PDA

View Full Version : Tigers or A's?


Myrtle72
10-08-2006, 12:15 PM
Now that the Twins and the Yankees are out of it, I have a feeling we will be a little more divided with who we want to win the ALCS.

I'm rooting for the Tigers.

Who are you rooting for?

Tiger23
10-08-2006, 12:23 PM
Tigers.

I was at the game yesterday. One of the greatest experiences of my life. I'm still very envious of those who have gotten a chance to see their team win it all (hint: all of you). I think the Tigers are in a very good position to make a run for it all right now.

Jjav829
10-08-2006, 12:27 PM
Tigers.

I was at the game yesterday. One of the greatest experiences of my life. I'm still very envious of those who have gotten a chance to see their team win it all (hint: all of you). I think the Tigers are in a very good position to make a run for it all right now.

Well, congrats on winning the ALDS.

I have to think you are right. None of the remaining teams is all that impressive. The Mets without Pedro and El Duque are just not impressive at all. Great offense, good bullpen, horrible starting pitching.

The A's are going to be tough, but they are very beatable and they have a history of choking in the playoffs.

If Kenny Rogers is going to pitch the rest of the playoffs like he pitched Friday, I don't think the Tigers can be beat.

PicktoCLick72
10-08-2006, 12:29 PM
White Sox

Gregory Pratt
10-08-2006, 12:30 PM
Oakland. Go Oakland!

I expect Frank Thomas to treat Kenny Rogers as he did Yohaaan.
I expect Barry Zito to shut down the Tigers.
And I expect Oakland to win.

Not just want, but I really think they're a better team.

gobears1987
10-08-2006, 12:36 PM
A's, not because I like them, but because my favorite player is on their roster. I've waited 13 long years to see Frank Thomas play in a World Series and really want to see it hapen.

Patrick134
10-08-2006, 12:41 PM
Tigers.

I was at the game yesterday. One of the greatest experiences of my life. I'm still very envious of those who have gotten a chance to see their team win it all (hint: all of you). I think the Tigers are in a very good position to make a run for it all right now.


Oakland having home field is huge for them, but it doesn't guarrantee them anything.

bafiarocks03
10-08-2006, 02:17 PM
A'S! I love them. They are my 2nd favorite team! So DEFINETLY A's! WORLD SERIES!

anddd..my D'Angelo Jimenez is on the a's!

=D I've already cried!

Railsplitter
10-08-2006, 02:24 PM
Tigers. They have better unis.

I'm sure we'll see clips of Bert Campineris tossing his bat at Lerrin LaGrow the in 1972 ALCS.

TornLabrum
10-08-2006, 02:34 PM
I'm going with the A's for reasons that will be explained in my next "Fallen Arches" column.

LongLiveFisk
10-08-2006, 02:43 PM
A's

DoItForDanPasqua
10-08-2006, 03:29 PM
Tigers, I can't stand the fans in Oakland with their drums and horns. I prefer the fans in Detroit with their guns and their knives.

I also resent the fact that the A's wear white shoes after Labor Day.

dickallen15
10-08-2006, 03:37 PM
I'm for the Tigers and the AL Central. If the A's beat Detroit, I will be an A's fan in the WS. AL all the way.

LongLiveFisk
10-08-2006, 03:41 PM
I also resent the fact that the A's wear white shoes after Labor Day.

I never understood the whole "white shoes" thing with Oakland. Is it to purposely be different or has that franchise always worn white shoes? :?:

TDog
10-08-2006, 04:01 PM
I never understood the whole "white shoes" thing with Oakland. Is it to purposely be different or has that franchise always worn white shoes? :?:


I don't know if they wore white shoes in Kansas City or even their early days in Oakland, but the elephant goes all the way back to Philadelphia, to the early part of the 20th century. The shoes have probably only been around since Charlie Finley (who wanted to get his hands on the White Sox, or at least the market) defined the dress code. In the 1970s, the A's coaches wore white caps while the players wore green caps. I haven't seen the A's play on television in many years, so I don't know if that's still the case.

I hate the Tigers, and I hate the A's. My deep-seated hatred for the A's is more intense than my hatred for the Tigers. Now I would like to see a rematch of the 1984 World Series, the only World Series I ever got to see in person. I would root for the Padres to win this time, as I did last time, but I don't see the series going to San Diego this year.

23Ventura
10-08-2006, 04:14 PM
I'm rooting for the A's, because of Frank Thomas.

slobes
10-08-2006, 05:25 PM
I've been pulling for the A's ever since Sox got eliminated.

chisoxmike
10-08-2006, 05:36 PM
A's.

**** the Tigers and our Central Divisoin RIVALS!!!!!!! Yes, people, the Tigers are a RIVAL of YOUR Chicago White Sox.

The A's don't mean **** to me.

Myrtle72
10-08-2006, 05:37 PM
A's.

**** the Tigers and our Central Divisoin RIVALS!!!!!!! Yes, people, the Tigers are a RIVAL of YOUR Chicago White Sox.

The A's don't mean **** to me.

Well, they stoped being our rivals this season once they Sox were eliminated.

Chips
10-08-2006, 05:42 PM
A's.

**** the Tigers and our Central Divisoin RIVALS!!!!!!! Yes, people, the Tigers are a RIVAL of YOUR Chicago White Sox.

The A's don't mean **** to me.

**** the A's and your best friend Billy Beane. :cool:

chisoxmike
10-08-2006, 05:58 PM
Well, they stoped being our rivals this season once they Sox were eliminated.


So last week the Twins were no longer our rivals?

So by your saying in the playoffs the Twins, Tigers, and Indians arn't rivals so we should root for them, but magically on opening day they become rivals again?


:rolleyes:

Chips
10-08-2006, 06:03 PM
So last week the Twins were no longer our rivals?

So by your saying in the playoffs the Twins, Tigers, and Indians arn't rivals so we should root for them, but magically on opening day they become rivals again?


:rolleyes:

That's why I'm pulling for the Cardinals or Padres. **** the other AL Central teams and **** the A's.

WSox597
10-08-2006, 06:09 PM
Go Tiggers! It's simple, the A's are in California. I'm constiitutionally unable to root for teams from either coast. I can't help myself. It's probably TV's fault with the overexposure.

Frank Thomas IS the White Sox. Deal with it or get off the Sox bandwagon.

Time to update this signature. Was is the actual word. Was, not is.

Myrtle72
10-08-2006, 06:12 PM
So last week the Twins were no longer our rivals?

So by your saying in the playoffs the Twins, Tigers, and Indians arn't rivals so we should root for them, but magically on opening day they become rivals again?


:rolleyes:

Yeah, that is pretty much what I am saying. Except it's not that we should root for them because they're in the AL Central, just that we can.

We're not competing against them right now, so why not root for them? I like the Tigers and I like a lot of the players on the Tigers. Them being in the central division is a silly reason to not root for them, if you ask me.

soxwon
10-08-2006, 06:13 PM
Who has the most ex-cubs?
It is a determining factor, hasnt failed for years.
same with NY and SL/SD

Myrtle72
10-08-2006, 06:14 PM
Who has the most ex-cubs?
It is a determining factor, hasnt failed for years.
same with NY and SL/SD

:rolling:

This post is hilarious. And the worst part is, you're probably dead serious.

Grzegorz
10-08-2006, 06:17 PM
If it can't be the Chicago White Sox it's the Detroit Tigers...

Everything about the A's makes me sick.

BTW, take the elephant patch off the uniform.

soxwon
10-08-2006, 06:33 PM
:rolling:

This post is hilarious. And the worst part is, you're probably dead serious.

well if you do some digging you will find its true.
it may seem odd but it works.

gf2020
10-08-2006, 06:40 PM
I am rooting for the A's.

1. I have to assume the longer the Tigers stay in the playoffs, the more revenue they will generate. Their owner is already likely to increase payroll as is, but more home games and merchandise means more money to spend on players. The Tigers have unbelievable arms in their system. I don't want them to be able fill their few holes with superstars and be even more of a threat to the division title next year.
2. Frank Thomas is my favorite player in White Sox history. I'd love to see him further his considerable HOF credentials.
3. I hate and know people from Detroit, while I know of not one person from Oakland.
4. I never forget: http://sportsmed.starwave.com/i/magazine/new/whitesox_tigers_fight.jpg
I hate any team that once employed Robert Fick.

I am rooting for the A's, but will then switch allegiance to whatever team emerges from the NL to win the world series, hopefully the Cards.

RealMenWearBlack
10-08-2006, 06:44 PM
I don't care who wins that series as long as the Padres or Cardinals advance to the World Series and win it.

gobears1987
10-08-2006, 07:00 PM
Time to update this signature. Was is the actual word. Was, not is.Frank Thomas is the Sox in the same way that Minnie Minoso and Louis Aparicio are still the Sox. You can't be a White Sox fan while ignoring the greats on this team. Certain players come to symbolize a franchise long after they leave. Michael Jordan is still the image you get when you think of the Bulls. Frank Thomas will always be the White Sox.

I created this sig because I'm sick of all the bandwagon Flub fans who hate Frank and drink the Cubune Kool-Aid.

Myrtle72
10-08-2006, 07:06 PM
Frank Thomas is the Sox in the same way that Minnie Minoso and Louis Aparicio are still the Sox. You can't be a White Sox fan while ignoring the greats on this team.

I think what people are having a problem with is that you expect everyone to have the same opinion of who is great and who is not on this team. Just because you believe Frank was and is the White Sox and was the best player doesn't mean everyone else is going to.

People are going to have different opinions than you. People are going to disagree about what makes a good ball player and what does not. Just because someone doesn't believe Frank Thomas was the best White Sox player ever the way you do doesn't make that person a bandwagoner.

fusillirob1983
10-08-2006, 07:28 PM
A's are my first choice because of Frank. I'll probably be rooting for the Tigers if they make it though. They've played well this season, and as much as I wish the Sox were celebrating yesterday after winning an ALDS, I was able to appreciate how excited the players and fans in Detroit were yesterday.

MarySwiss
10-08-2006, 07:47 PM
Originally Posted by soxwon http://www.whitesoxinteractive.com/vbulletin/images/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://www.whitesoxinteractive.com/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=1378055#post1378055)
Who has the most ex-cubs?
It is a determining factor, hasnt failed for years.
same with NY and SL/SD
:rolling:

This post is hilarious. And the worst part is, you're probably dead serious.

well if you do some digging you will find its true.
it may seem odd but it works.

Sorry, Myrtle; soxwon is correct. The "ex-Cub factor" has been a Chicago legend for a long time. Not sure who started it--I always thought it was Mike Royko, but there seems to be some disagreement--but the basic idea is that whichever team has the fewest ex-Cubs is the more likely to win.

Myrtle72
10-08-2006, 07:49 PM
Sorry, Myrtle; soxwon is correct. The "ex-Cub factor" has been a Chicago legend for a long time. Not sure who started it--I always thought it was Mike Royko, but there seems to be some disagreement--but the basic idea is that whichever team has the fewest ex-Cubs is the more likely to win.

I wasn't saying it was funny because I thought it was stupid or anything, I actually meant that I was pleased to learn those stats are true.

MarySwiss
10-08-2006, 07:54 PM
I wasn't saying it was funny because I thought it was stupid or anything, I actually meant that I was pleased to learn those stats are true.
Yeah, I got that. :smile:

I'm sure the ex-Cub factor thing is not infallible, but it's kind of a cool Chicago legend.

Tiger23
10-08-2006, 08:34 PM
Great. Neifi Perez just continues to hurt the Tigers.

Dan the Man
10-08-2006, 08:46 PM
I really wanted one of these teams to win it all. The A's because of Hurt, Tigers because I guess they kind of remind me of the '05 Sox. In this series though, A's.

oeo
10-08-2006, 08:48 PM
Well, congrats on winning the ALDS.

I have to think you are right. None of the remaining teams is all that impressive. The Mets without Pedro and El Duque are just not impressive at all. Great offense, good bullpen, horrible starting pitching.

The A's are going to be tough, but they are very beatable and they have a history of choking in the playoffs.

If Kenny Rogers is going to pitch the rest of the playoffs like he pitched Friday, I don't think the Tigers can be beat.

I think the A's remind me a lot of last year's White Sox. They were the underdogs coming in, with a history of doing nothing in the postseason. They showed they're the real deal in the ALDS. A's will win in 6...the Tigers beat up on terrible Yankees pitching; there's no way they do the same against the A's. They did it all year long...beat up on bad pitching, and when they ran into something good, they couldn't get anything done.

Chips
10-08-2006, 08:48 PM
Who has the most ex-cubs?
It is a determining factor, hasnt failed for years.
same with NY and SL/SD

Except in the 2005 World Series when the White Sox with 2 ex-cubs swept the Houston Astros and their one ex-cub.

:rolleyes:

Sox It To Em
10-08-2006, 08:59 PM
A's.

**** the Tigers and our Central Divisoin RIVALS!!!!!!! Yes, people, the Tigers are a RIVAL of YOUR Chicago White Sox.

The A's don't mean **** to me.

Agreed. Why so many Sox fans are ardent on rooting for our divisonal rival over a completely neutral team is beyond me. I just don't understand. A's all the way! I like the fact that were the only AL Central team with a recent WS championship and would like to keep it that way.

ws05champs
10-08-2006, 09:15 PM
Tigers for 2 reasons:

1. Representing the Central Division they were worthy adversaries (unlike the twinkies) that beat us for the wild card. As such they deserve our respect and support.

2. The further they get the more likely the arms will fall off of their pitching staff.

Chips
10-08-2006, 09:17 PM
Tigers for 2 reasons:

1. Representing the Central Division they were worthy adversaries (unlike the twinkies) that beat us for the wild card. As such they deserve our respect and support.


They deserve our support because the beat us out for the Wild Card?

I'm not throwing my support at any AL team nor the Mets. The winner of the St. Louis/San Diego series will get my support.

cheeses_h_rice
10-08-2006, 09:22 PM
I ****ing hate Zumaya, Rogers, and Iroid.

The A's don't mean jack **** to me, but I would like to see Big Frank cement his HOF status by leading the A's to the World Series this year.

The Tigers? **** those guys.

chisoxmike
10-08-2006, 09:23 PM
I ****ing hate Zumaya, Rogers, and Iroid.

The A's don't mean jack **** to me, but I would like to see Big Frank cement his HOF status by leading the A's to the World Series this year.

The Tigers? **** those guys.


Word.

Chips
10-08-2006, 09:24 PM
Word.

The asteroid would be ideal.

Myrtle72
10-08-2006, 09:27 PM
I think it's interesting that people have such strong opinions about this. :cool:

chisoxmike
10-08-2006, 09:29 PM
I think it's interesting that people have such strong opinions about this. :cool:


I think because most of us, like me, still can't believe our Sox aren't playing in the playoffs this year.

Chips
10-08-2006, 09:29 PM
1. Asteroid
2. A's

:cool:

1. Asteroid
2. Strike
3. Alien Invasion

CLR01
10-08-2006, 09:30 PM
1- Extinction level event
2- Death
If those don't come through and I end up in a hospital, paralyzed, staring at a TV:
3- Cards
4- Padres
5- Hospital collapse
6- Mets
7- Oakland
7- Oxygen explosion
8- kitties

chisoxmike
10-08-2006, 09:31 PM
1- Extinction level event
2- Death
If those don't come through and I end up in a hospital, paralyzed, staring at a TV:
3- Cards
4- Padres
5- Hospital collapse
6- Mets
7- Oakland
7- Oxygen explosion
8- kitties

:rolling:

Chips
10-08-2006, 09:33 PM
1- Extinction level event
2- Death
If those don't come through and I end up in a hospital, paralyzed, staring at a TV:
3- Cards
4- Padres
5- Hospital collapse
6- Mets
7- Oakland
7- Oxygen explosion
8- kitties

:rolling:

cbotnyse
10-08-2006, 09:53 PM
The Bears.

spiffie
10-08-2006, 09:53 PM
Back in August when the wheels were falling off the White Sox Express (as opposed to the Neal Cotts Express), I put some cash down on the A's to win it all, since they were the only team that looked to have any chance of not stepping on their own dicks this postseason. So far I'm right. My wallet hopes I am right for 2 rounds.

Myrtle72
10-08-2006, 10:03 PM
Back in August when the wheels were falling off the White Sox Express (as opposed to the Neal Cotts Express), I put some cash down on the A's to win it all, since they were the only team that looked to have any chance of not stepping on their own dicks this postseason. So far I'm right. My wallet hopes I am right for 2 rounds.

:o:

You bet on another team before the Sox were eliminated? :tongue:

Chips
10-08-2006, 10:09 PM
:o:

You bet on another team before the Sox were eliminated? :tongue:

Nothing wrong with that, would it be wrong to bet against the Sox when they were struggling?

shoelessshaun27!
10-08-2006, 10:14 PM
A's!!!! LET's GO FRANK!!!

FarWestChicago
10-08-2006, 10:53 PM
Word.We know you friggin' FOBB. I would like to burn both your Beane autographed copy of Moneyball and your Nick Swisher poster. :puking:

chisoxmike
10-08-2006, 10:55 PM
We know you friggin' FOBB. I would like to burn both your Beane autographed copy of Moneyball and your Nick Swisher poster. :puking:

:rolling:

Of everyone, why pick on me?

cheeses_h_rice
10-08-2006, 11:05 PM
Is it my imagination, or did FWC edit everyone's posts that were in any way favorable to the A's, and make it seem like we all have shrines to Billy Beane in our living rooms?

:)

FarWestChicago
10-08-2006, 11:12 PM
Of everyone, why pick on me?A lot of the Beane loving FOBB's are still trying to pretend they are Sox fans. You aren't even hiding your true colors anymore. In a way, I respect your honesty.

CLR01
10-08-2006, 11:14 PM
We know you friggin' FOBB. I would like to burn both your Beane autographed copy of Moneyball and your Nick Swisher poster. :puking:



:roflmao:

Chips
10-08-2006, 11:20 PM
:rolling:

Of everyone, why pick on me?

This is why:

http://www.whitesoxinteractive.com/vbulletin/attachment.php?attachmentid=4920&d=1160363893

A. Cavatica
10-09-2006, 12:20 AM
Nicely done, West! :rolling:

Grinder Rule #151: Respect the power of the language filter.

Gregory Pratt
10-09-2006, 12:23 AM
Barry Zito, Eric Chavez and Frank Thomas are favorites of mine.
Go get 'em!

BNLSox
10-09-2006, 12:26 AM
Go A's . Although I did put my old Mags jersey on half way through game 4 yesterday. Something is wrong with me.

RadioheadRocks
10-09-2006, 12:34 AM
Go Mets!!! :D:

A. Cavatica
10-09-2006, 12:56 AM
I give West straight the scum laden A's for this one. :cool:

Myrtle72
10-09-2006, 12:57 AM
I give West straight the scum laden the scum laden A's for this one. :cool:

... and thanks to the language filter, that post doesn't even make sense.

The Dude
10-09-2006, 01:03 AM
Tigers:gulp:

**** the scum laden A's!:angry:

The Dude
10-09-2006, 01:04 AM
This is why:

http://www.whitesoxinteractive.com/vbulletin/attachment.php?attachmentid=4920&d=1160363893

:rolling:
:rolling:
Wow, thats the best ****ty photoshop thing youve done yet!:redneck

MUsoxfan
10-09-2006, 02:16 AM
Tigers Tigers Tigers

davenicholson
10-09-2006, 08:20 AM
The Bears.

hi im skot
10-09-2006, 09:22 AM
I also resent the fact that the the scum laden A's wear white shoes after Labor Day.

:?:

They wear white shoes all year long.

chisoxmike
10-09-2006, 09:33 AM
This is why:

http://www.whitesoxinteractive.com/vbulletin/attachment.php?attachmentid=4920&d=1160363893

Wow Chips. I have to say thats pretty good.

SoxFan78
10-09-2006, 09:47 AM
The Oakland Athletics!

The reason? See my sig...

D. TODD
10-09-2006, 10:02 AM
Let's go A's! It wouldn't bother me too much if the Tigers win though. I'm glad the Twinkies are out on the other hand.:D:

PennStater98r
10-09-2006, 10:04 AM
What about the Pujols?

robiwho
10-09-2006, 10:05 AM
Tigers.

Beer Can Chicken
10-09-2006, 10:08 AM
I have to go with the Tigers. Even though they are a divisional rival they have a good history and the fans are deserving. For some reason I don't hate them like I do the Twins and Indians, probably b/c they were always a AL East team to me. Watching them win game 4 at home was amazing and gave me goosebumps. I wish the SOX would have won just 1 series at home!

Plus: I hate the ****ing A's

MarySwiss
10-09-2006, 10:46 AM
I think because most of us, like me, still can't believe our Sox aren't playing in the playoffs this year.

Exactly!

As for who I want to see win, how about "nobody?"

Iwritecode
10-09-2006, 10:46 AM
Yeah, I got that. :smile:

I'm sure the ex-Cub factor thing is not infallible, but it's kind of a cool Chicago legend.

The only team that I know of that actually won anything with 3 ex-Cubs while playing against a team with less are the 2001 Diamondbacks.

They also broke the Balboni "curse". :wink:

viagracat
10-09-2006, 10:46 AM
The Tigers. Gotta like any team that smacks down the Yankmees. That roar you heard off in the east over the weekend was not thunder, but Mt Steinbrenner, and I loved every minute of it. I think the Tigers now have enough mojo to knock off the FOBBs in seven.

Come Opening Day next spring, of course it will be the White Sox and then it will be everyone else, and the world will make sense again. :cool:

Chips
10-09-2006, 12:24 PM
The only team that I know of that actually won anything with 3 ex-Cubs while playing against a team with less are the 2001 Diamondbacks.

They also broke the Balboni "curse". :wink:

I guess you missed my post about the 2005 Sox (dub ex-cubs) sweeping the Astros in the World Series (one ex-cub.)

And I guess this is worth mentioning again: **** A'S, **** BILLY BEANE, AND **** ALL THE FOBB'S.

:pee A'S

6800

cbotnyse
10-09-2006, 12:44 PM
I guess you missed my post about the 2005 Sox (dub ex-cubs) sweeping the Astros in the World Series (one ex-cub.)

And I guess this is worth mentioning again: **** the scum laden A's, **** BILLY BEANE, AND **** ALL THE FOBB'S.

:pee the scum laden A'squick question, how is it you hate Billy Beane but like Steinbrenner?

SoxFan76
10-09-2006, 12:49 PM
I'm rooting for the Oakland Athletics because I would love to see Frank Thomas get another ring. Plus I like Swisher and Huston Street.

I guess that makes me a FOBB as well. :rolleyes:

daveeym
10-09-2006, 01:01 PM
Yeah, I got that. :smile:

I'm sure the ex-Cub factor thing is not infallible, but it's kind of a cool Chicago legend.
Well up until the diamondbacks won a few years ago the legend was something like no team with 3 or more ex-cubs have ever one the World Series. I think it's been bastardized to whichever team has more ex cubs will lose.

FarWestChicago
10-09-2006, 01:03 PM
Plus I like Swisher and Huston Street.

I guess that makes me a FOBB as well. :rolleyes:Yep, you're another A's fan. :puking:

daveeym
10-09-2006, 01:10 PM
Yep, you're another the scum laden A's fan. :puking:
Not only that but he's avoiding the language filter by typing out Athletics. That's a paddlin, er banning. :cool:

October26
10-09-2006, 01:45 PM
Exactly!

As for who I want to see win, how about "nobody?"

Yes, I agree with you. I was rooting for Frank in the Twins series but now that that is over with, I have officially entered my disinterested period. Both of the teams competing in the ALCS had a hand in knocking out the Sox, so it is hard for me to cheer for either of them.

As a casual observer, I will say that the Tigers appear to have the better pitching (this week anyway - these were the same Tigers that couldn't beat Kansas City the last weekend of the year, remember? Hence they are the Wild Card team).

So, am I rooting for anybody to win? No. But if I had to pick one, I think the Tigers are going to get it done. However, there is always the Frank Thomas factor lurking out there ...

SoxEd
10-09-2006, 01:45 PM
Call me a Moderator's Lickspittle if you will, but as much as I love Big Frank, I hate the A's with a passion that I otherwise reserve for a certain North London soccer team.

The A's keep winning against us, year in, year out, and the Franchise is a Media Darling to boot.

For me, it's Kitties all the way from here on out.
My sincere apologies to any Detroit fans for having just cursed your team to an ignominious failure in the ALCS.

FarWestChicago
10-09-2006, 02:05 PM
as much as I love Big Frank, I hate A's with a passion that I otherwise reserve for a certain North London soccer team.

The A's keep winning against us, year in, year out, and the Franchise is a Media Darling to boot.Well said!! A man of intelligence and integrity here. :thumbsup:

Hangar18
10-09-2006, 02:09 PM
Tigers, I can't stand the fans in Oakland with their drums and horns. I prefer the fans in Detroit with their guns and their knives.

I also resent the fact that the the scum laden A's wear white shoes after Labor Day.


A's fans are the West Coast version of White Sox fans. I actually like them.
Tiger fans? They are the cruder version of White Sox fans. But I like them too. Ive heard people call us the "oakland raider" fans of baseball :cool:

Myrtle72
10-09-2006, 02:14 PM
the scum laden A's fans are the West Coast version of White Sox fans. I actually like them.


How do you figure?

LuvSox
10-09-2006, 02:17 PM
What's the deal with Swisher? I just don't like the guy, I can't seem to pin down the reason. :?:

FloridaSox
10-09-2006, 02:24 PM
A's for two reasons:

1. Frank Thomas
2. Bill Beane. I would to see both Ken Williams and Bill Beane with rings. They are the two best General Mangers in the business in my humble opinion.

CLR01
10-09-2006, 02:27 PM
the scum laden A's for two reasons:

1. Frank Thomas
2. Bill Beane. I would to see both Ken Williams and Bill Beane with rings. They are the two best General Mangers in the business in my humble opinion.


:o: :cower:

Myrtle72
10-09-2006, 02:27 PM
2. Bill Beane. I would to see both Ken Williams and Bill Beane with rings. They are the two best General Mangers in the business in my humble opinion.

Oh no, here we go.

DoItForDanPasqua
10-09-2006, 02:35 PM
I would to see both Ken Williams and Bill Beane with rings. They are the two best General Mangers in the business in my humble opinion.

Bill Beane and Ken Williams are two very different general managers. It was when Williams went out and got guys who can run and sacrifice that the Sox found success. Beane and his Moneyball style are just the opposite. The Sox played more "station to station" baseball this year and it hurt them. I don't like Beane's boring game and I don't want it to spread further by success in Oakland. Ken Williams should give Beane a roundhouse kick.

MisterB
10-09-2006, 02:38 PM
How do you figure?

Probably because they play second fiddle in their home market to a team that hasn't won much of anything over the last few decades. (Although overall the Giants have been better than the Flubs in that regard.)

SoxFan76
10-09-2006, 02:53 PM
Probably because they play second fiddle in their home market to a team that hasn't won much of anything over the last few decades. (Although overall the Giants have been better than the Flubs in that regard.)

Well I know Hangar actually went to Oakland and saw a couple White Sox games there. I think he does have some credibility on that subject.

Dibbs
10-09-2006, 03:03 PM
No way I am rooting for Mags and the rest of the SCUM LADEN Tigers.

GO FRANK & GO ATHLETICS!!!!!!



A's :rolleyes:

Iwritecode
10-09-2006, 03:17 PM
I guess you missed my post about the 2005 Sox (dub ex-cubs) sweeping the Astros in the World Series (one ex-cub.)

I saw it. But the legend was orignally that no team could win with 3 or more ex-cubs. Plenty of teams have done ok with 2 or less.

This post sums it up nicely:

Well up until the diamondbacks won a few years ago the legend was something like no team with 3 or more ex-cubs have ever one the World Series. I think it's been bastardized to whichever team has more ex cubs will lose.

kraut83
10-09-2006, 03:56 PM
**** A's. I've hated them from the AL West days of the Sox and haven't stopped since. Go Tigers!

A. Cavatica
10-09-2006, 03:59 PM
2. Bill Beane. I would to see both Ken Williams and Bill Beane with rings. They are the two best General Mangers in the business in my humble opinion.

So you like Billy Beane? Would you say you're a...friend of Billy Beane?

cheeses_h_rice
10-09-2006, 04:30 PM
So, how about those Oakland Athletics?

SoxFan76
10-09-2006, 05:15 PM
So, how about those Oakland Athletics?

You're not allowed to root for them. FWC even put their name in the language filter just to keep us heathens away.

CaptainBallz
10-09-2006, 05:22 PM
You're not allowed to root for them. FWC even put their name in the language filter just to keep us heathens away.

Well, for the next couple weeks I'm a FOS (Friend of Scum)

SoxFan76
10-09-2006, 05:30 PM
Well, for the next couple weeks I'm a FOS (Friend of Scum)

haha me too (for the next couple weeks, like you said)

ShoelessJoeS
10-09-2006, 06:21 PM
Frank and the scum laden A's all the way

Scottzilla
10-09-2006, 06:22 PM
:rolling:

This post is hilarious. And the worst part is, you're probably dead serious.

i asked this question a couple of weeks ago. i remember this theory goes back to 89. it was in a suntimes sports column.... not you know who.

it started back then as ' no team in the history of mlb has won with more than 3 ex cubs on the active roster' but at some point a team did win with 4 ex cubs but only because the opponent had 5.

oh ya and im rooting for frank,, not necissarily the a's
anyone but the stinking tigers

FarWestChicago
10-09-2006, 06:26 PM
Well I know Hangar actually went to Oakland and saw a couple White Sox games there. I think he does have some credibility on that subject.That's the first time I've heard Hangar and credibility in the same sentence in a while. :?:

I've been to dozens of games in Oakland. The team and their fans are *******s. You FOBB's just don't know it.

Chips
10-09-2006, 06:29 PM
So, how about those Oakland Athletics?

They ****ing suck as much as their crappy ass GM.

Chips
10-09-2006, 06:43 PM
Wow Chips. I have to say thats pretty good.

You love Billy Beane. :redneck

cbotnyse
10-09-2006, 06:51 PM
They ****ing suck as much as their crappy ass GM.I asked this earlier, I think you missed it.....How can you hate Billy Beane so much but like Steinbrenner? :dunno:

Chips
10-09-2006, 07:24 PM
I asked this earlier, I think you missed it.....How can you hate Billy Beane so much but like Steinbrenner? :dunno:

Steinbrenner wants to win year in and year out, he considers his seasons a failure if he doesn't win a World Series. Billy Beane likes getting cheap players and fielding competitive teams that are not of championship caliber.

Now if Steinbrenner fires Torre and keeps Cashman around, I will lose some respect for the old man, but he still is the best owner in sports.

SABRSox
10-09-2006, 08:08 PM
FOFT's ≠ FOBB's.

gbergman
10-09-2006, 08:10 PM
Oakland

FarWestChicago
10-09-2006, 08:15 PM
FOFT's ≠ FOBB's.Bull****. Actions speak louder than words. You pull for A's and you're a friggin' FOBB.

gbergman
10-09-2006, 08:33 PM
Bull****. Actions speak louder than words. You pull for the scum laden A's and you're a friggin' FOBB.

Can you or someoneelse explain these terms to me FOBB BOBB Foft's?

Chips
10-09-2006, 08:56 PM
Can you or someoneelse explain these terms to me FOBB BOBB Foft's?

A FOBB is a ****ing foolish fan of Billy Beane.

A FOFT is a ****ing foolish fan of Billy Beane masking as a fan of Frank Thomas.

Meh to all of them.

DoItForDanPasqua
10-09-2006, 09:15 PM
http://images.google.com/images?q=tbn:JMj4N3Abbh_B-M:http://www.jonballard.com/images/lists/moneyball.jpg + http://images.google.com/images?q=tbn:7bpUqIlVOC8LaM:http://www.pigwar.com/images/gallery/fire.jpg = :)

Oblong
10-09-2006, 09:16 PM
A's

(just testing this filter thing. That's cool)

MarySwiss
10-09-2006, 09:19 PM
the scum laden A's

(just testing this filter thing. That's cool)

Eek! For a second there, I thought you were rooting for the A's. :?:

And yep, that filter is cool!

SoxandtheCityTee
10-09-2006, 09:30 PM
i remember this theory goes back to 89. it was in a suntimes sports column.... not you know who.


It was Mike Royko who publicized the Ex-Cub Factor, though I think it was a reader who did the research and put him on to it. I thought it was the 1990 WS that he first made a splash with this. This guy had predicted the Reds would win based on Ex-CF and they did, sweeping the Athletics.

cbotnyse
10-09-2006, 10:33 PM
Steinbrenner wants to win year in and year out, he considers his seasons a failure if he doesn't win a World Series. Billy Beane likes getting cheap players and fielding competitive teams that are not of championship caliber.

Now if Steinbrenner fires Torre and keeps Cashman around, I will lose some respect for the old man, but he still is the best owner in sports.I'm really not sure what you mean here, doesnt every owner want to win year in and year out? :?: and your saying Bean doesnt want to win?:?:

I actually never even heard of BB before I started posting here, thats how closely I followed the A's. But it doesnt matter. The Sox are out and the Gods of baseball are out as well, which makes me very happy, so now I could care less what happens.

Its Bears season.:cool: :gulp: :moonwalk:

Chips
10-09-2006, 10:42 PM
I'm really not sure what you mean here, doesnt every owner want to win year in and year out? :?: and your saying Bean doesnt want to win?:?:



No, I don't think every owner wants to win. Look at the owners in Pittsburgh, they trade away their talented players every year and they continue to suck. Look at Bill Wirtz, look at the White Flag trade, look at the Devil Rays, etc.

Beane has a hard on for his stupid "Moneyball" theory.

Congrats on 2,300. :gulp:

Craig Grebeck
10-09-2006, 10:47 PM
No, I don't think every owner wants to win. Look at the owners in Pittsburgh, they trade away their talented players every year and they continue to suck. Look at Bill Wirtz, look at the White Flag trade, look at the Devil Rays, etc.

Beane has a hard on for his stupid "Moneyball" theory.

Congrats on 2,300. :gulp:
Beane's theory is to build his teams around something that the market undervalues. He tries to find cheap production through veterans, undervalued prospects, etc. He takes risks but he has compiled a great record over the years. If you think he doesn't try to build competitive teams, you're sorely mistaken.

p.s. Have you read the book/had an open mind about anything new in baseball?

Oblong
10-09-2006, 11:04 PM
I always interpreted Beane's atttitude that his way isn't the best way, it's just the best way for his situation. He figured that he was at a disadvantage money wise so he would try to do things different from the way everybody else did.

The playoffs are too much of a crapshoot to draw conclusions on "Moneyball" long term. If Giambi slides then they beat the Yankees.

Chips
10-09-2006, 11:08 PM
Beane's theory is to build his teams around something that the market undervalues. He tries to find cheap production through veterans, undervalued prospects, etc. He takes risks but he has compiled a great record over the years. If you think he doesn't try to build competitive teams, you're sorely mistaken.

p.s. Have you read the book/had an open mind about anything new in baseball?

I said he builds competitive teams that are not of championship caliber.

Sure his teams have complied a very impressive record, but where have they gone?

Nowhere, they've lost every single playoff series they played until this year.

Chips
10-09-2006, 11:24 PM
I said he builds competitive teams that are not of championship caliber.

Sure his teams have complied a very impressive record, but where have they gone?

Nowhere, they've lost every single playoff series they played until this year.

I don't hate him because his teams don't go anywhere, I'm glad they don't.

It has to do with his crazy ideas of Moneyball and how getting castoffs and cheap prospects is somehow the thing to do. Using OPS and VORP and the rest of the useless anagrams to evaluate talent is best left for the statheads. Plus, I don't like anything about the A's except that Jose Canseco played there. Them bastards have had our number for years, it ****ing sucks.

chisoxmike
10-09-2006, 11:27 PM
Plus, I don't like anything about the the scum laden the scum laden A's except that Jose Canseco played there.


:rolling:

:bashbro
"Chips is my best friend!"

Craig Grebeck
10-09-2006, 11:29 PM
I don't hate him because his teams don't go anywhere, I'm glad they don't.

It has to do with his crazy ideas of Moneyball and how getting castoffs and cheap prospects is somehow the thing to do. Using OPS and VORP and the rest of the useless anagrams to evaluate talent is best left for the statheads. Plus, I don't like anything about the the scum laden A's except that Jose Canseco played there. Them bastards have had our number for years, it ****ing sucks.
It's the thing to do when you have a cheap payroll and need to constantly reinvent yourself to stay competitive.

Chips
10-09-2006, 11:30 PM
It's the thing to do when you have a cheap payroll and need to constantly reinvent yourself to stay competitive.

Where has it gotten anyone?

First round playoff exits.

Myrtle72
10-09-2006, 11:34 PM
No, I don't think every owner wants to win. Look at the owners in Pittsburgh, they trade away their talented players every year and they continue to suck. Look at Bill Wirtz, look at the White Flag trade, look at the Devil Rays, etc.

I think the Orioles are in that category, also.

Chips
10-09-2006, 11:35 PM
I think the Orioles are in that category, also.

They fall under the etc. tag along with the Royals, Brewers, Rockies, etc.

Myrtle72
10-09-2006, 11:36 PM
So... for those of us who haven't spent time and money reading Beane's masterpeice, can someone please give a quick synopsis of it?

Chips
10-09-2006, 11:39 PM
So... for those of us who haven't spent time and money reading Beane's masterpeice, can someone please give a quick synopsis of it?

The book is actually written about Michael Lewis and it details Billy Beane's methodology, yada, yada, yada.

SpartanSoxFan
10-10-2006, 12:08 AM
I can't go with a rival in our division. That's all that needs to be said.

Give me the scum-laden A's...

Arkham
10-10-2006, 12:15 AM
Given that postseason rooting is all about what you consider to be the lesser of two (or four, or possibly eight) evils once your team is eliminated, it strikes me that there's a lot of people in this thread with far too much concern over what other people in this thread consider to be the lesser evil.

gobears1987
10-10-2006, 01:03 AM
A FOBB is a ****ing foolish fan of Billy Beane.

A FOFT is a ****ing foolish fan of Billy Beane masking as a fan of Frank Thomas.

Meh to all of them.
I agre with your first comment. Your second comment is just dumb and idiotic.

A FOFT is a true White Sox fan who stuck through this team through the strike, Bevington, and Manuel.

I'll let this one slide since you probably are just **** faced with the rest of your drinking team.

gobears1987
10-10-2006, 01:05 AM
Bull****. Actions speak louder than words. You pull for the scum laden A's and you're a friggin' FOBB.
Oh please West. You know from my past posts that I hate FOBBs. Just look at the arguments Jeremyb1 and I got into on this board, but rooting for the greatest player to ever wear Sox pinstripes does not make anyone a FOBB.

chisoxmike
10-10-2006, 01:06 AM
I'll let this one slide since you probably are just **** faced with the rest of your drinking team.


Wow.

:gulp:

Chips
10-10-2006, 01:06 AM
I agre with your first comment. Your second comment is just dumb and idiotic.

A FOFT is a true White Sox fan who stuck through this team through the strike, Bevington, and Manuel.

I'll let this one slide since you probably are just **** faced with the rest of your drinking team.

I'm as sober as mongoose on a warm July morning. :?:

A FOFT is a noodle hiding their love for Billy Beane behind Frank Thomas.

Fenway
10-10-2006, 01:07 AM
as a Red Sox fan I am rooting for the Tigers. Once a great baseball town that has had a horrible 20 years. I just don't like Oakland

MUsoxfan
10-10-2006, 03:31 AM
as a Red Sox fan I am rooting for the Tigers. Once a great baseball town that has had a horrible 20 years. I just don't like Oakland


I agree with you on all counts.

Grzegorz
10-10-2006, 05:42 AM
Here's hoping the Athletics and Frank Thomas both go belly up in the playoffs.

OEO Magglio
10-10-2006, 07:13 AM
I really couldn't care less who wins but it'll be the Tigers.

Craig Grebeck
10-10-2006, 08:54 AM
So... for those of us who haven't spent time and money reading Beane's masterpeice, can someone please give a quick synopsis of it?
Beane didn't write it. It was written by Lewis and it details how Oakland stayed one of the best teams in baseball despite their low payroll. It details their draft strategy and some of their high-risk pickups. It's a well written book, whether you like Beane or not you should check it out.

Oblong
10-10-2006, 09:06 AM
The author didn't set out to write a book about Billy Beane. (Joe Morgan still thinks Beane wrote it).

He was going to write a book about the business of baseball. When doing his research he realized that everybody except Beane handled it pretty much the same way so he decided to focus the book on Billy Beane.

Beane also denies a lot of the anecdotes, like throwing a chair at the wall when Bonderman was drafted. (although I guess he'd have reason to deny that now)

My favorite part of the book is when they are discussing potential draft picks and a scout mentions that one particular player is on the heavy side. "We're not selling Jeans here".

jenn2080
10-10-2006, 09:14 AM
I agre with your first comment. Your second comment is just dumb and idiotic.

A FOFT is a true White Sox fan who stuck through this team through the strike, Bevington, and Manuel.

I'll let this one slide since you probably are just **** faced with the rest of your drinking team.


HHHHMMMMMMmmmmm :rolleyes:

Sox It To Em
10-10-2006, 10:17 AM
Why is there so much venom towards sabremetrics on this site? Billy Beane is one of the most successful GMs in baseball, routinely building a team that wins 95~ games on a payroll that's consistently ranked in the bottom eight. The three first-round eliminations are just part of baseball and are far too small of a sample size to draw conclusive analyses from, and besides, that has changed this year. It's good for baseball how a low-ranked payroll team can consistently make a bid for the playoffs. Or would you rather see a Yankee$-Red Sawx ALCS nearly every year?

This will fall on deaf ears, but sabremetric statistics such as VORP and OPS are infititely more indicative of a player's abilities than traditional statistics such as RBIs or pitcher wins (which are largely team or context dependent) and batting average (which only tell us part of the story). They're not useless by any means. That is, unless your definition of useless is something new or something you're unable to or don't want to understand.

ode to veeck
10-10-2006, 10:24 AM
Why is there so much venom towards sabremetrics on this site? Billy Beane is one of the most successful GMs in baseball, routinely building a team that wins 95~ games on a payroll that's consistently ranked in the bottom eight. The three first-round eliminations are just part of baseball and are far too small of a sample size to draw conclusive analyses from, and besides, that has changed this year. It's good for baseball how a low-ranked payroll team can consistently make a bid for the playoffs. Or would you rather see a Yankee$-Red Sawx ALCS nearly every year?

This will fall on deaf ears, but sabremetric statistics such as VORP and OPS are infititely more indicative of a player's abilities than traditional statistics such as RBIs or pitcher wins (which are largely team or context dependent) and batting average (which only tell us part of the story). They're not useless by any means. That is, unless your definition of useless is something new or something you're unable to or don't want to understand.

You're opening an old can of worms here, both with sabremetrics and with that team from Oakland that is best left alone. I think the venom with the sabremetricians is more to do with the fact that people take it too far; they are not the final predictor or valuation of a player's abilities. You still have to have the ability to see the forest through the trees, i.e. the stats are just one means to help you ID a forest and not an end upon themselves. As far as West's and others venom towards the Oakland club, you had to have have sat at the 20 something miserable Sox games at the Coleseum in the last 6 years (as West and I did), plus put up with 5 years worth of endless moronic posts by the FOBBs at WSI to understand the feelings there.

Myrtle72
10-10-2006, 10:32 AM
As far as West's and others venom towards the Oakland club, you had to have have sat at the 20 something miserable Sox games at the Coleseum in the last 6 years (as West and I did)

Alright, so just for curiousity's sake, what's a game at the Coleseum like?

ode to veeck
10-10-2006, 10:48 AM
Alright, so just for curiousity's sake, what's a game at the Coleseum like?

Just look at the Sox W-L in Oakland 01-06.

Jerome
10-10-2006, 10:48 AM
Athletics

:bandance:

cbotnyse
10-10-2006, 10:56 AM
Why is there so much venom towards sabremetrics on this site? Billy Beane is one of the most successful GMs in baseball, routinely building a team that wins 95~ games on a payroll that's consistently ranked in the bottom eight. The three first-round eliminations are just part of baseball and are far too small of a sample size to draw conclusive analyses from, and besides, that has changed this year. It's good for baseball how a low-ranked payroll team can consistently make a bid for the playoffs. Or would you rather see a Yankee$-Red Sawx ALCS nearly every year?

This will fall on deaf ears, but sabremetric statistics such as VORP and OPS are infititely more indicative of a player's abilities than traditional statistics such as RBIs or pitcher wins (which are largely team or context dependent) and batting average (which only tell us part of the story). They're not useless by any means. That is, unless your definition of useless is something new or something you're unable to or don't want to understand.:gascan

Rocky Soprano
10-10-2006, 11:14 AM
I'll go with the Tigers. I hate the A's and their general manager.

batmanZoSo
10-10-2006, 11:19 AM
Anyone else developing a reaction like a shooting pain in the back of your head when you see the phrase "scum laden"? :rolleyes:

SABRSox
10-10-2006, 11:31 AM
Why is there so much venom towards sabremetrics on this site? Billy Beane is one of the most successful GMs in baseball, routinely building a team that wins 95~ games on a payroll that's consistently ranked in the bottom eight. The three first-round eliminations are just part of baseball and are far too small of a sample size to draw conclusive analyses from, and besides, that has changed this year. It's good for baseball how a low-ranked payroll team can consistently make a bid for the playoffs. Or would you rather see a Yankee$-Red Sawx ALCS nearly every year?

This will fall on deaf ears, but sabremetric statistics such as VORP and OPS are infititely more indicative of a player's abilities than traditional statistics such as RBIs or pitcher wins (which are largely team or context dependent) and batting average (which only tell us part of the story). They're not useless by any means. That is, unless your definition of useless is something new or something you're unable to or don't want to understand.

The problem is that there are too many SABR "know-it-alls" that come here and spout crap about how to make the Sox a better team. Basically, they're just armchair general managers, and everybody sees them for that. And they make the rest of us decent SABR folk look bad in the process. That's why all the venom.

And by the way, not all SABR folk bow down to the altar of BB and A's. I only root for one GM, this guy:

:KW

cbotnyse
10-10-2006, 11:35 AM
Anyone else developing a reaction like a shooting pain in the back of your head when you see the phrase "scum laden"? :rolleyes:yeah I'm gonna root against the A's just so this whole issue will go away.

CaptainBallz
10-10-2006, 01:07 PM
Anyone else developing a reaction like a shooting pain in the back of your head when you see the phrase "scum laden"? :rolleyes:

I was actually getting pissed until I realized it was a filter. I felt confused, scared, and out of the loop.

I want Mags back
10-10-2006, 01:09 PM
the man who turned me into a sox fan at age 3, gave us 15+ great years, will be a future hall of famer


OR


the guy who left for more money because of his ****head agent



LET'S GO Athletics!!!!


Edit: I typed A 's and it made it scum laden a's. hows it do that

Dibbs
10-10-2006, 01:15 PM
Edit: I typed A 's and it made it scum laden the scum laden A's. hows it do that


Big Brother

jenn2080
10-10-2006, 01:46 PM
Anyone else developing a reaction like a shooting pain in the back of your head when you see the phrase "scum laden"? :rolleyes:


YES! :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

Completely unnecessary.

batmanZoSo
10-10-2006, 01:49 PM
I was actually getting pissed until I realized it was a filter. I felt confused, scared, and out of the loop.

Ah, yes of course.

For a minute there I just thought people were copying West in a vain attempt to get on his good side. :D:

KMKsuburbannoise
10-10-2006, 01:51 PM
I'm goin for the A's. they are a pain in the Sox ass but I can't go againt Big Frank.

FielderJones
10-10-2006, 01:53 PM
Every time I'm feeling down or upset I just reload this thread and it brightens my day. It just makes me laugh watching the two factions argue about which team is more worthy of hate, thus who to cheer for.

The language filter doesn't give me a headache, it makes me laugh more. This is probably because I'm an older Sox fan, and A's were divisional Sox rivals for 25 years. It's harder for me to hate the Tigers, because they still seem like an AL East team. They've hardly been a factor in keeping the Sox out of the postseason the way the scum laden Twinkiies or the scum laden Jndjans have. So, based on less hate, I'm hoping for a Tigers sweep over A's.

FielderJones
10-10-2006, 01:55 PM
Big Brother

:tongue: I'm hoping you get a 3-day rip just for being a frikin' FOBB.

Myrtle72
10-10-2006, 01:57 PM
Every time I'm feeling down or upset I just reload this thread and it brightens my day. It just makes me laugh watching the two factions argue about which team is more worthy of hate, thus who to cheer for.

The language filter doesn't give me a headache, it makes me laugh more. This is probably because I'm an older Sox fan, and the scum laden A's were divisional Sox rivals for 25 years. It's harder for me to hate the Tigers, because they still seem like an AL East team. They've hardly been a factor in keeping the Sox out of the postseason the way the scum laden Twinkiies or the scum laden Jndjans have. So, based on less hate, I'm hoping for a Tigers sweep over the scum laden A's.

So, you laugh about it, but then you give your imput on who should be hated less. That's awesome. :redneck

Hangar18
10-10-2006, 02:15 PM
Say, wasnt their a post-season prediction thread somewhere around here?
I dont think I ever got to put my A's will win it all/Frank Thomas series MVP prediction in, only in some threads :(:

Kilroy
10-10-2006, 02:20 PM
Bull****. Actions speak louder than words. You pull for the scum laden A's and you're a friggin' FOBB.

That's complete bull****. Just because I want to see the greatest player in White Sox history actually play in a world series and make some contribute doesn't make me an FOBB.

I can't help that Thomas is on the A's. I'd be pulling for him no matter who he was playing for.

If the Sox had made the playoffs, I'd be cheering for the Sox. I've been watching Thomas and cheering for him every single moment of his MLB career. I'm not stopping now just because KW had personal problems with him and got rid of him. Part of me wants to see Thomas win the Series MVP just to give KW a big fat ****-you.

But me pulling for Thomas to have all the success he can, no matter where he's playing, doen't make me and FOBB.

Personally, I think there's something to be said for Sox fans that have turned to support the Tigers now. What the **** is that?

Myrtle72
10-10-2006, 02:23 PM
I can't help that Thomas is on the the scum laden A's. I'd be pulling for him no matter who he was playing for.


If it were the Sox vs. the Atheltics in the ALCS, would you still be rooting for Frank?

FielderJones
10-10-2006, 02:28 PM
So, you laugh about it, but then you give your imput on who should be hated less. That's awesome. :redneck

No, I gave my own personal reason for hating A's more. I didn't tell anyone else who to cheer for.

Fenway
10-10-2006, 02:31 PM
good overview of the ALCS from Boston.com

and he makes a great point

Funny, we didn't spent the past three days wondering how the LCS might have been different had Francisco Liriano been healthy. And to be frank, the Twins might have pulled a bigger choke job than the Yankees did based on the strength of their pitching staff, a strength the Yankees obviously know nothing about. I got a kick out of watching Steve Phillips on ESPN yesterday morning insist the only way to fix this is for the Yankees to sign Barry Zito AND Jason Schmidt in the offseason. What better way to solve the mess you're in by throwing more cash at free agents. Because that's worked so well so far.

http://www.boston.com/sports/nesn/wilbur/sports_blog/blog/2006/10/10/arms_the_hammer/index.html

Kilroy
10-10-2006, 02:32 PM
If the Sox had made the playoffs, I'd be cheering for the Sox.

If it were the Sox vs. the Atheltics in the ALCS, would you still be rooting for Frank?


Try and keep up.

LuvSox
10-10-2006, 02:34 PM
Steve Phillips

Baseball genius

Myrtle72
10-10-2006, 02:37 PM
Try and keep up.

I didn't ask if you would not be rooting for the Sox. I asked if you would be rooting for Frank. It was just a question, I wasn't trying to imply anything.

Myrtle72
10-10-2006, 02:43 PM
No, I gave my own personal reason for hating the scum laden A's more. I didn't tell anyone else who to cheer for.

Actually, I really meant that it was funny, and not in a bad way. I liked your post about how people are so opinionated about who they hate less.

Seems like a lot of people have gotten really grumpy since the White Sox season ended. And sure, I understand that it really sucks, but geeze, don't get your panties all up in a bunch because I was trying to compliment you. Sorry for the misunderstanding.

(Oh, did I pass your spelling/grammar requirements with this post?)

FielderJones
10-10-2006, 02:51 PM
Actually, I really meant that it was funny, and not in a bad way. I liked your post about how people are so opinionated about who they hate less.

Oops! :redface:

I took the hillbilly smiley at the end as a dig; as if the word awesome was in teal. Sorry for taking offense when none was intended.

Kilroy
10-10-2006, 02:59 PM
I didn't ask if you would not be rooting for the Sox. I asked if you would be rooting for Frank. It was just a question, I wasn't trying to imply anything.

I'm always pulling for Frank to do well. In cases where he's playing the Sox, if Frank hits a homer, let it be solo while the Sox are up two or three. I want him to do well, but don't hurt the Sox.

Chips
10-10-2006, 03:38 PM
Anyone else developing a reaction like a shooting pain in the back of your head when you see the phrase "scum laden"? :rolleyes:

No, I like it.

MUsoxfan
10-10-2006, 03:43 PM
Personally, I think there's something to be said for Sox fans that have turned to support the Tigers now. What the **** is that?


Ummm....maybe it's because the Tigers losing at this point no longer has an effect on the World Series hopes of the Sox. **** the A's. **** Milton Bradley. **** Eric Chavez. **** Barry Zito. **** the Network Associates McAfee FOBB Oakland Coliseum that's 1/2 covered in tarp. And finally....**** Billy Beane and anyone that looks like him.

Myrtle72
10-10-2006, 03:51 PM
Quick question... does anyone know how much Frank Thomas made per year during his last few years with the Sox?

He makes $500,000 on the A's now. Just curious for a comparison.

FielderJones
10-10-2006, 04:08 PM
Quick question... does anyone know how much Frank Thomas made per year during his last few years with the Sox?

He makes $500,000 on the the scum laden A's now. Just curious for a comparison.

Frank's salary stats are here (http://www.baseball-almanac.com/players/player.php?p=thomafr04). No mention of incentive bonuses though.

Oblong
10-10-2006, 04:34 PM
I'm surprised at what I've read here. I assumed it would be near unamimous for the A's because of Frank Thomas. Is there something beyond Billy Beane that I don't know about to cause this A's hatred?

gbergman
10-10-2006, 04:34 PM
Oakland A's

a's

cbotnyse
10-10-2006, 04:37 PM
I'm surprised at what I've read here. I assumed it would be near unamimous for the the scum laden A's because of Frank Thomas. Is there something beyond Billy Beane that I don't know about to cause this the scum laden A's hatred?the owner of this site hates oakland. And A's have always beat up on the Sox, we just dont like them.

The Tigers havent hurt the Sox that much over the years. Hopefully last year will be the last. :cool:

ode to veeck
10-10-2006, 04:46 PM
the owner of this site hates oakland. And the scum laden A's have always beat up on the Sox, we just dont like them.

The Tigers havent hurt the Sox that much over the years. Hopefully last year will be the last. :cool:

That and years of whining posts by FOBBs

Myrtle72
10-10-2006, 05:24 PM
Frank's salary stats are here (http://www.baseball-almanac.com/players/player.php?p=thomafr04). No mention of incentive bonuses though.

Wow. I knew he took a serious pay cut, but I didn't think it was THAT drastic. I would hope that he's getting a lot in incentives.

Hangar18
10-10-2006, 05:29 PM
Im not a friend of Billy Beane. and Im cheering for Frank Thomas. He will win the MVP in World Series.

gbergman
10-10-2006, 05:31 PM
Oakland Athletics

Hangar18
10-10-2006, 05:32 PM
WHY is it that the MLB schedule makers have chosen to give us TWO SERIES every year against Oakland? Im sick of it. In 03, that was the difference in us winning the division. In 06, it again was the difference in us winning the division. I see in 2007, the White Sox are playing Oakland twice.

Memo to schedule Makers: There are other teams you can schedule us against ......

batmanZoSo
10-10-2006, 05:38 PM
WHY is it that the MLB schedule makers have chosen to give us TWO SERIES every year against Oakland? Im sick of it. In 03, that was the difference in us winning the division. In 06, it again was the difference in us winning the division. I see in 2007, the White Sox are playing Oakland twice.

Memo to schedule Makers: There are other teams you can schedule us against ......

Uh, you have to play at least two against every team. We actually lucked out this year only getting two and not three with them because that's the reality of the 4 team division out west. If you even out the leagues, problem solved, but til then we're gonna have to face Oakland thrice some years.

The bottom line is you can't lose every ****ing game in a park. It's on the Sox, not MLB.

chisoxmike
10-10-2006, 05:40 PM
WHY is it that the MLB schedule makers have chosen to give us TWO SERIES every year against Oakland? Im sick of it. In 03, that was the difference in us winning the division.

Eh, the main reasons for the Sox demise in 2003 was 1) A ****ty first half, 2) Losing 10 games to the ****ty Tigers, 3) Splitting that 4 games series against Minnesota at HOME, 4) Jerry Manual.

Myrtle72
10-10-2006, 05:40 PM
WHY is it that the MLB schedule makers have chosen to give us TWO SERIES every year against Oakland? Im sick of it. In 03, that was the difference in us winning the division. In 06, it again was the difference in us winning the division. I see in 2007, the White Sox are playing Oakland twice.

Memo to schedule Makers: There are other teams you can schedule us against ......

So... the White Sox didn't win the division in 2003 and 2006 because of the people who make the mlb schedule?

I think it's the Sox responsibility to not take a vacation every time they play the A's, don't you?

Chips
10-10-2006, 05:44 PM
So... the White Sox didn't win the division in 2003 and 2006 because of the people who make the mlb schedule?

I think it's the Sox responsibility to not take a vacation every time they play the the scum laden A's, don't you?

I thought we lost the division this year because Pods needed glasses.

Hangar18
10-10-2006, 05:44 PM
Uh, you have to play at least two against every team.

The bottom line is you can't lose every ****ing game in a park. It's on the Sox, not MLB.


What I meant was 2 home and away series against them, while the other teams only playing Once (home and away)

Hangar18
10-10-2006, 05:47 PM
I thought we lost the division this year because Pods needed glasses.


Old material brother. Try working on some new stuff man.
But since you brought it up .....
* Bullpen not being worth a darn
* Mark Buehrle taking 07 off
* Javy Vazquez taking the 1st half off
* Pods playing disabled (Glasses, hamstring)

are chief reasons why were not where we should be ....

Hangar18
10-10-2006, 05:49 PM
So... the White Sox didn't win the division in 2003 and 2006 because of the people who make the mlb schedule?

I think it's the Sox responsibility to not take a vacation every time they play the the scum laden A's, don't you?

*sighs* I was about to post in there to refrain from the Hangar-says-MLB-biased-against-SOX posts ...... but I see I'm too late. Yes. The SOX have a responsibility to not take the weekends off against the A's. That said, they couldve/should've won all those games .....

cbotnyse
10-10-2006, 08:22 PM
GO Athletics. CLR01, where is that teal banana?

gobears1987
10-10-2006, 09:28 PM
Eh, the main reasons for the Sox demise in 2003 was 1) A ****ty first half, 2) Losing 10 games to the ****ty Tigers, 3) Splitting that 4 games series against Minnesota at HOME, 4) Jerry Manual.Bingo, especially on #2. How did we lose 10 games to the 03 Tigers?

TCentral
10-10-2006, 09:39 PM
Go Tigers!

Go with the division.

Myrtle72
10-10-2006, 11:50 PM
Bingo, especially on #2. How did we lose 10 games to the 03 Tigers?

Probably the same reason why we lost so many games to the Royals this season... or at least way more than we should have.

TDog
10-11-2006, 05:24 AM
Anyone else developing a reaction like a shooting pain in the back of your head when you see the phrase "scum laden"? :rolleyes:

I do, sort of, but the reaction has nothing to do with baseball. Really, I want to hyphenate "scum laden," as it is a compound modifier. It's like fingernails on a blackboard (assuming that phrase isn't replaced by Brandon McCarthy) to see it unhyphenated.

The thing is, because I endorse the sentiments, I have gotten over the missing hyphens. Really I wouldn't complain if this filter became a permanent feature at WSI.

The Dude
10-11-2006, 08:07 AM
Go Tigers!

Go with the division.

I'm with ya man. **** A's!

jenn2080
10-11-2006, 08:10 AM
WHY is it that the MLB schedule makers have chosen to give us TWO SERIES every year against Oakland? Im sick of it. In 03, that was the difference in us winning the division. In 06, it again was the difference in us winning the division. I see in 2007, the White Sox are playing Oakland twice.

Memo to schedule Makers: There are other teams you can schedule us against ......

We cannot use that as an excuse. For next year we are getting 10 against Yanks and 9 against Oakland. If we do not make the playoffs we can not use that as an excuse.

chisoxmike
10-11-2006, 10:51 AM
I'm with ya man. **** the scum laden A's!


So I guess you would root for the Packers, Lions, and Vickings in the NFL playoffs if the Bears weren't in it then.

CLR01
10-11-2006, 01:54 PM
GO Athletics. CLR01, where is that teal banana?


Partying like a rockstar with the three different drinking smilies.
http://whitesoxinteractive.com/chisox716/tealnana.gif

thomas35forever
10-11-2006, 04:04 PM
Sorry if this has been asked already, but could somebody PLEASE tell me why the Athletics are referred to as the "scum laden A's"? It's driving me crazy!