zach23

QUOTE(RockRaines @ Jun 13, 2006 -> 11:38 AM) Anyone playing in the 25+ leagues around the area? I am. I mentioned the league in my earlier reply.

Why don't the Sox just realize that there are some things that need to be done so that ALL fans are happy ALL the time. They just need to do the following: Change all the seats so that they change color depending on the person looking at them. So if someone likes blue or green or red, or whatever else, the seats will read their mind and change to that color just for them. Others looking at them will see the color they like. Charge only what each individual person is willing to pay for admission and personally deliver the tickets to them when it is convienent for them. If someone doesn't want to pay, let them in free and they should be able to sit in the best seat even if there is someone else that wants to sit there. The Sox just have to figure out how to get everyone into the seat they want at all times. Make it so that all seats point in the direction that all people like at all times with no obstructions. The seats must be soft enough for those that like soft and firm enough for those that like firm. Get every player that every fan wants regardless of cost or roster size. If that player then doesn't perform to the satisfaction of any fan anywhere, get rid of him and get better players. The Sox should have a team that always goes 162-0 and wins every World Series. Every fan in the park should see the lineup they want to see even if that means 30 guys must be in the starting lineup. The Sox must simply figure out how to get that to work. Everyone must get to park for free right next to the stadium. Everyone should be allowed to show up 5 minutes before game time and still be able to get in to see the first pitch. There should also be lots of bars and restaurants real close to the park, but there must still be parking lots for everyone as well, and the bars and restaurants must not turn the neighborhood into Wrigleyville. For those that hate bars and restaurants, they must be invisible. For those that walk to the park and hate parking lots, the lots must be invisible and they should be able to see nice houses and trees. The Sox should have every announcer and commentator on earth on the payroll doing their own play-by-play and commentary. The fans can then choose from 1000 different radio stations to hear only the play-by-play and color commentator that they want to hear. Same with TV. Every newspaper must write only about the Sox. Every sports radio station must only talk about the Sox. The stadium must be willing to morph into different stadiums for each fan's taste. If one person likes the old Comiskey better then it should morph into that. If they like the old park but with the new park's concourse, then it should do that. If someone likes seeing the skyline, then the park must rotate so they can. Nobody should wait in any line for anything. Vendors should be able to read everyone's mind and bring them the food they want immediatley. Each fan should have a personal vendor for each type of food and beverage and their own personal restroom. Every type of food and beverage ever created should be available with a vendor to personnaly serve it to each fan. The fans should decide if they want to pay anything or eat and drink for free. If the Sox would just stop being so cheap and address these things then everyone would be happy.

This is like watching a wounded animal try to gnaw off its own leg to get out of a trap. Hangar, why are you so worried about being popular? Isn't that what Cub fans care most about?

QUOTE(Hangar18 @ Jun 12, 2006 -> 11:44 AM) Thats WHY its called the Chicago NewsMedia Watch. Not the Suburban NewsMedia Watch. Those papers cater to the suburbs of Chicago. the Tribune Entertainment Corporation has much more CLOUT than the 3 papers combined. When I lived in Chicago I got the Southtown there. Plus, if newspapers affect people so much, wouldn't the pro-Sox bias of the Southtown be causing tons of surburbanites to become Sox fans thus offsetting all the damage that the Tribune does in the city? What about national sports media such as the major sports magazines? Don't people in Chicago read those? Wouldn't they offset anything that the Tribune does? Wouldn't people outside of Chicago see those national periodicles more than local papers like the Trib and Times? If the Tribune can control what the Times is doing as far as bias, why can't they strong arm small papers like the Southtown and Herald? Shouldn't they be able to also strong arm Sports Illustrated and ESPN the magazine and make them show a bias to the Cubs? I think you should include every possible newspaper in the area including the Star, the Bridgeport News, the Joliet Herald, and the sports section in StreetWise. You should also include every story in each sports magazine sold in the city and suburbs and there should be an accurate account for the total time in minutes and seconds that each team is talked about on each and every radio station and tv station in the tri-state area. This includes the FM stations, spanish stations, etc. and not just AM1000 and WSCR. If all that was done accurately and verified by a non-biased 3rd party (maybe a board made up of people that have no interest in sports) then the media bias could be taken seriously and you could be given a nomination for a pulitzer prize for your work in exposing this. QUOTE(Hangar18 @ Jun 12, 2006 -> 11:46 AM) Thats WHY its called the Chicago NewsMedia Watch. Not the Suburban NewsMedia Watch. Those papers cater to the suburbs of Chicago. the Tribune Entertainment Corporation has much more CLOUT than the 3 papers combined. This is the CHICAGO newsmedia watch. Not the NATIONAL NEWSMEDIA WATCH. Nobody in Chicago reads those magazines?

QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Jun 12, 2006 -> 10:52 AM) But I agree that it would be a step in the right direction of believability if his thread referred to this as coverage from Chicago's major newpapers, instead of the media generally. Yes, because the media in general would also include magazines such as SI, ESPN, and Sporting News. I don't know about Sporting News, but I get SI and the ESPN Magazine and both give the Sox some decent coverage.

QUOTE(WCSox @ Jun 12, 2006 -> 10:40 AM) I rotated around between CF, P, and 3B from little league through high school. I always wanted to be a pitcher, but was horrible on the mound. Had above-average zip on my fastball and had a decent slider, but my arm is inaccurate as hell. I unintentionally hit three batters in a game during my freshman year of HS (two in the same inning) and a brawl broke out. I asked the coach to take me out of the rotation after that. After that, the coach tried to stick me at 3B but, again, my inaccurate arm was a problem. So, I moved back to my "natural" position, CF. I was pretty good out there. I had some speed back then and also have good depth perception and can get good reads on the ball. Managed to throw a couple guys out at the plate as well. I was an above-average hitter with decent power to the opposite field, but not prolific enough to start on a college team. My biggest regret is that I didn't get off my lazy ass, go to college right out of HS, and try out for a team. I had a real good fastball and change up and went 8-0 with a 2.80 ERA my senior year of HS. I think I could have had a shot to pitch for a college team but now I will never know. I don't think I ever had the stuff to go beyond that level, but since I never tried, I will never know.

I played pretty much every position and primarily SS, 3B and pitcher through T-Ball, Little League and Pony league from the ages of 5-18. I pitched all 4 years of High School at Whitney Young from 1981-1985 and played no other positons there. Our coach wouldn't allow pitchers to do anything but pitch. After High School I pitched and played 3B on various leagues at McKinley park, Marquette, River park, Winnemac, and a bunch of others in the Chicago parks district from 1986-1994, then I didn't play at all from 1995-1999. I am playing on a league now that I have been in since 2000. http://midwaybaseball.org I now play 3B and only pitch occasionaly because at the age of 39 there isn't much left of my arm. Our league is for guys 25 and older and you must be over 30 to pitch. Wood bats only, since the combination of aluminum bats and bad fields would kill some of us old guys in our league.

QUOTE(SouthsideNorthsideFan @ Jun 11, 2006 -> 01:10 PM) I don't care! There was still Cubs bias - they were talking faster during those 65 seconds!!! - Hangar Jr. Umm, were those strictly display balloons, or sale items? I have no idea if the balloons were for sale or if they were just for decoration. Yes, it was in the suburbs where it doesn't count.

The past few issues of ESPN the magazine have had Sox stories on Ozzie and Thome and only one Cubs story on Zambrano. Recently Sports Illustrated has also had stories on Ozzie and Thome and an interview with Buehrle while only having one story on Maddux. Do major sports magazines also not count as "media" in the same way that the Southtown doesn't count? "Sportsrise" on Comcast Sports Net Chicago spent 4 minutes and 45 seconds on Sox highlights and interviews while only spending 3 minutes and 15 seconds on the Cubs. WGN news at 9PM spent 1 minute and 35 seconds on the Sox while only spending 1 minute and 5 seconds on the Cubs. While watching various TV channels during scattered times in a 2 day period there were 14 Sox commercials as opposed to 3 for the Cubs. There was a Sox player on Saturday Night Live in the recent past, and no Cubs players appeared on the show. At my local Jewel I counted 12 Sox balloons displayed and only 8 for the Cubs. The local businesses, restaurants, and bars in my town displayed 26 Sox signs as opposed to 15 for the Cubs. I polled the guys on my baseball team, the opposing team, and people at the game and out of 34 people 33 said they don't think there is a media bias for the Cubs and 1 was too young to understand the question and answer anything other than "dada". That poll should be just as scientific and accurate as your Metrodome poll. All of this clearly proves that playing with polls and numbers is complete bulls*** and can be easily twisted to make whatever point anyone chooses to make. Just ask any politician.

I get the Southtown and in today's paper there were 3 Sox Stories and only 1 on the Cubs. I jog around my subdivision in the morning and today out of the houses that had papers in the driveway, 25 had the Southtown, 14 had the Tribune and 10 had the Sun-Times. Then there were 4 that had other papers like the WSJ. So by my numbers, more people read the Southtown and the Southtown is heavily pro-Sox, so therefore the media favors the Sox greatly. My random sampling should count to you since I remember when you did a poll of fans in the Metrodome asking them if the Sox were a big market team or small market. You then used those numbers as "proof" of your point that the Sox were cheap.

Hangar's old obsession - The Sox are cheap and won't win because they get cheap players like Dye instead of spending money for better players. Now that he can't complain about that anymore his new crusade is the media bias. The most classic piece of Hangar lunacy was when he complained that the media did not beleive in the 2005 Sox from opening day when he himself spent most of the season griping that they could not go far because they were too cheap to keep C. Lee and Maggs and had Dye in RF. Some people just always need something to complain about.

QUOTE(Steff @ Jun 1, 2006 -> 04:19 PM) The attendance was s*** in Pitts today because the fans have brains, unlike most of the Cub "fans". It's not about the coverage... it's about word of mouth. And if it's not then let them read and fill that s*** hole up all they want. I don't want their stupid asses at my "house". This is it exactly. This is the same reason why s*** like the "Spice Girls" and "New Kids on the Block" sell millions of records while groups with actual talent can't sell s***. The majority of people in the world will buy s*** wrapped in a pretty package if it is marketed correctly. And someone can complain about it until they are blue in the face and it won't put a stop to it. The Cubs are going to always sell out Wrigley from now on, and because it is sold out other people will want to be part of it because they perceive it as the popular thing to do. That is it, bottom line. Some people need to get over that and get on with their lives. Even if the Tribune and the Sun-Times were to start writing stories favoring the Sox 90% of the time, people will still go to Wrigley in masses and the Sox will draw based on their play. Hangar is like Don Quixote chasing windmills.

QUOTE(RockRaines @ Jun 1, 2006 -> 04:10 PM) SO does Old Style Beer. I would like some comparison's on that. And Jewel and Dominicks sell cubs and white sox bags of nuts, I wonder if the ratio of cubs to sox bags in the display is sqewed based on the attendance the previous week. They were selling Sox and Cubs cookies at Jewel near my house, and had "Cubs" written on the sign first and in bigger letters. Jewel hates the Sox.

QUOTE(zach61 @ Jan 30, 2006 -> 01:04 PM) You're not going to give away the "secret" ingredient that the hot dog stands use? Yeah, I completely forgot to mention the celery salt. The other trick is to put some celery salt in the water when the hotdogs are being steamed.

Vienna hotdogs steamed and served on an S. Rosen's poppyseed bun. Put on mustard, onions, relish, tomato, cucumber and Vienna sport peppers. I like to have one of those and also a tamale from Veteran's on Archer and Ashland. Put the tamale on a hotdog bun with all the same toppings. I grew up eating both of these from the carts in Bridgeport. Mike's on Aberdeen and then later MaryAnn on Lyman street. Maryann is still out in the summer. Now I am hungry and need to go downstairs and make some of these in my steamer pot. Good thing I always keep Vienna hotdogs, Veterans tamales, and condiments on hand. I make these at home at least once a week.

QUOTE(mmmmmbeeer @ Jan 17, 2006 -> 08:34 AM) my biggest objection would be that "criminal gene". with that in mind, it's VERY different from adoption. Adoption you get to choose your child after careful research. A baby borne of rape you not only have no chance to research and choose a child, but you also know from conception on that that child's father was genetically prone to violent behavior. Well, my wife and I have adopted and I have to tell you that this isn't exactly true. We did meet the biological mother and father, but only once briefly. As far as their medical history, they filled out a form given to them by the agency. Did they tell the truth on it, who knows? There are many times we take our son to the doctor and they ask us if there is a history of certain conditions in the family. We have to say that we really don't know and tell them he was adopted. We show them all the information we got from the agency. We also have no way of knowing if the guy we met is the real biological father. The couple was not married and didn't even live together. So for all we know the real biological father may have never answered any questions about medical history. We didn't research or "choose" a child. We went through the long adoption process, specified if we would take a boy, or girl or either, specified what races we would accept, and if we would accept a child from a mother who took drugs, alcohol, etc. We submitted a life book that consisted of personal pictures so the mother they matched us to could decide if she liked us. When a baby became available that fit, we were introduced to the parents, or the mother if the father wasn't known. If they liked us, they chose us, if not they were introduced to another couple. Every agency is different too, some don't do things like ours. Plus, ours was private and would only take clients that were referred to them. We looked into foreign adoption at another agency and with that you even have less of a choice. You basically go through the process and the country you are adopting from decides which child you will get. You can't specify sex, race, etc. Plus in these cases the child was usually abandoned and nothing is known about the parents. So there really isn't that much difference in a child that is adopted and one that is conceived from rape. Besides the obvious that your wife has gone through a horrible ordeal, the only real difference is you know everything about the mother's history and can control the pre-natel care she gets. In our case, the biological mother had almost no pre-natel care. In both cases you may not even know who the father was since there is a chance that the rapist won't be caught. Its hard for me to comment on the original question of this post since it would be impossible for my wife to have a child even if she was raped. That is why we adopted in the first place. If she could have children and this happened, I would respect whatever decision she made. If she did decide to keep the child, I would have no problem accepting him/her as my own. After adopting, that is a much easier thing to see now. Since the day we adopted my son and started going to see him in the hospital (he was born premature), I have never once felt like he wasn't mine. It doesn't matter that he isn't biologically mine, he is my son and always will be. I guess the hardest thing about a child from rape would be if he someday wanted to know his biological father. With our son we decided from day one that he will know he was adopted. We have pictures of his biological parents and gave them books to fill out personal information about themselves. If someday he wants to know more about them, he will be able to. I want him to know that his parents didn't just give him up because they didn't want him. In the case of a rape, this would be much harder.

You love it rough, and nobody is rougher than a caveman. Art Kusnyer is your dream date. Be careful or he may use his club on you.

It is a shame that any s***bag loser can just be a parent. It would be great if everyone had to go through the same screening that we had to go through to adopt. We had to have background checks, interviews with social workers, full disclosure of all finances, get fingerprinted, get a water quality report from our town, prove our dogs were vaccinated, and both get physicals. If everyone had to do this before they could have a kid, there would be a lot less unwanted or abused children.

QUOTE(LowerCaseRepublican @ Jan 3, 2006 -> 08:42 PM) http://news.yahoo.com/s/eo/20060103/en_tv_eo/18055 What a bunch of fascist whiners. They can openly condemn a cartoon but yet the same organization hides systematic rape, molestation and abuse for over 40 years from all authorities & puts priests into new parishes so they can harm children all over again. f***ing hypocritical bastards. Well, since all the problems in the world have been fixed and all suffering has ended there is plenty of time to work on condemning a cartoon.

QUOTE(SoxFan1 @ Jan 3, 2006 -> 09:18 PM) So what should we do? Run and hide until it all blows over. Or maybe that is for a hurricane.

QUOTE(YASNY @ Dec 15, 2005 -> 11:38 AM) Everything I am seeing in the media, other than rotoworld, has been very positive about the moves the Sox have made. Yet, here we are in an "Evil Kenny Williams" thread. Sometimes I wonder just what it takes to satisfy some Sox fans. Sadly, some people will never be happy. There are those that get more enjoyment out of complaining.

QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Dec 15, 2005 -> 10:51 AM) My biggest Porzio memory was the Cubs fan poster who was here when I joined named Cy Porzio. Next up Jerry Don Gleaton Crappy pitcher who kind of resembled Jerry Reuss. He had the bad porn star moustache. Matt Stark

QUOTE(whitesoxmanager @ Dec 15, 2005 -> 12:15 AM) look my only two points are really: 1. the team that just won the WS should be given the same chance to make the run the next year. if the team starts off gangbusters by the allstar break then great lets keep rolling, but if the team starts off poorly and we are subject to missing the playoffs, then that is the time to consider making moves. of course it might be too late and the costs too high, but that is the way i wouldve respected this group of guys. this is not the decision that the CWS management made. so be it. 2. how does one in life really know when he is making the wrong moves? for all it appears the moves have been done in faith of improvement. KW and the whitesox have yet to face this challenge. some of us dont like trading away proven WS winners for question marks. thats all. 1. This is how the Sox operated for years and it usually burned them. Instead of going into the season with question marks and holes they are now trying to fill those possible holes proactively, while also looking to keep them filled in the future. Waiting around to see what happens is dumb, not only in baseball but in any business. If you are not proactive, eventually you will fall behind and it will be that much harder to get back on top. The guys from the 2005 team got plenty of respect. They were honored with a huge parade and all received a nice World Series share. They are professionals and they realize that guys get traded all the time. Some day most will be invited back to work in the organization again like the current Sox coaches, broadcasters, etc. I am sure they will all be honored like the 1983 team was on their 20th anniversary. 2. Nobody knows if the moves made will work, but I am sure they were done after carefully analyzing the current team and what was needed to keep getting better. I doubt that KW and his staff are just picking names out of a hat as far as who to trade and who to pick up. After doing all the right things last offseason to make this team a champion, I will give him the benefit of the doubt that he knows what he is doing. What you are proposing is similar to coming up with the bases loaded and two outs, down one run, and hoping for a walk to tie the game. You want to just stand there and hope it all goes well. KW is up there swinging away to win. He may go down swinging and lose, but at least he is going to take it upon himself to try and win. After watching so many Sox teams just wait and hope to get better, I would much rather watch this new approach of going out and getting more talent to build around what is already a pretty good core. It works for the Yankees and Braves every year. Also, loyalty to the players means nothing. If these players that were traded happened to be free agents this year and were offered more money from some other team, I would bet almost all of them would leave in a heartbeat and care very little about returning to try and repeat. I used to get attached to certain players when I was younger and would get upset when they were gone. All I want now is to see the Sox field the best team possible each year to keep winning. I can always see those old players again at Soxfest someday in the future.

Got my tickets for this at noon today: FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: Tuesday, November 29, 2005 “SOX PRIDE: THE STORY OF THE 2005 WORLD CHAMPION CHICAGO WHITE SOX” FILM PREMIERES AT EVENT BENEFITING WHITE SOX CHARITIES --TICKETS ON SALE TODAY AT NOON-- CHICAGO – The World Series Champion Chicago White Sox will host a special red-carpet event to launch the brand-new “Sox Pride: The Story of the 2005 World Series Champion Chicago White Sox” DVD at 7:00 p.m. on Monday, December 5 at the Arie Crown Theater. Tickets will be available at noon today, Tuesday, November 29, online at whitesox.com, through TicketMaster phone lines at (312) 559-1212, at Chicagoland TicketMaster outlets and at the Arie Crown Box Office. Proceeds from the event will benefit Chicago White Sox Charities. The Sox Pride DVD, created by the White Sox and Major League Baseball Productions, features season highlights, original interviews with players and coaches and unique behind-the-scenes glimpses at the club’s 2005 Championship season. Other special features include the 2005 player introductory video, the club’s television advertising spots and other surprises. The DVD hits stores on December 6 and will be available at all major Chicagoland music stores. “This was such a magical season for White Sox fans and the city of Chicago,” said White Sox vice president of marketing Brooks Boyer. “Sox Pride captures the excitement of White Sox baseball, while offering an exclusive behind-the-scenes glimpse at our players from Spring Training through the World Series victory parade. The additional features, including the famous player introduction video and the season highlight reel, make it an even more special piece of memorabilia. This is the only holiday gift for White Sox fans this season.” “With SoxFest already sold out, this event is the only chance some fans will have to be a part of the excitement before the start of the 2006 baseball season,” said Boyer. The screening will begin at 7:00 p.m. on Monday, December 5. Doors to the Arie Crown Theater will open at 5:00 p.m., and between 5:00 and 7:00 guests may use their own cameras to have their photographs taken with the World Series trophy and shop for White Sox and World Series merchandise and memorabilia. Additional copies of Sox Pride will be available for sale. Tickets for this once-in-a-lifetime event are $30 and include a free copy of the DVD, which retails for $19.95. Proceeds from the event will benefit Chicago White Sox Charities. Tickets are available online at whitesox.com, through TicketMaster phone lines at (312) 559-1212, at Chicagoland TicketMaster outlets and at the Arie Crown Box Office. Capacity is limited and all seats are reserved, so fans are encouraged to purchase tickets soon. The Arie Crown Theater is located at McCormick Place’s Lakeside Center, 2301 S. Lake Shore Drive in Chicago. Parking is available for $8. -30- © 2005 Chicago White Sox

If anyone ever types the name "Joe Cruddy" on here ever again they should be beaten and banned.