the other cities.

It's not going to eliminate the problem (I went to a game at old Comiskey in June of 84- it was 40 degrees)- but it would reduce it- and it doesn't cause any harm/damage.

Warm weather teams have argued it does do harm/damage to them though. Even if it's warm, attendance stinks for them that early in the year. Loading up on home games in April means fewer home games once school is out and people can actually go to games.

jdm2662
03-31-2011, 04:42 PM
I've seen snow flakes in May during my life. I've been to Sox games in April when it was 80 degrees and been to games where it was 30 degrees. Hell, the 80 degree day, it was 45 degrees and raining when I left the house. I've also seen days where it was 72 and sunny in Joliet, 60 and raining in Lombard, and 52 and cloudy during a Sox game.

It's the midwest in April. The weather has always been unpredicable this time a year, and it's never going to change. Last year, there were no rain outs until 2.5 weeks into the season, which was the longest in 25 years. There also been openers delayed by a week because of snow. **** happens and you are not going to to please everyone. The only logical solution is to schedule divison games the first couple of weeks. Therefore, if there are cancelled games, they are much easier to make up.

TomBradley72
03-31-2011, 04:56 PM
Warm weather teams have argued it does do harm/damage to them though. Even if it's warm, attendance stinks for them that early in the year. Loading up on home games in April means fewer home games once school is out and people can actually go to games.

But that makes no sense- it's not "loading up" April games for anyone- just shifting the timing within the month.

doublem23
03-31-2011, 05:10 PM
But that makes no sense- it's not "loading up" April games for anyone- just shifting the timing within the month.

Exactly, we all know by April 10 it's illegal for the weather to be bad in places like Cleveland, Detroit, Chicago, etc.

EnglishChiSox
03-31-2011, 05:19 PM
5 cities gave domes, only 2 cities would be certain of fine weather on any date you wish to mention (Imo anyway, Pheonix and SD) so games would have to be played in stadiums where weather might be a factor but that is part of the game, both teams have to play in the cold.

Big Hurt so good
03-31-2011, 05:25 PM
Looks like fun, but seriously MLB... can't they figure out to load the schedule with games in warm-weather climates in April...

http://tinyurl.com/4m8asf5

downstairs
03-31-2011, 05:27 PM
I don't understand the whole "cold" argument. Every team plays an away series and then comes back home in less than a week. Is the weather in Chicago, on average, *that* much better on April 7th than on April 1st?

Does the baseball season start on a week that is magically the final cold week of the year, everywhere in the country?

DumpJerry
03-31-2011, 05:29 PM
I've been to some pretty damn cold games in May at Comiskey. Sometimes early June games can be more like a Bears game.

I've also been to games in April where it was 85 and sunny. At Comiskey.

PeteWard
03-31-2011, 05:57 PM
I disagree with the idea that teams should always open in warm weather areas. It's not like northern teams are going to go on the road for some crazy 3 week road trip before playing their home openers; they'd be gone for at most a week or so. How much difference does a week make in the type of weather? Not much at all really.

Every time there's bad weather in April on the opening week, this argument comes up. It disappears in years when the weather is nice. For every season where there's a bad cold weather system that comes through the first week of April, there's another season where it's 65 and sunny the first week of April (last year it was 75 degrees in mid Michigan on March 31). And heck, chances are it'll be freezing cold and crappy on April 15.

Delaying the start of the games in northern cities by a week or two would hardly make a lick of difference in the number of games cancelled in April.

I think there is a substantial difference in the Midwest between the first and second week of April. Not guaranteed but my guess is that it averages out to be warmer,

Huisj
03-31-2011, 06:11 PM
Here's data from Lansing, MI on April 1 and April 15 the last few years (chose Lansing because I'm here and it's pretty representative of a wide midwestern area):

2011:
April 1: 49 degrees, showers (predicted)

2010: (gosh it was warm last spring!)
April 1: 80, partly cloudy
April 8: 58, cloudy and and misty, trace of morning snow
April 15: 81, partly cloudy

2009:
April 1: 52, partly cloudy
April 8: 50, partly cloudy
April 15: 60, fog and mist, showers, trace of morning snow
(also, 4 inches of snow fell April 6)

2008:
April 1: 59, fog and mist, trace of morning snow
April 8: 63, cloudy
April 15: 57, sunny

2007:
April 1: 67 degrees, thunderstorms
April 8: 34, fog, snow flurries
April 15: 53 degrees, partly cloudy
(also, 5 inches of snow fell April 11)

2006:
April 1: 48, fog and mist
April 8: 43, fog then sunny
April 15: 69, sunny

2005:
April 1: 57, partly cloudy
April 8: 63, fog then sunny
April 15: 66, sunny
(also, 4 inches of snow on April 23!)

2004:
April 1: 52, cloudy
April 8: 48, cloudy and drizzle
April 15: 70, partly cloudy

2003:
April 1: 69, sunny
April 8: 32, freezing drizzle
April 15: 84, mostly cloudy

2002:
April 1: 42, cloudy, mist and trace of snow
April 8: 59, cloudy and foggy
April 15: 84, mostly cloudy, showers

So it's been a little warmer sometimes by the middle of the month, but it's still all over the place. To me, the trend doesn't seem strong enough to say it's a bad idea to ever schedule games in northern cities in early April.

A. Cavatica
03-31-2011, 06:17 PM
The weather has always been unpredicable this time a year, and it's never going to change.

Coop can fix it.

Lip Man 1
03-31-2011, 06:53 PM
Huisj:

If playing the first ten days / two weeks in warm weather sites is such an odd notion, why was MLB doing exactly that in the late 80's / early 90's?

That's right...that's what was done until teams like the Angels started complaining about playing a lot of home games in April.

If MLB had an actual commissioner, he could have said. "It's in the best interest of baseball to play as many games as possible in as best conditions as possible. It simply makes for a better product, it also potentially reduces the injury factor that can happen in difficult conditions. Sorry Angels, Dodgers, Rangers, Braves, Marlins etc. You open at home in April."

Of couse since MLB doesn't have a commissioner with gonads you get to see the Sox try to hit in 30 degree weather. :rolleyes:

Lip

SOXSINCE'70
03-31-2011, 06:57 PM
Coop can fix it.

A reminder, FYI:Just trying to help.

:tealtutor:

soltrain21
03-31-2011, 06:57 PM
Huisj:

If playing the first ten days / two weeks in warm weather sites is such an odd notion, why was MLB doing exactly that in the late 80's / early 90's?

That's right...that's what was done until teams like the Angels started complaining about playing a lot of home games in April.

If MLB had an actual commissioner, he could have said. "It's in the best interest of baseball to play as many games as possible in as best conditions as possible. It simply makes for a better product, it also potentially reduces the injury factor that can happen in difficult conditions. Sorry Angels, Dodgers, Rangers, Braves, Marlins etc. You open at home in April."

Of couse since MLB doesn't have a commissioner with gonads you get to see the Sox try to hit in 30 degree weather. :rolleyes:

Lip


Baseball starts when it's cold out and ends when it's cold out. Deal with it.

WhiteSoxJunkie
03-31-2011, 08:05 PM
I'm ok with cold weather cities hosting Opening Day. There is a mystique to the whole day. It's different when the team's home opener isn't on Opening Day. Remember when the Sox started on the road every year from 91-04? It's nice to have your team start the season at home more than once every 15 years.

Zakath
03-31-2011, 09:59 PM
Here's data from Lansing, MI on April 1 and April 15 the last few years (chose Lansing because I'm here and it's pretty representative of a wide midwestern area):


Having lived in the Lansing area before, I can tell you that if you just say "cloudy," you're going to be right about 80% of the time.

Zakath
03-31-2011, 10:00 PM
Looks like fun, but seriously MLB... can't they figure out to load the schedule with games in warm-weather climates in April...

http://tinyurl.com/4m8asf5

I'm thinking that if I'm going to get into a snowball fight, Matt Thornton is not the guy I want on the other side...

Huisj
03-31-2011, 11:26 PM
Having lived in the Lansing area before, I can tell you that if you just say "cloudy," you're going to be right about 80% of the time.

After living in Grand Rapids for a time too, I can say that it makes Lansing seem like a sunny place. Amazing what going 60 miles closer to the lake can do for winter time lake effect cloud cover.

Huisj
03-31-2011, 11:40 PM
Huisj:

If playing the first ten days / two weeks in warm weather sites is such an odd notion, why was MLB doing exactly that in the late 80's / early 90's?

That's right...that's what was done until teams like the Angels started complaining about playing a lot of home games in April.

If MLB had an actual commissioner, he could have said. "It's in the best interest of baseball to play as many games as possible in as best conditions as possible. It simply makes for a better product, it also potentially reduces the injury factor that can happen in difficult conditions. Sorry Angels, Dodgers, Rangers, Braves, Marlins etc. You open at home in April."

Of couse since MLB doesn't have a commissioner with gonads you get to see the Sox try to hit in 30 degree weather. :rolleyes:

Lip

I really have a hard time blaming this on the commissioner. Sure, you can argue that a commissioner is wimpy if they won't force teams to play a load of home games in early April, but can't just as strong an argument be made that a commissioner is wimpy if he is scared of the possibility of some cold weather? To me, it seems wussier to be alter a schedule because some years it might be cold (even though there's no guarantee that you might go on the road for two weeks while it's in the 70s in Chicago, and then come back and have it be 41 with drizzle and an overnight ice storm later in the month).

There are teams in baseball that play in sites where the weather might be bad. That's just part of the game. Sometimes that means it's cold out, but sometimes it's not cold at that very same time of year. Should they not schedule games in Florida later in the summer because of the possibility of a hurricane? Or not in late spring in Kansas City because of tornadoes in the plains? Or in Texas in August because it's too hot?

EDIT: the strong and forceful commissioner in the late 80s allowed the Sox to open the season in the warm climate of Milwaukee (followed by Boston and New York) in 1985, and then at home in 1986, 1988, 1990, and then tropics of of Baltimore (followed by Detroit and New York) in 1991. Seems the warm weather sites didn't get going until the mid '90s, but wait, that must have been Selig's idea, so that can't be right.

TomBradley72
04-01-2011, 07:14 AM
First of all the idea that a different approach to Opening Day would "load up" teams with April games is 100% RIDICULOUS. It doesn't change the overall home games a team plays in April- it just changes WHEN they play those games in April- 1st 10 days on road for northern teams, 2nd 10 days at home for northern teams, etc.

From a marketing perspective- Opening Day is a big event- I'd rather have the "story" be about the games than about snow/weather, etc. With a packed MLB schedule- and a post season drifting into November- ANY actions that could potentially reduce rain outs/rescheduling, etc. would seem to be a good idea.

By the way- from a historical perspective- the reason the Cincinnati Reds open the season every year since the late 1800's is because they were the most southern city in the league in the early days- and the league felt they had the best chance for decent weather to open the season. So this is not a new idea- but one from the earliest days of professional baseball.

Ron Karkovice
04-01-2011, 09:29 AM
A reminder, FYI:Just trying to help.

:tealtutor:

I dont think that something so obviously sarcasm/joke needs teal. Am I right, or am i right?

Ex-Chicagoan
04-01-2011, 09:42 AM
After living in Grand Rapids for a time too, I can say that it makes Lansing seem like a sunny place. Amazing what going 60 miles closer to the lake can do for winter time lake effect cloud cover.

What he said.

Record high for 3/31 in Grand Rapids was 78 degrees, all the way back in... 2010.

Spring in the Midwest is changeable. You pays your money and takes your chances...

SephClone89
04-01-2011, 10:08 AM
I dont think that something so obviously sarcasm/joke needs teal. Am I right, or am i right?

You're right.

DumpJerry
04-01-2011, 10:48 AM
I dont think that something so obviously sarcasm/joke needs teal. Am I right, or am i right?
The use of teal is the option of the poster. The "teal tutor" tag that was posted is for when people use the wrong color and try to pass it off for teal.

SI1020
04-01-2011, 11:18 AM
First sentence has a typo in it. Bang up job, Mark! Nobody edits anymore. There are typos, misspelled words and historical errors galore every day in the media. I'll stop now before I get a big head and make a mistake that needs edited.

Lip Man 1
04-01-2011, 11:21 AM
Huiji:

According to my schedules:

87 Sox opened at KC (KC has milder weather)
89 Sox opened at California
90 Sox opened at home BECAUSE IT WAS THE LAST YEAR OF THE ORIGINAL COMISKEY PARK
91 Sox opened at Baltimore (Balt. has milder weather)
92 Sox opened at California
93 Sox opened at Minnesota (dome)
94 Sox opened at Toronto (dome)

Like I said late 80's / early 90's and it started before Selig but he ended the process.

In 95 the schedules were all screwed up because of the labor / impasse and because the season didn't open until April 26th. (If MLB wants to open up around that time every year they play play anywhere they want by then...)

Lip

ewokpelts
04-01-2011, 11:25 AM
Huisj:

If playing the first ten days / two weeks in warm weather sites is such an odd notion, why was MLB doing exactly that in the late 80's / early 90's?

That's right...that's what was done until teams like the Angels started complaining about playing a lot of home games in April.

If MLB had an actual commissioner, he could have said. "It's in the best interest of baseball to play as many games as possible in as best conditions as possible. It simply makes for a better product, it also potentially reduces the injury factor that can happen in difficult conditions. Sorry Angels, Dodgers, Rangers, Braves, Marlins etc. You open at home in April."

Of couse since MLB doesn't have a commissioner with gonads you get to see the Sox try to hit in 30 degree weather. :rolleyes:

LipThe warm weather teams have a POINT. They end up hosting a lot of games when kids are in school. Thus losing out to more summer games.

Selig, like it or not, has been a VERY POWERFUL comissioner. And the comissioner has ALWAYS been an employee of the member clubs. Selig was the first to be a former club owner instead of an judge or executive from another industry.

Also of note, Selig is 2 for 3 in avoiding a strike/lockout. There was no work stoppage in 2002 or 2007 under his watch.

Harry Chappas
04-01-2011, 11:27 AM
Nobody edits anymore. There are typos, misspelled words and historical errors galore every day in the media. I'll stop now before I get a big head and make a mistake that needs edited.

Whether intentional or not, the grammar above made me laugh.

TomBradley72
04-01-2011, 11:28 AM
The warm weather teams have a POINT. They end up hosting a lot of games when kids are in school. Thus losing out to more summer games.



How do you figure?

They would NOT be playing more home games in April- it's just the timing WITHIN April.

ewokpelts
04-01-2011, 11:28 AM
by the way, under lip's idea, the cubs AND sox would open the season on the road. So will they have thier home opener and first homestands at the same time?

what about the mets and yankees?

Lip Man 1
04-01-2011, 11:45 AM
Ewok:

1. It's not my idea, MLB started it and actually used it.

2. Either the Sox or Cubs could stay on the road an additional two or three days thus solving the issue of conflicting home openers.

3. Life isn't fair, neither is baseball. It's a valid point about warm weather clubs playing a lot of home games with kids in school (although for some reason nobody seems to give a damn about the Sox having to play 12 home games in April in generally miserable weather with kids in school this season, but I digress...) so here's what you do. MLB makes up the difference with a cash payment on the average amount of money these warm weather clubs feel they are losing. (after an examination of the data provided over the years attendance-wise.) Remember Selig "crowed" two off seasons ago about how "baseball is now a six billion dollar industry..." That's NFL territory there, I'm sure MLB can afford to reimburse those franchises and make the game better and make it better for the ones who pay the freight, the fans.

I'm sure the moment, the iota you mention "money" these teams will be as quiet as Wrigley Field come World Series time.

Lip

Huisj
04-01-2011, 01:02 PM
Ewok:

1. It's not my idea, MLB started it and actually used it.

2. Either the Sox or Cubs could stay on the road an additional two or three days thus solving the issue of conflicting home openers.

3. Life isn't fair, neither is baseball. It's a valid point about warm weather clubs playing a lot of home games with kids in school (although for some reason nobody seems to give a damn about the Sox having to play 12 home games in April in generally miserable weather with kids in school this season, but I digress...) so here's what you do. MLB makes up the difference with a cash payment on the average amount of money these warm weather clubs feel they are losing. (after an examination of the data provided over the years attendance-wise.) Remember Selig "crowed" two off seasons ago about how "baseball is now a six billion dollar industry..." That's NFL territory there, I'm sure MLB can afford to reimburse those franchises and make the game better and make it better for the ones who pay the freight, the fans.

I'm sure the moment, the iota you mention "money" these teams will be as quiet as Wrigley Field come World Series time.

Lip

I know it's not your idea since they did use it, but they didn't seem to use it to the extreme that you seem to be implying. What good is opening in Baltimore if you promptly go to Detroit after a 2 game series, and then move on to New York? Does a two game series in Baltimore before going to Detroit really help anyone avoid potential bad weather?

It seems that people are implying that northern teams should take a full multi-week road trip to start the season, and then come home for the second half of the month. You claiming they basically tried that and that Selig is too much of a wimp to do it now. In reality, it doesn't seem like that happened very often in the time frame you say it did.

In '89, the Sox opened out west and played 3 series out there before coming home. In '92 and '96, they played two series out west before coming home. Besides those years, they did not avoid cold weather sites at the start of the season for more than 2 or 3 games over that time period.

bigdommer
04-01-2011, 01:11 PM
A reminder, FYI:Just trying to help.

:tealtutor:
I didn't think it was sarcastic. Coop will get these guys keeping the ball in on the hands, working quick, throwing strikes, so they can get us a White Sox winner!

Lip Man 1
04-01-2011, 01:34 PM
Huisj:

Which doesn't change the fact that it was done. Even two, three, five games in better weather (and you can argue playing in California, Texas, Atlanta, Florida anyplace south of the Mason-Dixon line is much better) makes for a better product on the field and better for the folks paying the bills (i.e. fans...)

And I'm curious what you think of my comment about paying off those "poor" teams who have to play a lot of April games in 70 degree weather (boo-hoo)

In my opinion the following teams should always open at home, ideally for a full week:

Reds, Dodgers, Braves, Cardinals, Astros, Marlins, Nationals, Brewers (dome), Padres, Diamondbacks, Rays, Blue Jays (dome), Orioles, Royals, Rangers, Angels, Mariners (if possible).

Naturally this isn't perfect, some clubs might have to start in cold weather because of the math but it's at least a forward step towards making things better. Buehrle was right.

Lip

doublem23
04-01-2011, 01:52 PM
I cannot believe anyone cares about this.

Sunny and near 50 in Cleveland today. :chillpill:, everyone

soltrain21
04-01-2011, 01:55 PM
I cannot believe anyone cares about this.

Sunny and near 50 in Cleveland today. :chillpill:, everyone

Boom. Roasted.

LongLiveFisk
04-01-2011, 02:52 PM
I cannot believe anyone cares about this.

Sunny and near 50 in Cleveland today. :chillpill:, everyone

Yeah, kind of ironic that it's rainy and ****ty here in Chicago today. :lol:

soltrain21
04-01-2011, 03:22 PM
Huisj:

If playing the first ten days / two weeks in warm weather sites is such an odd notion, why was MLB doing exactly that in the late 80's / early 90's?

That's right...that's what was done until teams like the Angels started complaining about playing a lot of home games in April.

If MLB had an actual commissioner, he could have said. "It's in the best interest of baseball to play as many games as possible in as best conditions as possible. It simply makes for a better product, it also potentially reduces the injury factor that can happen in difficult conditions. Sorry Angels, Dodgers, Rangers, Braves, Marlins etc. You open at home in April."

Of couse since MLB doesn't have a commissioner with gonads you get to see the Sox try to hit in 30 degree weather. :rolleyes:

Lip

This didn't work out for you too much did it, Lip?