PDA

View Full Version : I Have a Couple of Simple Questions


sox230
05-05-2012, 12:34 PM
1) What has Kenny Williams done since 2006 that has persuaded Jerry to keep retaining him as GM?

2) Why doesn't Jerry get more heat from the fans/media? He displayed a complete lack of leadership with his absence during the Ozzie-Kenny saga, as well as running a piss poor organization, from scouting to drafting to development, which has really been awful since the late 80's/early 90's.

3) What is love?

Answers to any/all of the questions would be very much appreciated.

DSpivack
05-05-2012, 12:45 PM
1) What has Kenny Williams done since 2006 that has persuaded Jerry to keep retaining him as GM?

2) Why doesn't Jerry get more heat from the fans/media? He displayed a complete lack of leadership with his absence during the Ozzie-Kenny saga, as well as running a piss poor organization, from scouting to drafting to development, which has really been awful since the late 80's/early 90's.

3) What is love?

Answers to any/all of the questions would be very much appreciated.

Baby, don't hurt me, don't hurt me, no more.

LITTLE NELL
05-05-2012, 01:49 PM
The White Sox are not run like a big market team.
I think the answer lies with JR.
They have spent some money on guys like Dunn and Peavy but when things did not go well last year they went into rebuilding mode. Big market teams do not rebuild, they go out and get better players. I still say they should not have let Buerhle walk. Something could have been worked out. Would the Yankees or Red Sox let Buerhle walk?
The minors have been a joke also, we don't develop players well and when we have someone that might be really good, we bring them up too early. Beckham and Sale both should have spent more time in the minors. I put the blame on KW along with the mindset that JR and EE had when they bought the team that the minors are over rated and you build good teams with smart trades and free agent signings, WRONG. You use all three.
Sox fans are to blame also. The Sox are the only big market team never to draw 3 million in a season. Its sort of a disgrace that they did not draw 3 million in 2006 after the great championship run in 2005. If we draw 2 million this year I will be shocked

doublem23
05-05-2012, 01:50 PM
They're fine

NardiWasHere
05-05-2012, 01:52 PM
I also want to know what love is. I want you to show me.

hawkjt
05-05-2012, 01:54 PM
1. GM's are generally not a year to year position. Roland Hemond was the Sox GM for a long time. Sox have been in the hunt most years under Kenny.

2. Sox fans put heat on by staying home,which they are doing this year and last. What else can they do? But again, I think over the last 20 years, the Sox are probably in the top 8 teams in baseball in total wins..at one point they were #2 behind the Braves from 1990-2005,I believe. Not a great many super years,but always steady winners.

3. I cannot describe it,but I know it when I feel it,like porn.

LITTLE NELL
05-05-2012, 02:11 PM
1. GM's are generally not a year to year position. Roland Hemond was the Sox GM for a long time. Sox have been in the hunt most years under Kenny.

2. Sox fans put heat on by staying home,which they are doing this year and last. What else can they do? But again, I think over the last 20 years, the Sox are probably in the top 8 teams in baseball in total wins..at one point they were #2 behind the Braves from 1990-2005,I believe. Not a great many super years,but always steady winners.

3. I cannot describe it,but I know it when I feel it,like porn.

2001-2011 we are not in the top 8
http://www.examiner.com/article/a-s-are-top-8-mlb-winners-this-century-but-it-hasn-t-been-enough-to-win-it-all

SI1020
05-05-2012, 02:11 PM
1. Pretty much wrecked the franchise.

2. Maybe partly because his team won the only WS in Chicago since Woodrow Wilson was President. Reinsdorf definitely had his share of critics almost from the beginning, but the Sox winning that title did wonders for his image.

3. I think Lou Rawls, the late great singer from the south side of Chicago, explained it as well as anyone ever has since the dawn of time.

vP8lqM7nx2I

Viva Medias B's
05-05-2012, 02:25 PM
1) What has Kenny Williams done since 2006 that has persuaded Jerry to keep retaining him as GM?

2) Why doesn't Jerry get more heat from the fans/media? He displayed a complete lack of leadership with his absence during the Ozzie-Kenny saga, as well as running a piss poor organization, from scouting to drafting to development, which has really been awful since the late 80's/early 90's.

3) What is love?

Answers to any/all of the questions would be very much appreciated.

Jerry hires his GMs and managers on the cheap.

TDog
05-05-2012, 02:31 PM
1. GM's are generally not a year to year position. Roland Hemond was the Sox GM for a long time. Sox have been in the hunt most years under Kenny.

2. Sox fans put heat on by staying home,which they are doing this year and last. What else can they do? But again, I think over the last 20 years, the Sox are probably in the top 8 teams in baseball in total wins..at one point they were #2 behind the Braves from 1990-2005,I believe. Not a great many super years,but always steady winners.

3. I cannot describe it,but I know it when I feel it,like porn.

I won't paraphrase Potter Stewart, but the idea that fans not attending games puts pressure on ownership to act like a big-market team, if I am remotely understanding the reasoning, is absolutely ridiculous.

And I understand that suggesting such a thing leaves me open to being accused of blaming the fans for the White Sox problems.

asindc
05-05-2012, 02:42 PM
1. Pretty much wrecked the franchise.

2. Maybe partly because his team won the only WS in Chicago since Woodrow Wilson was President. Reinsdorf definitely had his share of critics almost from the beginning, but the Sox winning that title did wonders for his image.

3. I think Lou Rawls, the late great singer from the south side of Chicago, explained it as well as anyone ever has since the dawn of time.

vP8lqM7nx2I

One of my favorite albums.

DonnieDarko
05-05-2012, 03:01 PM
3) What is love?


A chemical reaction that takes place in your brain. It's basically your brain telling you to procreate with a person to produce offspring and ensure the survival of the species. In the case of loving family members and the like, it's simply another, similar, chemical reaction in your brain, but this one is not focused toward reproduction. Rather, it's focused more toward pooling your resources together to ensure the survival of the family unit/tribe/whathaveyou.

The more you know~~~~*

samurai_sox
05-05-2012, 03:01 PM
1. Jerry's immense loyalty to Kenny is what keeps him here. Wouldn't be surprised if Jerry considers Kenny as one of his sons.

2. Jerry's teams have produced 7 of Chicago's last 8 championships. When the Hawks won the cup, it was the first non-JR owned team that won since the '85 Bears. I agree that he could do a better job running the Sox, though.

3. Don't know, I'm not that experienced in that department.

doublem23
05-05-2012, 03:48 PM
1. Jerry's immense loyalty to Kenny is what keeps him here. Wouldn't be surprised if Jerry considers Kenny as one of his sons.

Also possible JR thinks KW is a good GM whose just had a string of bad luck.

tsoxman
05-05-2012, 04:08 PM
Also possible JR thinks KW is a good GM whose just had a string of bad luck.
Or bad decisions.

LITTLE NELL
05-05-2012, 04:16 PM
Answer to #3.....Going to Sox games in 1970.

voodoochile
05-05-2012, 04:44 PM
3) What is love?

Love is unconditional - You love the Sox regardless of Kenny's failures, Ozzie's mouth, Dunn's appendix (and subsequent fail of a season), the White Flag trade, The Blacksox scandal and the first game ever at the new Comiskey that you paid a scalper $250/seat to attend.

Love will make you do crazy things - like staying at the opening game of the 2006 season for the whole thing or continuing to go to and watch games in the second half of 2007.

Love is continuing to post at WSI - regardless of the ranting, anger and obsessive pollyannaishness (new word of the day - it's mine, but you can use it) of many of the posters.

Love is baseball season in all it's frustrating joyous glory...

NardiWasHere
05-05-2012, 04:51 PM
Love is a battlefield.

Lip Man 1
05-05-2012, 06:54 PM
"Love is all around"- The Troggs 1968.

JR is a very loyal man, sometimes that works in your favor, sometimes it doesn't. He's not going to change his ways at this stage in his life.

Eventually massive change will come to the organization and we'll see how it responds to it.

Lip

Noneck
05-05-2012, 07:34 PM
Maybe Williams is controllable.

TDog
05-05-2012, 08:20 PM
Also possible JR thinks KW is a good GM whose just had a string of bad luck.

The thing is, you objectively can't tell. A fan or a casual observer can't anyway. There is no experimental control to prove whether Kenny Williams is a bad general manager who got lucky and built the only Chicago baseball champion since World War I was being fought to a standstill and Babe Ruth was an elite pitcher, or a great general manager who through bad luck managed to win only one championship in a century when only two teams have won two and only two championships.

Zakath
05-05-2012, 09:19 PM
QE61Bz7IHKg

ZombieRob
05-05-2012, 10:07 PM
Makes you wonder that the best player on the team is one Ron Shueler aquired

TDog
05-05-2012, 11:36 PM
Makes you wonder that the best player on the team is one Ron Shueler aquired

Not for long, really. You are talking about Paul Konerko. There was a time when the best player on the White Sox was a player drafted by a general manager let go by the Cubs after he left the White Sox.

What would make me wonder is if the best player on the White Sox were a .260-hitter acquired in a trade for Konerko. Fortunately, I don't have to do that.

In fact, there was a time in the 1970s when the best player on the Atlanta Braves was signed from a Negro Leagues team when the Braves were still a Boston team.

Mingo
05-06-2012, 10:37 AM
KW's Dunn and Peavy trades are paying off this season and Roben Ventura was a good decision for Manager. At the risk of getting singed here KW has done well this year.

Dan H
05-06-2012, 04:52 PM
Blaming the fans for the team's problems is an old scape-goating piece of nonsense. We are not obligated to attend one game a season. Loyalty is a two-way street and I just don't blindly give my loyalty to anyone.

As far as Reinsdorf not getting much heat, it is hard to argue with two three-peats even if the Bulls haven't done anything since Jordan left. And obviously, who do you have to compare Reinsdorf to? Bill Wirtz was awful and drove a once proud franchise into the ground. The Tribune Company won next to nothing. The Bears are run by a family that is always behind the rest of the league and their team has been to a grand total of one Super Bowl since the great 1985 team.

I attended games in 1970, too. That owner was a nice man, but he didn't have the resources or the know-how to run a baseball team. Reinsdorf does have one last place finish but his team didn't never lost 106 games.

LITTLE NELL
05-06-2012, 05:06 PM
Blaming the fans for the team's problems is an old scape-goating piece of nonsense. We are not obligated to attend one game a season. Loyalty is a two-way street and I just don't blindly give my loyalty to anyone.



I guess a lot of fans feel like you do, the Sox are 29th out of 30 in attendance so far this year.

asindc
05-06-2012, 05:23 PM
Blaming the fans for the team's problems is an old scape-goating piece of nonsense. We are not obligated to attend one game a season. Loyalty is a two-way street and I just don't blindly give my loyalty to anyone.

As far as Reinsdorf not getting much heat, it is hard to argue with two three-peats even if the Bulls haven't done anything since Jordan left. And obviously, who do you have to compare Reinsdorf to? Bill Wirtz was awful and drove a once proud franchise into the ground. The Tribune Company won next to nothing. The Bears are run by a family that is always behind the rest of the league and their team has been to a grand total of one Super Bowl since the great 1985 team.

I attended games in 1970, too. That owner was a nice man, but he didn't have the resources or the know-how to run a baseball team. Reinsdorf does have one last place finish but his team didn't never lost 106 games.

How are the Sox being disloyal?

PaleHoser
05-06-2012, 10:16 PM
3) What is love?

"Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. It is not rude, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth. It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perserveres. Love never fails."

St. Paul - 1 Corinthians 13:4-8

Tragg
05-06-2012, 10:40 PM
In the last 5 years or so:
Swisher 1 and Swisher 2 were awful trades. It's hard to get much worse.
Jackson 1 was bad.
The rest were in the "meh" range really.
But there really haven't been any good ones. Peavy won't turn out that bad, but in the end, we paid a ton of salary and got one year out of Peavy (hopefully we get that 1) and we could have gotten someone else trading all those young players.
He hasn't been a productive GM.
I'm sure he'll move along in the next year or so. I just hope he doesn't start trading the little young talent we have in the meantime.

Harry Chappas
05-07-2012, 10:11 AM
I have a strong feeling (well, more than a feeling) that this will be Kenny's last year in the role of GM.

From the top down, the Sox strike me as a team that is making it up as they go along. We're supposedly "rebuilding" but what have we done to that end? We signed Danks to a 5-year extension worth at an average of $13 million per year after posting an ERA in '11 of 4.33. That's #2 money for a guy pitching like a #5. We traded Sergio Santos and Carlos Quentin for Nestor Molina, Pedro Hernandez, and Simon Castro - none of whom project to be much more than back-of-the-rotation guys and who have been just average thus far in Birmingham.

A key piece of our present and future rotation - Chris Sale - has been moved to the bullpen leaving us with the aforementioned Danks, an inconsistent Gavin Floyd who they seem intent on moving, Peavy who will probably be moved at the trade deadline (Kenny will probably net another middling minor leaguer), Phil Humber, and [insert player here]. As for our position players, well, it's even worse with our "young" talent sucking to the point of embarrassment.

No, I don't think it's accurate to describe this as a rebuilding effort unless you're referring to the coaching staff where Kenny attempted to buy himself some time by appointing fan-favorite Robin Ventura who isn't ready for the job. The Sox not only rush players to the majors, but coaches as well!

Railsplitter
05-07-2012, 10:19 AM
2) Why doesn't Jerry get more heat from the fans/media? He displayed a complete lack of leadership with his absence during the Ozzie-Kenny saga, as well as running a piss poor organization, from scouting to drafting to development, which has really been awful since the late 80's/early 90's.



Probably the same reason Ditka became like a god for winning only one Super Bowl.

hawkjt
05-07-2012, 10:33 AM
Probably the same reason Ditka became like a god for winning only one Super Bowl.


Not a huge Ditka defender,but he presided over a great era of Bears success from 1983- 1990,where they won the division almost every year.

As for Reinsdorf, under his stewardship,in the 22 seasons since 1990, the Sox have had 14 winning seasons,one .500 season,and 7 losing seasons.
They have finished 1st or 2nd fifteen times, 3rd six times,4th once,and last place zero. So in the last 22 seasons,the Sox have usually won more than they lost,and finished 1st or 2nd,and occasionally 3rd.

They are not abject failures,ever, but have not won enough to be truly successful. They did win a world series,which makes Reinsforf more successful than any living Sox owner.

Hitmen77
05-07-2012, 01:18 PM
1) What has Kenny Williams done since 2006 that has persuaded Jerry to keep retaining him as GM?

2) Why doesn't Jerry get more heat from the fans/media? He displayed a complete lack of leadership with his absence during the Ozzie-Kenny saga, as well as running a piss poor organization, from scouting to drafting to development, which has really been awful since the late 80's/early 90's.



I think Reinsdorf is very loyal to his employees. I don't think he necessarily holds KW to a "what have you done for me lately" standard.

My guess is that perhaps he doesn't hold KW responsible in hindsight for Peavy and Dunn being flops (at least through 2011). The one move that that I'd expect KW to get heat for is being left holding the bag on Rios's lousy contract that Toronto was probably thrilled to unload. It would be interesting to be a fly on the wall for discussions between JR and KW on that transaction.

Overall, it's not like KW is awful. Yes, he's made some trades recently that have been busts, but I would guess that JR really values KW's knack for picking up low-cost players like Humber, Danks, Quentin, etc. that turn out to be successes with the Sox. Plus, of course, he values what KW was able to assemble for 2005.

IMO, the Sox organization's biggest problem is their inability to develop their own MLB-quality talent. Every team makes bad trades and/or bad signings. But, good organizations can overcome that with organizational depth. When the Sox have someone who is a huge bust, they don't have much in the way of talent in the farm system to turn to. But who knows if JR thinks of this as a "KW problem". Perhaps the farm system is bad because of JR's decision of how much to invest in it (for scouts, draft picks, international signings, etc.) In that case, he may not be of the mindset to blame Kenny for operating under Sox ownership's farm system philosophy.

For Question 2: Why doesn't JR get more heat from the fans and the media? I don't know, but remember, this is the guy who was totally vilified by the fans AND the media for the first 20 years of his ownership. He's had a dramatic turnaround in image. 2005 helped with that. Also, I don't think fans blame him for the KW/OG feud. For 2011, I think fans appreciated that JR was willing to spend more money to go "all in" with Dunn. They don't blame him for the failure of this effort and I think the farm system woes are a little too "behind the scenes" for most fans to connect to him.

FielderJones
05-07-2012, 02:33 PM
They did win a world series,which makes Reinsforf more successful than any living Sox owner.

More successful than any Sox owner, save the original one.

Hitmen77
05-07-2012, 02:45 PM
It seems like this thread has also strayed to the old "attendance" topic. So, here's my :twocents: on that:

The problem with the Sox isn't that their fans aren't as loyal or supportive as those of other teams. The problem is that, despite being in the 3rd largest metro area in the US, a majority of people in Chicagoland are fans of another team. They are not Sox fans and will not support our team. As such, the Sox have a smaller fan base than other major market teams. (IMO, this is a legacy of the TV moves to UHF in the late 60s and pay TV in the early 80s.)

The reality is that any team will see a loss of fan support when a team starts losing. The difference is that a team like the Cubs have a much larger fan base to pick up the slack for every "disenchanted" fan.

The challenge for Sox ownership is to build more fan support in Chicago. Pointing fingers at existing Sox fans (and I'm not saying Sox ownership is doing this) isn't going to fix the problem. How to they build more fan support? The Cubs are so entrenched in this city that the only way to do this is to build a team that frequently makes the playoffs and goes deep into the playoffs. This won't change the loyalties of existing fans, but it sure will lure a new generation of fans to the South Side. The 2005 team was a big boost in this direction, but it has to be more than just a one-time pennant that will turn the tide. Also, it will take time as you gain the interest of young fans and, in 10 years or so, they become ticket-buying customers.

The Sox are the only big market team never to draw 3 million in a season. Its sort of a disgrace that they did not draw 3 million in 2006 after the great championship run in 2005. If we draw 2 million this year I will be shocked

During sellouts, paid attendance at the Cell usually comes out to about 39,000. Even if the Sox had sold out all 81 games in 2006, they would have come in at 3.16 million fans. Sure, some teams have had a ton of sellouts in a row. The Red Sox and the Indians come to mind. But, I don't think it's a disgrace that the Sox drew 2.9 million in 2006

Nellie_Fox
05-07-2012, 03:23 PM
We have a general rule against "attendance threads." That's because, on WSI, it's preaching to the choir, and thus pointless. This one has been allowed to stray that way because it's been so long since we've had to enforce that rule, but I think that this season is likely to renew the issue, so let's nip it in the bud, right now.

TDog
05-07-2012, 03:34 PM
More successful than any Sox owner, save the original one.

And players loved playing for him. (Teal implied.) Can you imagine how the Comiskey family or the Allyns would have handled the current labor climate? Veeck really wasn't a very good owner at all when he came back to the Sox at about the same time baseball lost the reserve clause. There was 1977, but that wasn't a very good team, although they didn't play like a bad team until August so nobody noticed.

asindc
05-07-2012, 03:42 PM
It seems like this thread has also strayed to the old "attendance" topic. So, here's my :twocents: on that:

The problem with the Sox isn't that their fans aren't as loyal or supportive as those of other teams. The problem is that, despite being in the 3rd largest metro area in the US, a majority of people in Chicagoland are fans of another team. They are not Sox fans and will not support our team. As such, the Sox have a smaller fan base than other major market teams. (IMO, this is a legacy of the TV moves to UHF in the late 60s and pay TV in the early 80s.)

The reality is that any team will see a loss of fan support when a team starts losing. The difference is that a team like the Cubs have a much larger fan base to pick up the slack for every "disenchanted" fan.

The challenge for Sox ownership is to build more fan support in Chicago. Pointing fingers at existing Sox fans (and I'm not saying Sox ownership is doing this) isn't going to fix the problem. How to they build more fan support? The Cubs are so entrenched in this city that the only way to do this is to build a team that frequently makes the playoffs and goes deep into the playoffs. This won't change the loyalties of existing fans, but it sure will lure a new generation of fans to the South Side. The 2005 team was a big boost in this direction, but it has to be more than just a one-time pennant that will turn the tide. Also, it will take time as you gain the interest of young fans and, in 10 years or so, they become ticket-buying customers.



During sellouts, paid attendance at the Cell usually comes out to about 39,000. Even if the Sox had sold out all 81 games in 2006, they would have come in at 3.16 million fans. Sure, some teams have had a ton of sellouts in a row. The Red Sox and the Indians come to mind. But, I don't think it's a disgrace that the Sox drew 2.9 million in 2006

The first bolded point is so true it should be stickied and read by anyone who becomes a member here. We do not have the largest fan base of all the AL Central teams, not when Detroit has about 95% of the state of Michigan and about 80% of Northwest Ohio and Cleveland has the rest of northern Ohio.

To the second point, winning cures all.

downstairs
05-07-2012, 04:39 PM
They've been in the hunt more than MANY other teams since 2005.

JR is loyal.

Most of the blame is squarely on the players, and possibly Ozzie.

He has a new manager, so its only smart to let him GM over Ventura for a few years before blaming Kenny himself.

russ99
05-07-2012, 04:45 PM
It seems like this thread has also strayed to the old "attendance" topic. So, here's my :twocents: on that:

The problem with the Sox isn't that their fans aren't as loyal or supportive as those of other teams. The problem is that, despite being in the 3rd largest metro area in the US, a majority of people in Chicagoland are fans of another team. They are not Sox fans and will not support our team. As such, the Sox have a smaller fan base than other major market teams. (IMO, this is a legacy of the TV moves to UHF in the late 60s and pay TV in the early 80s.)

The reality is that any team will see a loss of fan support when a team starts losing. The difference is that a team like the Cubs have a much larger fan base to pick up the slack for every "disenchanted" fan.

The challenge for Sox ownership is to build more fan support in Chicago. Pointing fingers at existing Sox fans (and I'm not saying Sox ownership is doing this) isn't going to fix the problem. How to they build more fan support? The Cubs are so entrenched in this city that the only way to do this is to build a team that frequently makes the playoffs and goes deep into the playoffs. This won't change the loyalties of existing fans, but it sure will lure a new generation of fans to the South Side. The 2005 team was a big boost in this direction, but it has to be more than just a one-time pennant that will turn the tide. Also, it will take time as you gain the interest of young fans and, in 10 years or so, they become ticket-buying customers.

During sellouts, paid attendance at the Cell usually comes out to about 39,000. Even if the Sox had sold out all 81 games in 2006, they would have come in at 3.16 million fans. Sure, some teams have had a ton of sellouts in a row. The Red Sox and the Indians come to mind. But, I don't think it's a disgrace that the Sox drew 2.9 million in 2006

Well put. The Cell has the 4th lowest seating capacity in the majors.

SCCWS
05-07-2012, 05:00 PM
Most of the blame is squarely on the players, and possibly Ozzie.

.

Only if they are consistently underperforming ( i.e Dunn and Rios last year). But if a GM puts inferior talent on the field ( i.e. Beckham, Morel, Viciedo to name a few) the blame is on the GM.

peelwonder
05-07-2012, 10:10 PM
A chemical reaction that takes place in your brain. It's basically your brain telling you to procreate with a person to produce offspring and ensure the survival of the species. In the case of loving family members and the like, it's simply another, similar, chemical reaction in your brain, but this one is not focused toward reproduction. Rather, it's focused more toward pooling your resources together to ensure the survival of the family unit/tribe/whathaveyou.

The more you know~~~~*


Like my Dad says....Neuro Transmitter illusions.....

billyvsox
05-07-2012, 10:14 PM
Love is unconditional - You love the Sox regardless of Kenny's failures, Ozzie's mouth, Dunn's appendix (and subsequent fail of a season), the White Flag trade, The Blacksox scandal and the first game ever at the new Comiskey that you paid a scalper $250/seat to attend.

Love will make you do crazy things - like staying at the opening game of the 2006 season for the whole thing or continuing to go to and watch games in the second half of 2007.

Love is continuing to post at WSI - regardless of the ranting, anger and obsessive pollyannaishness (new word of the day - it's mine, but you can use it) of many of the posters.

Love is baseball season in all it's frustrating joyous glory...


Love.............A many splendor thing

also, like a battlefield.............

also, lies bleeding in your hand.............

voodoochile
05-08-2012, 12:11 AM
Love.............A many splendor thing

also, like a battlefield.............

also, lies bleeding in your hand.............

And it will even reign (rain?) o'er me...

October26
05-08-2012, 08:03 AM
Love is unconditional - You love the Sox regardless of Kenny's failures, Ozzie's mouth, Dunn's appendix (and subsequent fail of a season), the White Flag trade, The Blacksox scandal and the first game ever at the new Comiskey that you paid a scalper $250/seat to attend.

Love will make you do crazy things - like staying at the opening game of the 2006 season for the whole thing or continuing to go to and watch games in the second half of 2007.

Love is continuing to post at WSI - regardless of the ranting, anger and obsessive pollyannaishness (new word of the day - it's mine, but you clan use it) of many of the posters.

Love is baseball season in all it's frustrating joyous glory...


:thumbsup: love this!

russ99
05-08-2012, 08:32 AM
Love is unconditional - You love the Sox regardless of Kenny's failures, Ozzie's mouth, Dunn's appendix (and subsequent fail of a season), the White Flag trade, The Blacksox scandal and the first game ever at the new Comiskey that you paid a scalper $250/seat to attend.

Love will make you do crazy things - like staying at the opening game of the 2006 season for the whole thing or continuing to go to and watch games in the second half of 2007.

Love is continuing to post at WSI - regardless of the ranting, anger and obsessive pollyannaishness (new word of the day - it's mine, but you can use it) of many of the posters.

Love is baseball season in all it's frustrating joyous glory...

Heck yeah.

As for the second half of 2007 - I was at the Twins doubleheader. This year's team isn't that bad... yet.

So I have some hope that things get better this year, and if not, we can still enjoy baseball in the warm summer weather.

billyvsox
05-08-2012, 04:28 PM
and it will even reign (rain?) o'er me...


+1

34 Inch Stick
05-08-2012, 04:58 PM
Love is but a dung heap Betty, and I am a cock who climbs upon it to crow.