PDA

View Full Version : Ok gang, here's why we need to pull for the Tribe


DumpJerry
10-07-2007, 01:59 AM
As we well know, of the four AL teams in the playoffs, the Angels are the only with a fan base we are able to stomach. Followed by the Yankees only because the other two teams are the Tribe and Red Sox. Having said that, we need to pull for the Tribe to make it to the World Series. They don't have to win it, they just need to be in it. Here's why:
2004 World Series: Red Sox v. Cards
2005 World Series: White Sox v. Astros
2006 World Series: Tigers v. Cards

See the pattern? With the exception of the Red Sox, none of the above teams were in the post-season this year. Keep in mind that the Red Sox were swept in the ALDS by us in '05 and failed to make the post season in '06. The Cards, Kitties, White Sox and Astros have disappeared this year.

This tells me that playing all those stressful must-win games in September and October takes its toll on a team. Getting to the World Series this month would hopefully tax the Tribe into oblivion next year. I know they are a "young" team, but I don't think that will save the day.

Who do you want?

HomeFish
10-07-2007, 02:02 AM
My preference for World Series champions, in order:

1. Rockies
2. Yankees
3. Arizona
4. Anaheim
5. Boston
6. Cleveland

Obviously, Yanks and Angels are on there as technicalities.

Scottiehaswheels
10-07-2007, 02:05 AM
D'Backs and Indians... Series goes 7 games and I make $7,000 or so... LOL oh and uh D'backs win, although Indians breaking their "curse" would further piss off Cub fans....

Boondock Saint
10-07-2007, 02:25 AM
The Yankees, but for different reasons. Before the season started, I told a buddy that A Rod was gonna blow up this year. We spent a good amount of time arguing that, with said argument ending with him saying that he'd suck once the playoffs started, because he's "a choker". So I'm patiently waiting for A Rod to drill a couple homers into his theory.

Moses_Scurry
10-07-2007, 03:53 AM
I wouldn't have a problem with the Tribe winning it. They have the 2nd longest drought after the cubs. Anything that can extend the gap between #1 and #2 is good in my book. Maybe the Giants can win it next year if not the Sox!

Dont Stop Belivn
10-07-2007, 04:29 AM
As we well know, of the four AL teams in the playoffs, the Angels are the only with a fan base we are able to stomach. Followed by the Yankees only because the other two teams are the Tribe and Red Sox. Having said that, we need to pull for the Tribe to make it to the World Series. They don't have to win it, they just need to be in it. Here's why:
2004 World Series: Red Sox v. Cards
2005 World Series: White Sox v. Astros
2006 World Series: Tigers v. Cards

See the pattern? With the exception of the Red Sox, none of the above teams were in the post-season this year. Keep in mind that the Red Sox were swept in the ALDS by us in '05 and failed to make the post season in '06. The Cards, Kitties, White Sox and Astros have disappeared this year.

This tells me that playing all those stressful must-win games in September and October takes its toll on a team. Getting to the World Series this month would hopefully tax the Tribe into oblivion next year. I know they are a "young" team, but I don't think that will save the day.

Who do you want?

I like your thinking and would like to subscribe to your newsletter.

I'll be pulling for the Rox, but the Injuns are my second team just becasue my Aunt lives out there so i want her team to win

eastchicagosoxfan
10-07-2007, 06:03 AM
I root for the team from our division. That, and as other posters have indictacted, I want more distance between 1908 and all other World Series droughts.

Grzegorz
10-07-2007, 06:06 AM
If not the Tribe than the Bosox; keep the title out of the National League.

Frater Perdurabo
10-07-2007, 08:14 AM
I like the cut of your jib. Root for the Indians so that they won't be a threat to the Sox in 2008! Also, it again would prove the strength of the AL Central.

WSox597
10-07-2007, 08:19 AM
This tells me that playing all those stressful must-win games in September and October takes its toll on a team. Getting to the World Series this month would hopefully tax the Tribe into oblivion next year. I know they are a "young" team, but I don't think that will save the day.

In my best Mr. Burns imitation: Excellent!

Machiavelli as a baseball fan. :smile:

LongLiveFisk
10-07-2007, 12:34 PM
The Indians winning wouldn't bother me at all. A couple of my friends from Ohio are Indians fans but they were really cool about it when the Sox won. And they can't stand the Cubs either. That's always a plus. :D:

beckett21
10-07-2007, 12:37 PM
I lived in Cleveland for 4 years and I have no animosity towards the Tribe. Although they are a division rival, they are an easy choice for me.

SOXSINCE'70
10-07-2007, 12:42 PM
I'd like to see the Tribe and D-Backs.
Whether it happens,I can't say.
If it does,I'll take the D-Backs in 6.
CHRIS YOUNG IS GOD!!:gulp::gulp:

TDog
10-07-2007, 01:24 PM
You might be right about Cleveland going to the World Series taking its toll on the team. I don't want the Indians to win the World Series, though.

I hated the Tigers so much that I didn't cheer for them last year. There were a couple of years long ago that I pulled for the Twins to win he World Series despite the division rivalry. It only made their (few) fans more cocky. I expect I will be cheering for the National League.

SoxGirl4Life
10-07-2007, 01:47 PM
You might be right about Cleveland going to the World Series taking its toll on the team. I don't want the Indians to win the World Series, though.

I hated the Tigers so much that I didn't cheer for them last year. There were a couple of years long ago that I pulled for the Twins to win he World Series despite the division rivalry. It only made their (few) fans more cocky. I expect I will be cheering for the National League.


It won't be hard to root for either team that comes out of the National League. But if the Indians get there, and it goes 7, it might take a toll on the pitching staff. If we're to believe that's what happened to the Sox last year.

ChiSoxFan35
10-07-2007, 04:32 PM
No way, I'd rather see the Cubs over the Tribe. Their fans are pieces of crap (as seen with Thome), they always do classless stuff as stadium entertainment like pissing on the Sox jersey, and their team is full of douchebags who are always chirping from the dugout like they're tough. It used to be Coco Crisp but they still do it, I saw them doing it against the Yankees, thinking they're all tough, why don't you do it face to face

Dan Mega
10-07-2007, 04:42 PM
Cheering for a real rival?

I think not.

GO ANGELS AND YANKEES.

upperdeckusc
10-07-2007, 04:58 PM
No way, I'd rather see the Cubs over the Tribe. Their fans are pieces of crap (as seen with Thome), they always do classless stuff as stadium entertainment like pissing on the Sox jersey, and their team is full of douchebags who are always chirping from the dugout like they're tough. It used to be Coco Crisp but they still do it, I saw them doing it against the Yankees, thinking they're all tough, why don't you do it face to face

......and that's why you want to see the CUBS win it all?? you're right. the cubs don't fall into ANY of THOSE categories........ :?:

itsnotrequired
10-07-2007, 05:01 PM
I'm rooting for the Indians. Not cheering, but rooting. If the Sox don't make the postseason, I like to see the AL Central representative get as far as they can. This year it is Cleveland. Having them play the Yankees in the first round has made it easy.:cool:

SoxandtheCityTee
10-07-2007, 06:21 PM
I like the cut of your jib. Root for the Indians so that they won't be a threat to the Sox in 2008! Also, it again would prove the strength of the AL Central.

I like the Indians to take the AL pennant too. Third year in a row the AL World Series representative would come from the Central (however strong it is) rather than the Division Ordained By The Media To Win Now and Forever.

In the Series itself, I may root for the NL team. Still under advisement.

KyWhiSoxFan
10-07-2007, 06:34 PM
I root for the American League team no matter what. I don't like the National League. The only time I root for the National League is when they're playing the Yankees in the World Series.

JermaineDye05
10-07-2007, 06:58 PM
2 reasons why I won't be rooting for the tribe.

1) they're a rival.

2) I don't like their fans, I still can't believe how disrespectful they are to Thome.

SoxGirl4Life
10-07-2007, 07:35 PM
Yankees pulled Clemens out in the third, "re-aggrevating an injury" Sound familiar?

Oh yeah, Cleveland is only up 2-0 but he obviously doesn't have it.

drewcifer
10-07-2007, 07:42 PM
Yankees pulled Clemens out in the third, "re-aggrevating an injury" Sound familiar?

Oh yeah, Cleveland is only up 2-0 but he obviously doesn't have it.

3-0 now.

Things looking good.

SOXSINCE'70
10-07-2007, 08:27 PM
3-0 now.

Things looking good.

If the Tribe pulls this off,it may be the first time
since this palyoff format began in 1995 that all 4
League Divisional Series ended in a sweep.And only
one favorite (the Blow Sawx) prevailed.

ilsox7
10-07-2007, 08:33 PM
If the Tribe pulls this off,it may be the first time
since this palyoff format began in 1995 that all 4
League Divisional Series ended in a sweep.And only
one favorite (the Blow Sawx) prevailed.

Depends on who you listened to when it came to calling favorites.

ChiSoxFan81
10-08-2007, 12:17 PM
Here's my World Series pick:
Rockies vs. Indians.

This would be great because if Cleveland wins it, then the 2nd longest drought moves even further from the Scrubs. If Colorado wins, its just another expansion team to win, and the Scrubs still haven't won it. Screw the Yankees and Screw the Red Sox. We need another midwestern team to win so those east coast losers can shut their traps.

TDog
10-08-2007, 02:00 PM
I like the cut of your jib. Root for the Indians so that they won't be a threat to the Sox in 2008! Also, it again would prove the strength of the AL Central.

The AL Central is the second-weakest division in baseball. Only two teams finished above .500. The only other division with at least three teams under .500 was the NL Central.

Would you consider the NL Central the premier division in the league coming into this season because it sent a team to the World Series the previous three years, winning it all in 2006?

I'm to the point where I'm going to cheer for the NL in the Series again, something I never did before the Padres in 1984 went up against the Tigers, and something I didn't do consistently until the Yankees again started to go to the Series every year again in the 1990s.

October26
10-08-2007, 02:08 PM
As we well know, of the four AL teams in the playoffs, the Angels are the only with a fan base we are able to stomach. Followed by the Yankees only because the other two teams are the Tribe and Red Sox. Having said that, we need to pull for the Tribe to make it to the World Series. They don't have to win it, they just need to be in it. Here's why:
2004 World Series: Red Sox v. Cards
2005 World Series: White Sox v. Astros
2006 World Series: Tigers v. Cards

See the pattern? With the exception of the Red Sox, none of the above teams were in the post-season this year. Keep in mind that the Red Sox were swept in the ALDS by us in '05 and failed to make the post season in '06. The Cards, Kitties, White Sox and Astros have disappeared this year.

This tells me that playing all those stressful must-win games in September and October takes its toll on a team. Getting to the World Series this month would hopefully tax the Tribe into oblivion next year. I know they are a "young" team, but I don't think that will save the day.

Who do you want?

You read my mind. Once the Cubs were eliminated on Saturday, I thought I would no longer be interested in the playoffs. Then I started thinking, what is the best thing that can happen for our Sox during these playoffs? Given that we are not in the playoffs this year, how about exhausting the heck out of Cleveland's pitching staff. So, here's hoping the Tribe plays long into October - not because I am a turncoat but because as you say it "would hopefully tax the Tribe into oblivion next year." I do, however, think that Boston will present a challenge for Cleveland. And as much as I detest Red Sox nation, you cannot discount that Boston has a very talented team. Assuming the Yankees don't mount a comeback, I think it will be a very interesting ALCS between Boston and Cleveland this year.

Joliet Jeff
10-08-2007, 02:21 PM
I root for the team from our division. That, and as other posters have indictacted, I want more distance between 1908 and all other World Series droughts.

I feel the exact same way. If we can't win, let our division.

asindc
10-08-2007, 02:32 PM
The AL Central is the second-weakest division in baseball. Only two teams finished above .500. The only other division with at least three teams under .500 was the NL Central.

Would you consider the NL Central the premier division in the league coming into this season because it sent a team to the World Series the previous three years, winning it all in 2006?

Believe me, here on the East Coast, particularly at the World Wide Leader, they didn't care a whit that all the other AL East teams were finishing below .500 the years the Yanks and Red Sox won it all. And they will notice the trend if the AL Central keeps repping the league in the Big Show.

In fact, one of things that made the Red Sox fans so cocky when they played the real Sox in 05 is that they thought, for some strange reason, that the AL East was stronger, priimarily because the WS Champs came from that division more often than the Al Central.

Let's take a very general comparison from a certain perspective:

# of different teams to make the playoffs from the AL East since 2000 (the last time the Yanks won it all): 2 (you know who)

# of different teams to make the playoffs from the AL Central in the same time frame: 4, with 3 of them making it at least twice during that time (Sox, Cle., and Twinkees)

It seems that in recent years, it has been more difficult to make the playoffs from the Central than from the East. In fact, it would not surprise many at all if any of the top 4 in the Central win the division next year (well, maybe not the Twins if Hunter bolts), while it would be a shock if any team other than the Yanks or Red Sox win the East.

Before you respond, yes I realize this is just another post that falls under the category "lies, damn lies, and statistics." Point is, depends on how you look at it. I do know this: If the AL Central keeps winning the pennant, people across the country will pay attention.

TDog
10-08-2007, 02:51 PM
...
Before you respond, yes I realize this is just another post that falls under the category "lies, damn lies, and statistics." Point is, depends on how you look at it. I do know this: If the AL Central keeps winning the pennant, people across the country will pay attention.

Number of crappy teams in the AL Central in 2005: 4.

In 2005, the AL Central and AL Central were strong divisions because of the two teams on the top. In 2006, the AL Central was the strongest division in baseball because of its three top teams. In 2007, the Tigers were only Mariners-good, not much better than Blue Jays-good. The Twins and the White Sox lost more games than they won.

Nobody cared that the NL Cdentral won three straight NL pennants. I didn't watch the Cubs in the NLDS, so I wouldn't have seen if announcers were saying they were the team to beat because they come from the Central that had won three straight pennants.

chisoxfanatic
10-08-2007, 03:28 PM
Well, since the Angels are out of it, I now am hoping the Indians can do it.

Frontman
10-08-2007, 07:01 PM
I'd rather see the Yankees get to the Series than the Indians. Any fanbase that constantly boos Jim Thome to the extent they do? Doesn't deserve the thrills of a World Series run.

msmaggiej
10-08-2007, 07:33 PM
Goooooooooooooo Tribe!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1

mistake on the lake?????????? :mad: I think not!

Daver
10-08-2007, 07:36 PM
I want the Tribe to lose just because of the guy with the obnoxious drum at Jacobs Field.

asindc
10-08-2007, 07:43 PM
Number of crappy teams in the AL Central in 2005: 4.

Cleveland was a crappy team in 2005?

DumpJerry
10-08-2007, 07:45 PM
Cleveland was a crappy team in 2005?
Yes. For 6 weeks they played like they made a deal with the Devil. Outside of that, they were pretty bad.

MarySwiss
10-08-2007, 07:54 PM
Well, since the Angels are out of it, I now am hoping the Indians can do it.
Second that, Heather! I have a good pal who's a Tribe fan. Plus, the last thing I want to see is another one of those "only thing that matters in the whole damn world" Red Sawx/Yankees matchups!

OTOH, if that does happen, I am just ***** enough to hope that the ALCS goes seven, with each inning an extra-inning game. A few pulled muscles would be okay, too.

Meanwhile, in the unlikely event that the D'Backs wins this NLCS....

Oh, hell; no matter WHO wins the NLCS, if the World Series comes down to a Yanks or BoSox vs. D'Backs or Rox, GO NL!!!!!

Then again, a D'Backs/Evil Empire rematch could be intriguing....

ilsox7
10-08-2007, 07:55 PM
Yes. For 6 weeks they played like they made a deal with the Devil. Outside of that, they were pretty bad.

EDIT: Baseball Reference (which I used before editing) is wrong, I think. By memory instead, Cleveland won 93 games in 2005. That's pretty darn good. To say they were crappy is ridiculous.

EDIT 2: The 96 wins was their fantasy stat world record.

asindc
10-08-2007, 08:04 PM
EDIT: Baseball Reference (which I used before editing) is wrong, I think. By memory instead, Cleveland won 93 games in 2005. That's pretty darn good. To say they were crappy is ridiculous.

EDIT 2: The 96 wins was their fantasy stat world record.

My point exactly. To the topic at hand: I would find a Yanks/Red Sox series quite unbearable. I can understand, though, those who cannot bring themselves to root for Cleveland.

Frontman
10-08-2007, 08:37 PM
I want the Tribe to lose just because of the guy with the obnoxious drum at Jacobs Field.

Even a better reason than mine.

TDog
10-08-2007, 11:02 PM
EDIT: Baseball Reference (which I used before editing) is wrong, I think. By memory instead, Cleveland won 93 games in 2005. That's pretty darn good. To say they were crappy is ridiculous.

EDIT 2: The 96 wins was their fantasy stat world record.

In 2005, the Indians played unbelievable baseball for about six weeks. Before that, they were a bad team. After a botched fly ball with about a week to go in the season, the Indians couldn't win. In 2006, they were an atrocious team. The bullpen was as comically bad as the 2007 White Sox bullpen. (It's odd that picking up a bad closer in Joe Borowski would help them achieve as many wins as any team in baseball.)

A lot of people around here insist the 2006 White Sox were a crappy team, and they won 90 games.

ilsox7
10-08-2007, 11:09 PM
In 2005, the Indians played unbelievable baseball for about six weeks. Before that, they were a bad team. After a botched fly ball with about a week to go in the season, the Indians couldn't win. In 2006, they were an atrocious team. The bullpen was as comically bad as the 2007 White Sox bullpen. (It's odd that picking up a bad closer in Joe Borowski would help them achieve as many wins as any team in baseball.)

A lot of people around here insist the 2006 White Sox were a crappy team, and they won 90 games.

From July 25, 2005 until the end of the season, the Indians went 42-20. That's over 2 months of great baseball. Before that point, they were basically a .500 team (that and a horrible start). That is not crappy or bad by any definition.

TDog
10-08-2007, 11:57 PM
From July 25, 2005 until the end of the season, the Indians went 42-20. That's over 2 months of great baseball. Before that point, they were basically a .500 team (that and a horrible start). That is not crappy or bad by any definition.

Crappy in April (9-14). Crappy the last week of September. While battling for the division title and wild card after the division slipped away, they lost six of their last seven. Except for three games against the Sox, a team that had clinched and was resting their best players, those losses came against Kansas City and Tampa Bay. And it wasn't that the Indians had nothing to play for. Quite the contrary, they finished two games out of the wild card. When they needed to win, they couldn't win. If the Cubs had performed as such, WSI consensus would have labeled the Cubs a crappy team. Or the White Sox, for that matter.

In 2006, the Indians were even worse. This is their year, though.

Brian26
10-08-2007, 11:58 PM
The season is six months long. It doesn't matter when the wins come, whether they happen at the beginning, end, or are distributed evenly throughout. Any team with 90+ wins should be given just due as a very good team.

The 2005 Indians were a very good team. The 2005 White Sox were a sensational, epic team for the ages.

ilsox7
10-09-2007, 12:16 AM
Crappy in April (9-14). Crappy the last week of September. While battling for the division title and wild card after the division slipped away, they lost six of their last seven. Except for three games against the Sox, a team that had clinched and was resting their best players, those losses came against Kansas City and Tampa Bay. And it wasn't that the Indians had nothing to play for. Quite the contrary, they finished two games out of the wild card. When they needed to win, they couldn't win. If the Cubs had performed as such, WSI consensus would have labeled the Cubs a crappy team. Or the White Sox, for that matter.

In 2006, the Indians were even worse. This is their year, though.

WSI consensus means nothing to me. The Indians in 2005 were a good team. They were bad for brief stretches, but to label them as bad for the entire season minus 6 weeks is absurd, IMO.

TDog
10-09-2007, 12:37 AM
WSI consensus means nothing to me. The Indians in 2005 were a good team. They were bad for brief stretches, but to label them as bad for the entire season minus 6 weeks is absurd, IMO.

I offered WSI consensus as an answer to your absolute "any definition."

In the end, the Indians looked better than they were. When they needed to win to get to the postseason, they couldn't. Their collapse is not unlike the 1967 White Sox, which finished three games behind after losing five straight to the two weakest teams in the American League.

People were so impressed with the 2005 Indians looking so good, that they were the consensus division winner for 2006. They finished in fourth place. This year, they won a division where losses exceeded wins, where three of the five teams finished below .500.

The Indians could go to the World Series this year. But they come from a division that was weak this year and wasn't that strong in 2005.

ilsox7
10-09-2007, 12:46 AM
I offered WSI consensus as an answer to your absolute "any definition."

In the end, the Indians looked better than they were. When they needed to win to get to the postseason, they couldn't. Their collapse is not unlike the 1967 White Sox, which finished three games behind after losing five straight to the two weakest teams in the American League.

People were so impressed with the 2005 Indians looking so good, that they were the consensus division winner for 2006. They finished in fourth place. This year, they won a division where losses exceeded wins, where three of the five teams finished below .500.

The Indians could go to the World Series this year. But they come from a division that was weak this year and wasn't that strong in 2005.

I guess I don't consider WSI Consensus any definition. :D:

Anyways, I was just trying to point out that they weren't bad or crappy, as some said. Were they world beaters? Not at all. Were they a great team? No. But they were above average. So, by any reasonable definition, the 2005 Indians were above average.

TDog
10-09-2007, 01:02 AM
I guess I don't consider WSI Consensus any definition. :D:

Anyways, I was just trying to point out that they weren't bad or crappy, as some said. Were they world beaters? Not at all. Were they a great team? No. But they were above average. So, by any reasonable definition, the 2005 Indians were above average.

Some around here are more reasonable than others. :D: Perhaps my use of the word "crappy" exaggerated the shortcomings of the 2005 Indians. But many exaggerate the quality of the AL Central. Even the White Sox had a winning record against the AL Central this year. And the White Sox didn't have the advantage of playing games against the 90-loss team that finished in fourth place.

ilsox7
10-09-2007, 01:05 AM
Some around here are more reasonable than others. :D: Perhaps my use of the word "crappy" exaggerated the shortcomings of the 2005 Indians. But many exaggerate the quality of the AL Central. Even the White Sox had a winning record against the AL Central this year. And the White Sox didn't have the advantage of playing games against the 90-loss team that finished in fourth place.

Agreed. I just think, in 2005, the Indians were above average. That was the only point I was getting at, in my roundabout and totally inefficient way.

asindc
10-09-2007, 12:29 PM
Some around here are more reasonable than others. :D: Perhaps my use of the word "crappy" exaggerated the shortcomings of the 2005 Indians. But many exaggerate the quality of the AL Central. Even the White Sox had a winning record against the AL Central this year. And the White Sox didn't have the advantage of playing games against the 90-loss team that finished in fourth place.

TDog,

My only point of contention is that you don't seem to recognize that the AL East bottom 3 over the past 7-10 years has been just as bad, if not worse, than the bottom 3 in the AL Central. Furthermore, the AL East bottom 3 have been consistently bad, while at least everyone in the Central, except KC, has shown signs of being competitive at times. And when I say competitive, I mean being able to compete for a playoff spot.

So if you label the AL Central weak this year and in 2005, you would have label the AL East as weak in 2005, 2006, and most of the recent years.

1908<2005
10-13-2007, 03:49 AM
As we well know, of the four AL teams in the playoffs, the Angels are the only with a fan base we are able to stomach. Followed by the Yankees only because the other two teams are the Tribe and Red Sox. Having said that, we need to pull for the Tribe to make it to the World Series. They don't have to win it, they just need to be in it. Here's why:
2004 World Series: Red Sox v. Cards
2005 World Series: White Sox v. Astros
2006 World Series: Tigers v. Cards

See the pattern? With the exception of the Red Sox, none of the above teams were in the post-season this year. Keep in mind that the Red Sox were swept in the ALDS by us in '05 and failed to make the post season in '06. The Cards, Kitties, White Sox and Astros have disappeared this year.

This tells me that playing all those stressful must-win games in September and October takes its toll on a team. Getting to the World Series this month would hopefully tax the Tribe into oblivion next year. I know they are a "young" team, but I don't think that will save the day.

Who do you want?
If the Tribe win this year another long World Series drought is broken.
2004 it was the Red Sox
2005 it was the White Sox
2006 it was the Cardinals
2007 it might be the Indians
2008 Scubs?

I don't like rooting for the Indians.

DumpJerry
10-13-2007, 09:45 AM
If the Tribe win this year another long World Series drought is broken.
2004 it was the Red Sox
2005 it was the White Sox
2006 it was the Cardinals
2007 it might be the Indians
2008 Scubs?

I don't like rooting for the Indians.
1908, please don't buy into the Cub fans' line of "it's our turn." Last time I checked, a team has to earn a spot in the World Series. If there were turns, then the Cubs need to wait for the Rangers, Rockies, Rays, and Mariners to make their first appearance in the Fall Classic before they get a turn.

LongLiveFisk
10-20-2007, 01:30 AM
1908, please don't buy into the Cub fans' line of "it's our turn." Last time I checked, a team has to earn a spot in the World Series. If there were turns, then the Cubs need to wait for the Rangers, Rockies, Rays, and Mariners to make their first appearance in the Fall Classic before they get a turn.

Well at least now that the Rockies are off that list, it's closer to being the Cubs' turn. :redneck