PDA

View Full Version : Solemn Oath!


DVG
03-25-2002, 11:46 PM
I hereby solemnly swear to no longer read anything that that
chronic, manic-depressive zombie Dan Helpingstine posts on this
website. I have had it with his "we're doomed. We'll never make
it" outlook. I don't doubt that the franchise has problems. One
way to solve them would be to quit whining about second-class
status, awful-awful owners, the Cubs, the ballpark, yap, yap,
yap, blah, blah, blah and come out to the park and support the team.

One other way would be to let go of 1994 and 1997. The fans
who insist that 1994 was "our year" are living in la-la land. Given
the Sox record in post-seaon play, there is absolutely no
guarantee in the world that our Sox wouldn't have found some
creative way to blow it. People who hate Reinsdorf because of
'94 and stay away from the games because of that are just
people that are bound and determined to feel sorry for them-
selves and to hate for the sake of hating.

1997 is another story. What I said about 1994 goes double for
1997. Does Mr. Helpingstine or anyone else realize that the
team was below .500 when the legendary "white flag" trade
was made? Sure, they were 3 1/2 games back, but a below .500
team does not a contender make, at least to me it doesn't.
Mike Royko once wrote an article brutally parodying cheerful
Cub fans and Harry Caray for thinking that a 49-51 Cub team
3 1/2 games out of first was a contender. The fans who think
that the 1997, below .500 team could've contended for any-
thing but a booby prize are of the same mindset as the Cub
fans that Royko mercilessly ridiculed.

Mr. Helpingstine states that the White Sox need to "reconnect"
with the fans. In my opinion, the onus is on the fans, not the
team. The team has made efforts to reconnect with the fans,
including signing Albert Belle to one of the most outrageous
contracts in baseball. That was before the 1997 season, and fans
weren't exactly breaking down the gates to get in even before
the big trade. In that case, the chronic complainers who whined
that the team was too cheap to sign a superstar started
whining because the superstar that the team gave fans was a
surly sourpuss who wasn't very fan-friendly.

Fans need to come to the ballpark to support the team, period.
I realize that it's a bad ballpark, blah, blah, but renovations are
going on to beautify it and make our baseball experience the
way nature intended it to be. (whatever way that is.) I will make
one prediction though. The ballpark renovations won't stop the
chronic complainers like Mr. Helpingstine from finding something
else to B&M about. Or to stay away from.

I seem to be rambling so I'll stop. My original point was that I'm
sick and tired of the negativity pouring forth from Dan H.'s arti-
cles.

Chisox_cali
03-25-2002, 11:49 PM
It looks like I'm not alone

Chisoxfn
03-26-2002, 01:16 AM
Your definately not alone.

Lip Man 1
03-26-2002, 01:45 AM
Just wondering if you all will feel the same way in six months if this "stellar" (read: cheap) pitching staff self distructs and the Sox wind up losing 90 or so games.

The truth really hurts doesn't it gang?

My late father had a saying "you get what you pay for..." nuff said!

Lip

Pete_SSAC
03-26-2002, 01:49 AM
Originally posted by Lip Man 1
Just wondering if you all will feel the same way in six months if this "stellar" (read: cheap) pitching staff self distructs and the Sox wind up losing 90 or so games.

The truth really hurts doesn't it gang?

My late father had a saying "you get what you pay for..." nuff said!

Lip

And how do you know this?

:cleo
"I said stop callin' me and asking me about this bleedin' baseball team!"

- Pete

RichH55
03-26-2002, 01:49 AM
Originally posted by Chisoxfn
Your definately not alone.


Agreed.....we cant put all our Angst into Baseball anyway...just ask a Blackhawks and Sox fan :D:

dougs78
03-26-2002, 08:39 AM
It looks like I'm not alone

You are most definitely not alone. I have actually stopped reading most of the columns a long time ago. I found myself in the same position that both DVG and Cali must have been in. I read the article and just didn't agree with the opinions expressed.

I've said it once, I've said it 1000 times I LIKE THIS TEAM! And you know what sox fans, (especially WSI columnists), the glass is not completely empty, hell its not even half empty, its damn near full. Of course there are things I would change about the team, thats what being a fan means....but a wise man once said....

"Happiness is found not in getting what you want...but instead in wanting what you got".



GO HOOSIERS!!!

Jerry_Manuel
03-26-2002, 08:53 AM
If you have a different opinion then what our guys have to say, send us a column and we'll put it up.

Soundoff@whitesoxinteractive.com

Jerry_Manuel
03-26-2002, 09:11 AM
I have had it with his "we're doomed. We'll never make it" outlook.

As long as Jerry Reinsdorf owns the team, this franchise will never win a World Series. Just my opinion.

One other way would be to let go of 1994 and 1997. The fans insist that 1994 was "our year" are living in la-la land. Given
the Sox record in post-seaon play, there is absolutely no
guarantee in the world that our Sox wouldn't have found some
creative way to blow it. People who hate Reinsdorf because of
'94 and stay away from the games because of that are just
people that are bound and determined to feel sorry for them-
selves and to hate for the sake of hating.


I'm sure the Sox would've found a way to screw it up like they always do. However, some fans are upset that their owner hand a rather large hand in killing their teams playoff run. Some fans haven't come back to baseball in general, due to the '94 strike.

1997 is another story. What I said about 1994 goes double for 1997. Does Mr. Helpingstine or anyone else realize that the team was below .500 when the legendary "white flag" trade was made? Sure, they were 3 1/2 games back, but a below .500 team does not a contender make, at least to me it doesn't.

As I said above, the team had a chance to win the divison. Fans saw the move as ditching payroll, and killing the season. I myself was 13 at the time, and didn't like the move at the time. The trade itself, has worked out on the field it hurt the team off the field.

Fans need to come to the ballpark to support the team, period. I realize that it's a bad ballpark, blah, blah, but renovations are going on to beautify it and make our baseball experience the way nature intended it to be. (whatever way that is.) I will make one prediction though. The ballpark renovations won't stop the chronic complainers like Mr. Helpingstine from finding something else to B&M about. Or to stay away from.

Some fans are afraid to get attached again, because they know it's only a matter of time before, Reinsdorf does something stupid. I'm all for the renovations but they have to address the upper deck. That's the biggest bitch in the media, so fixing it would be nice. The Sox also have to market better, period.

RedPinStripes
03-26-2002, 09:14 AM
Jeezzzzz!!!!! Where the hell is the tag for "the sky is falling!!!! cover the field!!!! the end of the world is here. !!!!!!


This is why the park is so dead because many sox fans worry more about the hatred tward JR and the fact that this organization hasn't won the ring since 1917.

There are some pretty intellegent fans on here and I can't belive many think we're doomed. Does anyone realize just how bad this division is?

We'll look at it this way..........

If ST. pitching means a lot to you, then i guess Konerko, Crede, Harris, and Valentine are all going to keep hitting near or over .400 right? It's a small concern when your staff gives up 10 runs a game, but how many teams that had the best record in ST won the series or even made the playoffs?

I'm not going to write a column on this. Sox-and-roll will have a phoneline on the next show and I'll take my full view there while taking calls.

Jerry_Manuel
03-26-2002, 09:17 AM
Originally posted by RedPinStripes
There are some pretty intellegent fans on here and I can't belive many think we're doomed. Does anyone realize just how bad this division is?


Yep the division is bad, I'm not going to make my case for Minnesota again. Let's just wait and see what happens when we get going for real on Monday.

RedPinStripes
03-26-2002, 09:34 AM
Originally posted by Jerry_Manuel


Yep the division is bad, I'm not going to make my case for Minnesota again. Let's just wait and see what happens when we get going for real on Monday.

I think losing TK is going to hurt the twins a lot. I'm not too worried about them. Monday will be the start of all the fun though.

THE_HOOTER
03-26-2002, 09:35 AM
Jerry,

For you to say that the team will not win a World Series with Renisdorf as the owner, you're probably right.

Considering he has had the most success by far of any owner of the Sox, I'll stick with him.

Renisdorf proved with the Bulls that if there is support and the team wins, he will support it and do what is necessary to win.

I think Dan's articles are too negative as well. We all know the problems, but I don't feel like hearing about them so much.

Heck, it's almost opening day! Hope springs eternal.

They should have built the damn ballpark in the South Loop along the lake. This team needs to identify itself more with the city dwellers. I am sure we have more suburb fans than city fans.

czalgosz
03-26-2002, 09:45 AM
What's funny about all this is that last year at this time, everyone was just giddy. I wish the old Rivals predictions contest still existed, because only a handful of people picked the Sox to win less than 95 games. Everyone was sure that the Sox were going all the way in 2001.

Of course, once the regular season started, that bandwagon emptied out really quick.

Now we're seeing the opposite, where everyone is sure that this team will suck something awful.

The truth, as usual, is probably somewhere in between. I would be surprised if this team won fewer games than it did last year, but I would also be shocked if it won more than 90. This is a good-but-not great team, and if it were in any division other than the AL Central, it would be considered a "young team on the verge of contention". It's not worth it to get too up or too down on this team.

The division is so weak, however, that I don't think anyone will run away with it. That means the Sox will have plenty of time to wallow around .500 and figure out the pitching situation, and they'll still be right in it.

And call me Pollyanna, but I still think the long-term prospects for this team are great. KW makes me nervous with his impatience and all this young talent at his disposal, but things should be great.

remember, things could be worse - we could be Royals fans...

dougs78
03-26-2002, 09:51 AM
If you have a different opinion then what our guys have to say, send us a column and we'll put it up

I keep hearing about this sound off feature, but I'm pretty sure I've never seen one. Where exactly do these columns go? Do they go up on the front page? Maybe no one has taken advantage of this option yet, but I'm pretty sure I've not seen a "sound off" column featured on the front page.

Iwritecode
03-26-2002, 09:52 AM
Originally posted by czalgosz
remember, things could be worse - we could be Royals fans...

Actually, I like this quote better:

:thankgod

RedPinStripes
03-26-2002, 10:11 AM
Originally posted by Iwritecode


Actually, I like this quote better:

:thankgod


:mkillcub
"me too"

Jerry_Manuel
03-26-2002, 10:12 AM
Originally posted by dougs78
I keep hearing about this sound off feature, but I'm pretty sure I've never seen one. Where exactly do these columns go? Do they go up on the front page? Maybe no one has taken advantage of this option yet, but I'm pretty sure I've not seen a "sound off" column featured on the front page.

Sometimes they are the "feature" article on the site. Other times they are at the bottom of the front page.

Here is the latest Sound Off, on the right side, you can read all the others we've recieved. (http://www.whitesoxinteractive.com/rwas/index.php?category=6)

dougs78
03-26-2002, 10:18 AM
orginally posted by Jerry Manuel
Sometimes they are the "feature" article on the site. Other times they are at the bottom of the front page.

Thanks for the heads up there Jerry. Come to find out, I actually had an article on there from way back in october. Who knew??? :smile: I'll have to say though, if I didn't even know my own article was ever up there, then its hardly going to inspire me to write other articles. The way it stands, just posting a message reaches a much wider audience than writing a sound off column.

hold2dibber
03-26-2002, 12:49 PM
I think people in this thread are confusing two issues: (1) the current prospects of the team on the field; and (2) the long term prospects of the team off the field. The article really was only about the second; and although depressing, I thought he was mostly dead on about the situation. The good news is, these things are largely cyclical, and with some aggressive and innovative thinking (and, perhaps, an ownership change), the fortunes of the franchise could easily be righted. But the fact remains, that the team has lost touch with a huge portion of its fan base. So many of the people who flocked to the park from '89-'94 just don't come any more. The onus is on the team to fix it, and to develop more fans. Obviously, this is possible. But JR and his crack team have fallen short for the last 8 years or so. Not fun to dwell on, and not much we can do about it, but true.

PaleHoseGeorge
03-26-2002, 01:26 PM
Originally posted by dougs78
Thanks for the heads up there Jerry. Come to find out, I actually had an article on there from way back in october. Who knew??? :smile: I'll have to say though, if I didn't even know my own article was ever up there, then its hardly going to inspire me to write other articles. The way it stands, just posting a message reaches a much wider audience than writing a sound off column.

It's a REALLY BIG website, Dougs. You should take some time to look around. You might be surprised at all the things it offers that AREN'T NEGATIVE. Some of them, in fact, are truly inspiring.

For now our fourth season, White Sox Interactive is devoted to the FANS of the Chicago White Sox. We publish what Sox Fans send us. Unlike the futile excercise of writing a letter to the editor of a newspaper (who will severely edit your opinions, assuming they publish them at all), Sox Fans at WSI have an opportunity to answer back to anything written here--both on the main page and the message boards.

Who is going to give you a better shake than that, the Cubune? LOL!!!

:gulp:

PaleHoseGeorge
03-26-2002, 03:04 PM
Originally posted by dougs78
...The way it stands, just posting a message reaches a much wider audience than writing a sound off column.

Sorry, but this is just flat wrong. The people who post on this message board are outnumbered by AT LEAST 3 to 1 by those who visit the main page. By WSI standards, writing on this message board is for the benefit of a very narrow audience.

Anyone who worked our SoxFest booth with me for three days knows this to be true. Sox Fans claiming to know and visit our site were overwhelmingly those who also said they NEVER post. They surf in to read the articles, spend some time with features they literally can't find anywhere else, and have some fun. They're totally biased and yet see no reason to do much more than scan this board--if they bother to visit it at all, which most don't. The lurkers here are always outnumbered by posting members by a wide margin. You can check this yourself.

Just because you can't see or engage these Sox Fans doesn't mean they don't exist. The Earth is not flat, just because it looks that way.

If you happen to be a lurker reading this, "Welcome!" I know for fact you've never whined even once here.

:)

FarWestChicago
03-26-2002, 04:14 PM
Originally posted by PaleHoseGeorge


Sorry, but this is just flat wrong. The people who post on this message board are outnumbered by AT LEAST 3 to 1 by those who visit the main page. By WSI standards, writing on this message board is for the benefit of a very narrow audience.You are quite correct, PHG. Yesterday there were over 1,100 unique visitors to the site. There were about 125 members on the board. Obviously, people are visiting the home page and the news system. :smile:

Jerry_Manuel
03-26-2002, 04:29 PM
Originally posted by FarWestChicago
Obviously, people are visiting the home page and the news system. :smile:

http://scifimedia.ign.com/pics/duffman.jpg
Oh Yeah!

dougs78
03-26-2002, 05:16 PM
The people who post on this message board are outnumbered by AT LEAST 3 to 1 by those who visit the main page. By WSI standards, writing on this message board is for the benefit of a very narrow audience.

This is quite interesting to me. It also really surprises me. But I guess I am just basing it on my own behavior which I may not be representative.

I'd be curious to know, how many unique visitor hits you get each day on the actual "Sound Off" page. I'd also like to know how many unique hits that a "headline" article gets. It would be interesting to compare these 2 numbers to how many hits an average posts gets. Just becuase they enter through the front page, doesn't mean they read the articles there any more than they read the posts, IMO.

Again, dont take this wrong West and George and staff, I think you guys do and OUTSTANDING job with this site. I am not meaning to sound like I am whining at all and I apologize if you have taken it that way.

FarWestChicago
03-26-2002, 05:26 PM
Originally posted by dougs78


This is quite interesting to me. It also really surprises me. But I guess I am just basing it on my own behavior which I may not be representative.Your behavior is representative of the more board oriented users of WSI. But, numerically, you are in a minority.
I'd be curious to know, how many unique visitor hits you get each day on the actual "Sound Off" page. I'd also like to know how many unique hits that a "headline" article gets. It would be interesting to compare these 2 numbers to how many hits an average posts gets.It would be possible to do this. But I don't really think it's the best use of my time. Do you? :smile:

PaleHoseGeorge
03-26-2002, 05:42 PM
Regular posters from the WSI boards, in relation to their relative number, account for a far-greater percentage of the site's hits than any other group of visitors. Postings here are most-likely to be read by a narrow but very devoted group.

You can get your glory wherever you want it at WSI. Whatever floats your boat...

However, suggesting the Sound Off column isn't worth anyone's effort is simply not fair--especially after whining about another Sox Fan's opinion column on the main page.

dougs78
03-26-2002, 09:07 PM
I was going to write a longer post, but then I started thinking about Cz's signature quote and I decided against it. I hope this one is more clear...

I guess what really bothers me about these articles has nothing to do with who reads what, or what views are espoused more prominently. What it comes down to is the main tagline of WSI.

"Totally Biased, Utterly Petty, Completely Unobjective."

When I first came here I thought this line was great, becuase it meant I had found a place where true fans could hang out and talk about the team and their chances in the upcoming year, the latest performances, trade speculation, etc. Well it turns out that is exactly what I found and for that reason I love it and I wholeheartedly appreciate all the effor that goes into it from the entire staff.

What has surprised me and I guess dissappointed me is that when I read the words of that tagline I thought that I would be talking with fans who were "Totally Biased" toward the White Sox. However, the articles on the front page seem to be much more biased against the White Sox. I guess that is pretty much the gist of all my points.

Jerry_Manuel
03-26-2002, 10:03 PM
Originally posted by dougs78
What has surprised me and I guess dissappointed me is that when I read the words of that tagline I thought that I would be talking with fans who were "Totally Biased" toward the White Sox. However, the articles on the front page seem to be much more biased against the White Sox. I guess that is pretty much the gist of all my points.

Dan Helpingstine maybe negative in your eyes, but in his eyes he's simpling stating the truth. I'm not sure how old of a man you are Doug, but Dan has seen close to 35 years of bad marketing, bad trades, bad teams, etc. After a while you get to a point where you don't think things will change.

*Just my opinion, not necessarily the opinion of staff at WSI*
We still are and will always be "Totally Biased, Utterly Petty, Completely Unobjective." If you disagree with something someone says whether it be on the boards or on the main page all you have to is speak up. Which is what you did now, and that's a good thing. So we're still totally biased but we can't be like those goofs on the troll board publishing dumb trade ideas, and cubbie kool-aid crap.

Chisox_cali
03-26-2002, 10:14 PM
You should just write s Sound-Off Column called "IF YOUR A LUKER READ THIS COLUMN" that should get their attention! :smile:

Daver
03-26-2002, 10:20 PM
Originally posted by Chisox_cali
You should just write s Sound-Off Column called "IF YOUR A LUKER READ THIS COLUMN" that should get their attention! :smile:

Great idea Cali,have it in by tuesday.:redneck

Chisox_cali
03-26-2002, 10:22 PM
Originally posted by daver


Great idea Cali,have it in by tuesday.:redneck

Ah CRAP Too Much PRESSURE :D: I'll just call the article that and it will just be a link to this thread, you've all said what needs to be said about this issue

dougs78
03-26-2002, 10:45 PM
originally posted by Jerry Manuel
Dan Helpingstine maybe negative in your eyes, but in his eyes he's simpling stating the truth. I'm not sure how old of a man you are Doug, but Dan has seen close to 35 years of bad marketing, bad trades, bad teams, etc.

Jerry, I truly appreciate you responding and trying to clarify things for me. But what you are saying is exactly what I don't understand. You say that he has seen 35 years of BAD, BAD, BAD....I'm only 23 and I can remember my Dad going to White Sox playoff games in '83, I can recall with fondness watching the Sox in the '93 playoffs, and feeling so let down when the season ended in '94. I can also say that I was turned off by the strike but the 2000 White Sox brought me back with a vengence. In short, I have so many GREAT memories of the White Sox in my lifetime that I can't understand how people only dwell on the bad. Whats more, its not only Dan many of the other writers tend to accentuate the negatives. See, I'm a big boy and I can handle reality, but what I see no need for is to dwell on the bad things, since we have no way of changing them.

After a while you get to a point where you don't think things will change

I truly hope that this is never the case for myself, you, Dan or anyone for that matter. If change is not possible in life, then I think you have ceased living. If you dont' think things will change then everything about your life stagnates and becomes meaningless. To think this way about anything, especially something as ephemeral and insignificant as baseball is just mind boggling to me.

Jerry_Manuel
03-26-2002, 11:01 PM
Originally posted by dougs78
I'm only 23 and I can remember my Dad going to White Sox playoff games in '83, I can recall with fondness watching the Sox in the '93 playoffs, and feeling so let down when the season ended in '94. I can also say that I was turned off by the strike but the 2000 White Sox brought me back with a vengence. In short, I have so many GREAT memories of the White Sox in my lifetime that I can't understand how people only dwell on the bad. Whats more, its not only Dan many of the other writers tend to accentuate the negatives. See, I'm a big boy and I can handle reality, but what I see no need for is to dwell on the bad things, since we have no way of changing them.


Your the kind of fan, the Sox need to reach out to. The Sox seem to be trying to recapture the fans who left in '94, or '97. I guess you could group me in with you (I'm 17 now, I'll be 18 in May).

I don't think I said anything about you or anyone else not being able to handle reality. True, there's no point on dwelling on the negatives, but the history of the Sox has shown that whatever positives the organization does have soon to negative. It's almost like a never ending cycle of bad luck.

Just my opinion on the subject.

PaleHoseGeorge
03-26-2002, 11:06 PM
Originally posted by dougs78
...I truly hope that this is never the case for myself, you, Dan or anyone for that matter. If change is not possible in life, then I think you have ceased living. If you dont' think things will change then everything about your life stagnates and becomes meaningless. To think this way about anything, especially something as ephemeral and insignificant as baseball is just mind boggling to me.

I'm not sure what you are saying here. Are you saying 84+ years of futility is irrelevant to the future? Are you saying it's foolish to only measure success by world championships, and not simply division ones? Is it okay, to your way of thinking, to die accepting a lifetime of mediocrity?

You're not clear on any of this. Please explain.

dougs78
03-27-2002, 07:01 AM
Originally posted by PHG
I'm not sure what you are saying here. Are you saying 84+ years of futility is irrelevant to the future? Are you saying it's foolish to only measure success by world championships, and not simply division ones? Is it okay, to your way of thinking, to die accepting a lifetime of mediocrity?

George, I am actually saying quite a bit in the post you speak of. Without getting overly philosophical and delving into Sarte, Heidegger, Nietzche and others I'll try to explain it in my terms. Life is too short to focus on negatives all the time. Success or lack thereof, is to me a largely subjective measure that relates to how many lives you touch and how much happiness you experience and help others to experience. So in that respect, I think it is foolish to measure success by World Championships.

Obviously, George, you fully enjoy the Chicago White Sox and they bring you great joy. If this was not the case, then I am sure you would not spend so much time to start an endeavour like this. As long as watching baseball brings joy and hope to your life then you should continue watching. And if that means you watch for 84 more years and die before your Sox haven won it all, then no, I don't think you have lived a life of mediocrity. And if you would think that your life has been mediocre based on how many World Championships the White Sox won, then I really feel bad for you.

See, the gist of the whole thing is that we are just fans....we have no control over anything the White Sox do. We can go to games and fill the coffers and hope that will translate into a better team, perhaps, but that is the extent. So to overly dwell on the negatives of an entity we cannot alter is just a self-defeating endeavour.

I hope that clears it up for you.

PaleHoseGeorge
03-27-2002, 08:01 AM
Originally posted by dougs78


George, I am actually saying quite a bit in the post you speak of. Without getting overly philosophical and delving into Sarte, Heidegger, Nietzche and others I'll try to explain it in my terms. Life is too short to focus on negatives all the time. Success or lack thereof, is to me a largely subjective measure that relates to how many lives you touch and how much happiness you experience and help others to experience. So in that respect, I think it is foolish to measure success by World Championships.

Obviously, George, you fully enjoy the Chicago White Sox and they bring you great joy. If this was not the case, then I am sure you would not spend so much time to start an endeavour like this. As long as watching baseball brings joy and hope to your life then you should continue watching. And if that means you watch for 84 more years and die before your Sox haven won it all, then no, I don't think you have lived a life of mediocrity. And if you would think that your life has been mediocre based on how many World Championships the White Sox won, then I really feel bad for you.

See, the gist of the whole thing is that we are just fans....we have no control over anything the White Sox do. We can go to games and fill the coffers and hope that will translate into a better team, perhaps, but that is the extent. So to overly dwell on the negatives of an entity we cannot alter is just a self-defeating endeavour.

I hope that clears it up for you.

Actually, you're saying a lot more here than in your previous post. Thanks for the clarification.