PDA

View Full Version : Yet another "White Sox are fake" article


SoxFan78
04-28-2005, 12:55 PM
What a surprise, i checked on page 2 and saw "another" article explaining how the sox are not for real. Great stuff.

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=neel/050428

skobabe8
04-28-2005, 01:05 PM
What a surprise, i checked on page 2 and saw "another" article explaining how the sox are not for real. Great stuff.

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=neel/050428
Thats the first such article I've seen.

BridgePortNative
04-28-2005, 01:09 PM
White Sox Baseball = Who Cares

Uncle_Patrick
04-28-2005, 01:10 PM
That article is just retarded. It reads like its written by a Twins fan.

2005 White Sox and fans to the media: WE DON'T CARE!

Hangar18
04-28-2005, 01:31 PM
What a surprise, i checked on page 2 and saw "another" article explaining how the sox are not for real. Great stuff.

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=neel/050428


I think whats AMAZING and DISTURBING about all of this, is the amount
of NEGATIVE and DISPARAGING articles about the SOX record start.
Its growing in numbers and coming from all corners now. They DONT
want us to win ........ all the Pre-written world series articles for the other
team will all be obsolete if we keep winning.

Anyone remember the 1989 Cubs getting this much NEGATIVE press? nope.
the 1998 Cubs? Heroes.
the 2003 Cubs? Legends-in-waiting. Hell, they were World Series Heroes by the time May came along.
Anyone see the difference between the 2005 SOX in April vs the 2003 Cubs in April? Were getting Ripped for being ........... 16-6.

TommyJohn
04-28-2005, 01:49 PM
I think whats AMAZING about all of this, is anyone remember when the cubs
of 1989? The City and Natioanal Media went BERSERK, hardly a damaging or disparaging article could be found about the cubs. The Cubs of 1998?
Folk Heroes ! The Cubs of 2003? Legends. Compare the SOX of 2005, thru April, to the Cubs of 2003, and whats the difference? The Media was onboard, writing cubfluff, spinning positive cub everywhere, anywhere at all times of the day. The Sox? The Media feigns ignorance for the first 3 weeks, finally beginning to acknowledge us by slamming us and writing off our success. Did that happen for them? Never.

Is it me, or every time the Cubs start off well, the attitude is one of
"can those lovable Cubbies do it this year, or are they setting their
fans up for another oh so crushing heartbreak?" while when the White
Sox start off well they (and fans) get nothing but abuse and sneering?
And you all think this will change if the White Sox ever win the World
Series? Don't I repeat DO NOT kid yourselves.

I know, I shouldn't let it bother me. Like, who cares? Well, I can't think
of any other sports team or fanbase that has to endure this type of
abuse.

mdep524
04-28-2005, 01:57 PM
I think whats AMAZING and DISTURBING about all of this, is the amount
of NEGATIVE and DISPARAGING articles about the SOX record start.
Its growing in numbers and coming from all corners now. They DONT
want us to win ........ all the Pre-written world series articles for the other
team will all be obsolete if we keep winning.

Anyone remember the 1989 Cubs getting this much NEGATIVE press? nope.
the 1998 Cubs? Heroes.
the 2003 Cubs? Legends-in-waiting. Hell, they were World Series Heroes by the time May came along.
Anyone see the difference between the 2005 SOX in April vs the 2003 Cubs in April? Were getting Ripped for being ........... 16-6. It is amazing the lengths the national and local media will go to downplay and condescend to the White Sox. Whether you care about the media or not, it is still a shame.

And Hangar, your post here is EXACTLY right.

crector
04-29-2005, 09:24 AM
So much for Lip's theory that Sox winning will lead to media respect.......

DaveIsHere
04-29-2005, 09:35 AM
I can see it now, if the Sox won the World series we would still not be Legitamate and all the talk would be how someone else should have won. Figures.......................

mweflen
04-29-2005, 09:38 AM
http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=neel/050428

it's all going to come crashing down. You know they sport a team on-base percentage about as low as the dusty underside of a sidewinder (forgive me, I was inhabited by the spirit of Dan Rather there for a second). And you realize, after Mark Buehrle (http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/players/profile?statsId=6525) (3.89 ERA/1.03 WHIP), their pitching staff just ain't anywhere near this good.

BaseballTonyght
04-29-2005, 09:59 AM
/shrug

It seems all in good fun. Fortunately, a team's fate is decided between the lines, not by the pen.

Procol Harum
04-29-2005, 09:59 AM
Let's face it, while we as Sox fans are rightly bullish about the great start after so many mediocre Aprils over the years, the Sox aren't gonna be able to change nat'l perceptions until we actually end up doing something. Getting off to a great start is no guarantee of ultimate victory. Why should we suddenly expect the world to fall at our feet after 88 years of failure just because we have a nice start? Can't blame them for being skeptical. To put this in Gumpish terms, "Nice start is as nice finish does."

harwar
04-29-2005, 10:30 AM
To put this in Gumpish terms, "Nice start is as nice finish does."

or .. winning is as winning does ...

Huisj
04-29-2005, 10:30 AM
http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=neel/050428

I saw that quote about Buerhle too. Isn't it funny that in the power rankings, they mention Garland as being legitimately good now? ESPN is a bunhc of clowns

chaerulez
04-29-2005, 10:30 AM
http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=neel/050428

What is it with this company and its so called "experts" that don't believe in the White Sox. Maybe they are bitter that the Yankees are doing pretty bad.

seanpmurphy
04-29-2005, 10:31 AM
http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=neel/050428

Possibly one of the worst articles I've ever read in my life.

DumpJerry
04-29-2005, 10:42 AM
Ok, in the past I've said we should take up a collection to buy out Uncle Jerry. That project is on ice, our Uncle has hired excellent execs who are making us happy.

All funds collected towards the effort to buy the Sox will now be directed in the effort to buy a media outlet. Please send new contributions.

Who wants to be Sports Director? If chosen, how will you program sports reports?:D:

infohawk
04-29-2005, 10:50 AM
Yeah, I read that too. What a bunch of garbage!!! We'll, I guess the Sox .OBP is fixed at around .311 for all time. Here's what I have to say to that...:dtroll: :dtroll: :dtroll: :dtroll: :dtroll: :dtroll:

SSN721
04-29-2005, 10:51 AM
Eh, oh well, only about 10 sentences on the Sox. I just love all these national guys that are supposed "Sox Fans" that refuse to put forth one positive comment about this team other then, wow, Ozzies a goofball and their pitching still sucks.

NonetheLoaiza
04-29-2005, 10:51 AM
That article is a piece of garbage. A sinking ship? *****...

They criticized Ozzie on PTI yesterday too, without even mentioning why Dye had to play SS or that it was them that fueled the Ozzie comments about Frank. Closer by committee? Last time I checked, Shingo was still the closer...albeit, barely.

Ol' No. 2
04-29-2005, 10:54 AM
If you haven't figured this out by now, this is just a bunch of sportswriters who picked the Sox for 3rd or 4th pre-season because they couldn't be bothered to find out such trivial details as who is actually on the roster. Now they're just trying to justify their stupidity. More servings of crow later on.

MUScholar21
04-29-2005, 10:59 AM
A little late:

http://www.whitesoxinteractive.com/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=49056

Spicoli
04-29-2005, 11:13 AM
Why have sports reporters moved away from letting the action on the field dictate what they report to trying to be little-gods who control the action on the field? Shouldn't it be that they "report" / "describe" the events that are unfolding as the players/teams dictate by their performance on the actual (not the virtual reality of their imaginations and statistical probablilities) field of play? Most sports broadcasts and articles are filled with pontifications from these so-called "experts" as if their commandments will/can change the reality of the results of actual play on the field. The Sox are in first, have the best record, are outplaying their opponents and winning; yet these "reporters" refuse to acknowledge the reality of that fact. Instead they talk around it like it is a mirage. Flatly put, this is not journalism, it is paranoid schizophrenia. Their egos have gotten the best of them and they are compromising their profession and their selves!


*off soap box*

cbrownson13
04-29-2005, 11:26 AM
There's one on ESPN Insider written by Rob Neyer. Starts off like this, "Here's why I don't believe the White Sox are the best team in the American League Central: Their pitchers obviously can't keep pitching as well as they have."

Obviously? Who knew?

DumpJerry
04-29-2005, 11:46 AM
There's one on ESPN Insider written by Rob Neyer. Starts off like this, "Here's why I don't believe the White Sox are the best team in the American League Central: Their pitchers obviously can't keep pitching as well as they have."

Obviously? Who knew?
As a lawyer who tangles it up in the courtroom on a regular basis, it is comments like this one from Neyer that make me drool. I would love, LOVE, to be on a radio or TV talk show with guys like this who make unsupported empty statements. I would have to spend 6 hours a day at the gym working off the fat as I eat them all alive..........

Hangar18
04-29-2005, 01:03 PM
Someone earlier shot down Lips theory that if the White Sox start WINNING,
the media attention will come. Ive always been suspicious that the Media
wouldnt and now we see a team with a 16-6 record being slammed home
and abroad. Its quite obvious the Chicago White Sox are striking a nerve with ESPN, Chicago Media outlets right now by winning. They obviously
wish it was the cubs instead ...........

NonetheLoaiza
04-29-2005, 01:16 PM
I'm still just outraged that the lead article on espn.com says 'April Aberration'. Honest to God, why can't they just cover the Sox because they are playing good baseball? It makes me so angry, because as has been said before, if the Cubs had a 16-6 record, it's 'Cubs Close to First World Series Title since 1908', blah blah blah. Ridiculous :angry: :angry: :angry:

DumpJerry
04-29-2005, 02:12 PM
Let's assume we'll win tonight and tomorrow night to give us a 18-6 April. That comes to a.750 winning percentage. We have 29 games in May. The current clip will give us 22 victories in May. If that happens, what excuses will the media come up with? I'm not sure if we can play .750 ball in May, there is a 16 game stretch from May 3-May 18 where we play at home and abroad Kansas City, Toronto, Tampa, Baltimore, and Texas before we have one day off before heading into the Urinal to start a 13 game stretch (May 20-June 1).

May will be a test for the team's health and stamina. I am sure we will pass.:smile:

seanpmurphy
04-29-2005, 02:23 PM
If you haven't figured this out by now, this is just a bunch of sportswriters who picked the Sox for 3rd or 4th pre-season because they couldn't be bothered to find out such trivial details as who is actually on the roster. Now they're just trying to justify their stupidity. More servings of crow later on.

Man those Indians are such a threat to win the Central!