PDA

View Full Version : BBTN Blows


kingpin_rcs
07-24-2003, 11:32 PM
But we already know that.

The latest dose of disrespect:

Harold Renolds talks about how he is worried about the Royals about how they are losing and then the other gut mentions how the lost to the Twins today and now the Twins are now 5.5 games out.

Then they show the Sox/Jays highlights. They show Frank strike out twice/one of the Jays homers/the rain delay/then Franks rbi single in the 13th and acted like it was a miracle that he got a hit.

Did they mention how the Sox have now won 7 in a row? NO!

Did they mention how the Sox are now 4 games out? NO!

Did they mention how Maggs was 4/6? NO!

Marte? NO!

They suck! Thank god this website exists.

adsit
07-24-2003, 11:40 PM
Originally posted by kingpin_rcs
They suck! Thank god this website exists.

I'll second that, on both counts. This website is the next best thing to watching the game in a Bridgeport bar.

As for the other thing... Bristol's about an hour's drive for me. If they keep this stuff up, I can pay 'em a visit for you guys... if you know what I mean...

I am a Chicago native, after all... we don't like being disrespected.

Dave

WhiteSox = Life
07-24-2003, 11:44 PM
Originally posted by kingpin_rcs
But we already know that.

The latest dose of disrespect:

Harold Renolds talks about how he is worried about the Royals about how they are losing and then the other gut mentions how the lost to the Twins today and now the Twins are now 5.5 games out.

Then they show the Sox/Jays highlights. They show Frank strike out twice/one of the Jays homers/the rain delay/then Franks rbi single in the 13th and acted like it was a miracle that he got a hit.

Did they mention how the Sox have now won 7 in a row? NO!

Did they mention how the Sox are now 4 games out? NO!

Did they mention how Maggs was 4/6? NO!

Marte? NO!

They suck! Thank god this website exists.

When you have Harold "I Love Sham-Me*" Reynolds, Bobby "Incognito" Valentine and Peter "Red Sox Will Win The World Series... Where Am I?" Gammons, what can you expect?

:D:

JJAustin69
07-24-2003, 11:44 PM
When the Twins had their 5 game streak going, they were the "red hot" Twins. Now we have 7 going, the hottest team in the AL (Giants have won 8) and it receives no mention. BBTN is crap.

gosox3072
07-24-2003, 11:56 PM
Whew im happy other people noticed this, i just got done watching 1 hour of bbtn and was astounded that they didnt even mention that we had a 7 game winning streak. Well if we keep winning sooner or later they are gonna have to notice us

Tavarin
07-25-2003, 12:07 AM
well, if its any consolation, Reynolds picked the White Sox to win the central in the BBTN that was on as a repeat around noon.

fquaye149
07-25-2003, 07:37 AM
realistically, we have backed into this 7 game win streak

but on the other hand, a win's a win!

hold2dibber
07-25-2003, 07:41 AM
Originally posted by fquaye149
realistically, we have backed into this 7 game win streak


What does that mean?

Bucktown
07-25-2003, 08:00 AM
I saw this too, but I think it is good to stay under radar at this point. If we win the World Series and they don't say anything then I will grouse.

SoxOnTop
07-25-2003, 08:16 AM
Originally posted by fquaye149
realistically, we have backed into this 7 game win streak

Yes, exactly what do you mean. If you can't get jacked about a 7 game win streak then you're really missing out.

LuvSox
07-25-2003, 08:18 AM
Originally posted by fquaye149
realistically, we have backed into this 7 game win streak

Huh?

Hangar18
07-25-2003, 08:57 AM
I remember how they were largely ignored til around the AllStar break in 2000, then and only then did they start getting bigtime Press coverage

QueerGirrl
07-25-2003, 09:01 AM
Originally posted by kingpin_rcs
But we already know that.

The latest dose of disrespect:

Harold Renolds talks about how he is worried about the Royals about how they are losing and then the other gut mentions how the lost to the Twins today and now the Twins are now 5.5 games out.

Then they show the Sox/Jays highlights. They show Frank strike out twice/one of the Jays homers/the rain delay/then Franks rbi single in the 13th and acted like it was a miracle that he got a hit.

Did they mention how the Sox have now won 7 in a row? NO!

Did they mention how the Sox are now 4 games out? NO!

Did they mention how Maggs was 4/6? NO!

Marte? NO!

They suck! Thank god this website exists.



:angry:

I watched both BBTN shows last night and I thought that they were definately anti-White Sox. I was very shocked that they didn't say anything about the win streak, how good our pitching was (they kept showing Garland giving up the homer in the fifth), and how well Maggs did. I'm liking the BBTN crew less and less.

harwar
07-25-2003, 09:02 AM
Originally posted by adsit
Bristol's about an hour's drive for me. If they keep this stuff up, I can pay 'em a visit for you guys... if you know what I mean...
I am a Chicago native, after all... we don't like being disrespected.

Now your talkin dave my boy.If i was 20 years younger i'd be right there with you.Just like the old days.I actually like the BBTN guys,but just point me to chris berman.

Clarkdog
07-25-2003, 09:46 AM
I noticed it too. Especially when they were talking about the poor late inning play of the Royals, that the Twins were "not going away" at 5.5 games back and the White Sox were "wedged in between them" at 4 games back - as if the Sox were an obstacle that should pushed aside so that the Royals and the Twins can have thier private pennant race.

I think what you're seeing is a media driven way to protect themselves from their earlier predictions. In the Spring there were an awful lot of ESPN "experts" that were snorting the Twinkie dust. I think Dan Patrick and the Magazine were the only ones on record saying they liked the White Sox in the AL Central. The Royals are a nice story. From worst to first. As a reporter you can't help not liking it. And it makes it easier to admit to failure on a prediction when a dark horse that you never considered contends with the team you originally backed.

But if the White Sox win it, there's going to be an awful lot of crow for dinner in Bristol.

daveb816
07-25-2003, 09:56 AM
Excellent, dead-on post.

They mentioned the Sox as an afterthought in the AL Central race, when they're the hottest team in the division and ahead of the Twins.

Can you imagine how much attention they would be giving the Cubs if they had a 7-game streak and chopped an 8-game deficit in half in a week's time?

harwar
07-25-2003, 11:02 AM
Originally posted by daveb816
Can you imagine how much attention they would be giving the Cubs if they had a 7-game streak and chopped an 8-game deficit in half in a week's time?

They have been doing this for years so i am becoming accustomed to it,i guess.But they are reaching new lows in their White Sox hatred.As a matter of fact wednesday july 30th,espn is broadcasting the giants-cubs game in the afternoon.At night,do we get the White Sox-royals?Of course not,we get the Dbacks-marlins & astros-braves.Now i can maybe see the braves-astros,but the Dbacks-marlins over the White Sox-royals? PATHETIC!

Lip Man 1
07-25-2003, 12:19 PM
Just a few points on ESPN televised games.

Part of the problem is the fact that many teams in the Central time zone WILL NOT move their game time up to accomodate ESPN's double header nights.

That's why you can basically assume that on nights when ESPN has a twin bill it'll involve a game on the East Coast and the West Coast only.

That's the only way they can fit that without joining a game in progress. The Sox in the past have turned down moving start times up so they could be the first game of the night. It would require moving the game up an hour to 6PM Central.

It's possible other teams have felt the same way and maybe the Royals in this case refused to burden their fans and change it.

I know that it bothers me that very good Central time zone matchups have gone untelevised by ESPN but that's the way it is. Now ESPN2 tends to do more games out of the central time zone because they usually one have one game. I remember a Sox / mariners game from 2000 that was shown on ESPN 2 from Comiskey.

and finally folks...PLEASE stop the "everyone's against us, conspiracy talk." Sox fans are better then that. The bottom line is "what has this organization CONSISTENTLY done, to warrent such attention?"

Three winning seasons since the strike, underperforming the last two and half years, a fluke year in 2000. Do you expect the national media to bend over backwards for that?

Win consistently, make off season headlines by acquiring top talent, get to the playoffs regularly and you'll get all the publicity you can stand.

Lip

phaedrus
07-25-2003, 12:39 PM
so Lip, based on that how do you explain the coverage the Flubs get nationally? I'm with you on the anti conspiracy thing but I can't even watch the national media anymore.

Gumshoe
07-25-2003, 12:56 PM
A good example of Phaedrus point is the fact that EVERY (SI, TSN, ESPN) internet or mag media source picked the Cubs to be the sleeper this year. They had lost TONS of games last year (I think 93) and had a young, good, but very inexperienced staff with NO offense. Meanwhile, the Sox are never mentioned on espn unless they are the only game of the day, and they show the Red Sox or Yanks at least 2 or 3 times before even showing the Sox highlights ONCE. I've seen taht happen MANY times.

We do need to win to warrant something, but come on, man.

G

JJAustin69
07-25-2003, 01:37 PM
I have to rely solely on the national media for my Sox highlights so I am keenly aware of the steady biases that they hold. They aren't exactly "out to get us" but they are responsible for lazy and shoddy reporting where the Sox are concerned. Trust me on this one.

fquaye149
07-25-2003, 05:21 PM
Originally posted by SoxOnTop
Yes, exactly what do you mean. If you can't get jacked about a 7 game win streak then you're really missing out.


i'm as excited as the next man about this win streak...but i'm looking at it for what it is:

we won 3 against the tigers, 2 against the indians the first one against the blue jays they almost GAVE us. Only last night did we really go out there and take one from a good team...and not in the way a red-hot team would have.

when the twins were "red-hot" they swept one of the better teams in the american league(oakland), and didn't leave much doubt about it. they were scoring a lot of runs and holding the teams to very few runs.

Meanwhile, with the exception of against detroit, who is detroit, we were winning games by one run against the indians, or letting the blue jays give us the game and still almost giving it back.

i'm ecstatic about this win streak, because a win's a win, and i think the sky's the limit, but i sort of understand espn not calling us the red-hot sox.

however their coverage is still inexcusable

FarmerAndy
07-25-2003, 05:51 PM
Originally posted by Lip Man 1

and finally folks...PLEASE stop the "everyone's against us, conspiracy talk." Sox fans are better then that. The bottom line is "what has this organization CONSISTENTLY done, to warrent such attention?"

Three winning seasons since the strike, underperforming the last two and half years, a fluke year in 2000. Do you expect the national media to bend over backwards for that?

Win consistently, make off season headlines by acquiring top talent, get to the playoffs regularly and you'll get all the publicity you can stand.

Lip

Thank you Lip!

I get so tired of the constant whining from my fellow Sox fans about media coverage.

There are times when Baseball Tonight puts the spotlight on the Sox, but it's a national show that has to cover 30 teams. Every now and then we'll get our piece, but we're not going to get coverage every night. Besides, I watch or listen to every Sox game anyway. The reason I watch Baseball Tonight is to see what's going on with the rest of the league. I think it's a good show and I enjoy it.

This win streak has been nice. I'm really excited about it, but we've got a long way to go before we deserve any royal treatment. (Don't forget, we're only at 52-50.)

MORE WIN, LESS WHINE! :cool:

Lip Man 1
07-25-2003, 09:55 PM
ESPN loves the "look" of Wrigley Field which is why the Cubs are usually scheduled for one or two Sunday Night national telecasts per year.

As far as during tne week, the Cubs are another Central time zone team, they had their game with the Phils shown Monday. That was the first prime time weekday telecast this season.

The Cubs are no different from the Sox, Astros or Cardinals in that regard. They won't consistently move game times just for ESPN.

The one team the past few years that HAS bowed to ESPN from Central divisions / time zones has been the Twins and part of that is because Minnesota always slates at least one or two afternoon games per home stand (I guess they figure they can't draw any less fans) ESPN usually shows two or three national weekend afternoon games from the Metrodome.

And part of that is because on many days there are no other afternoon games going on. (Just like the Cubs who have had two weekday afternoon games shown on ESPN this year including one game with the Sox)

ESPN is not out to "get" the Sox. The Sox like many other Central time zone teams just won't cater to their every whim.

I do wish ESPN would show more Sox Sunday night games. They have only shown two from Comiskey, I think the past four years but part of that is because the team has been mediocre and the ballpark is always half empty. (Not the kind of things ESPN is looking for). I do remember when the Sox were good (particularly in 1990) that ESPN aired four or five games that season in prime time.

It's all about winning folks pure and simple.

Lip