Hangar18

QUOTE(zach23 @ Jun 8, 2006 -> 10:52 AM) 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. Zach23, did you think the SOX were going to go All The Way last year, in spring training? With a guy coming off an injury himself (dye)? I'll bet you were Did you think the SOX were going all the way when Chris Snopek was the everyday replacement for Robin Ventura? I'll bet you were How about when the SOX had a continuous merry-go-round of Right Fielders, all signed to 1 year deals, cast-offs and available low-cost, when the SOX needed Power & Average and to get that, wouldve had to spend a bit because of what was available. Were you confident in the SOX back then to go all the way? I'll bet you were You know darn well what my argument was last year, your turning it into a "hangar-says-sox-are-cheap" argument. Shame on you. I said if were going to be trading guys because of salary (KW will tell you Konerko was originally the one he was trying to trade, but got a taker for Lee instead) I always said who are we replacing them with? Dont be patting yourself on the back so Fast, and in turn Patting the SOX on the back for last season. We got very lucky with what happened (taking so many chances on certain players) and having everyone pan out like they did. Kenny Williams will tell you so himself. KW acknowledged himself that he wasnt going to head into 2006 with the same "lack of offense" as he had in 2005 and knew he needed a proven run producer (Thome). Thome didnt come cheap by the way. Save the patting-of-WhiteSox-backs for this year, because they did something they havnt done in years. Went out and addressed weaknesses and werent afraid to spend to KEEP players. So dont pat yourself on the back there Zach, Dye started out the 05 season miserably, and I wondered if he was ever really going to be healed. Think of this, Zach. What if Dye werent coming off that injury plagued season, and instead was at the top of his game heading into the Free Agent class of 05? Would the SOX have pursued him to play in RF? I dont think so ................. it wouldve been someone who made sense $$$$$$$$$$$. Of course, things are different now, the SOX are acting like the big-market team they always were.

QUOTE(JimH @ Jun 8, 2006 -> 10:38 AM) Example: you deem stories about the opposition "bad" (your Tigers stance) and think it's somehow a slap in the face of White Sox fans. I don't. It's also my theory that stories about the opposition lead to more interest about baseball which translates to going to more games. Toni Ginetti is the author in question here. Her story couldve been for the Detroit Free Press. Had nothing to do with the White Sox. And thats fine................if she were sent to Detroit to do a piece on the Tigers amazing record so far this year (again, the media didnt do this for the SOX last year, another story though) Toni Ginetti was on assignment at US CELLULAR FIELD. ("hey who cares its about baseball") OK, I'll buy that maybe, what was her excuse last week, when Ginetti, again live from US Cellular Field, did a piece on the Cubs. Wasnt she supposed to be doing a piece on the SOX since she is only sent to the home parks of both teams (doesnt travel)? My problem, is that the media seems, at every chance, do a piece on the Cubs (thus furthering that particular product) and simply ignore the SOX. People on the other site used to come up with tired excuses for the Media like "well there are more cub fans" or "they only cover who is winning....Win something and the coverage will come....WATCH!!" My keeping track of this proves that the media keeps changing the rules and refuses to give the SOX the onslaught of coverage they Deserve for having actually WON Something of Significance. So if a NATIONAL writer like Phil Rogers does a piece on the Detroit Tigers, hes well qualified to do so since that is his jobtitle. Having the writers who are covering the SOX instead do a piece on the Cubs, or a whole entire RAHRAH piece on the Tigers is a bit over the top

The SOX creep just a little closer to 1st Place today, but unfortuneately this doesnt translate into any extra coverage for the 2005 WS Champs. They are nearly 100 stories behind the 5th Place team who are only 2 games out of Last Place now, but still continue to get more coverage in Chicago. Fred Mitchell today decides to do a piece on a Cub from yesteryear. Timely. I did notice online how the Tribune linked both MLB drug stories with the SOX, so on quick perusal, makes you think the SOX are intimately linked to this new scandal. Chicago Tribune: 5 cub stories 4 sox stories Chicago SunTimes: 4 cub stories 5 sox stories Standings as of June 8th, 2006 Priviledged, Media Owned, Media Favored, 4th Place in 05, 2 Games out of Last Place, Cubs 545 Underdog, Media Maligned, Media Ignored, WSChamps 05, 1/2 Games out of 1st Place, SOX 449

QUOTE(JimH @ Jun 7, 2006 -> 05:15 PM) Just for grins, I decided to look at a newspaper and count the stories like this guy hangar does. My count is drastically different, what gives hangar, are you reading a different version of the Sun Times? You say there's 8 Cub stories and 4 White Sox stories in today's (Wed. 6/7) Sun Times? Here are the titles of the articles: Sox on front page of paper and back page, i.e. first page of sports section. (doesn't count as articles) Sox Stories: 1. Page 126, "Cintron's 3 run HR stuns Tigers" 2. Page 125, "Win wipes out problems - but just for a night" column by Greg Couch 3. Page 125, "Cooper keeping faith Sox struggling pen will snap out of it" 4. Page 124, "Ozzie-Maggs a good patch up" Chris DeLuca column 5. Page 124, "Guillen mentor Leyland hasn't lost his touch" 6. Page 121, "Thome returns, says he can play first base" 7. Page 121, "Guillen hopes he's around for McCulloch" Cub stories: 1. Page 123, "Pitcher, catcher all in one" 2. Page 123, "Samardzija likens himself to Zambrano" 3. Page 122, "Wood has little staying power" 4. Page 122, "Prior's next two starts set - neither with Cubs" Even if you somehow spin it that Sox stories #4 and #5 are Tiger stories, that still leaves it 5 White Sox stories to 4 Cub stories. Not to mention, the White Sox were on the front page of the paper, and front page of the sports section, and White Sox coverage was in front of Cubs coverage. What exactly are you smoking? This inferiority/chip on the shoulder media conspiracy complex thing of yours has already gotten way beyond old ... and that's assuming you get the numbers right. When you screw up the numbers, it's borderline lunacy. JIM, You are correct. Kind of. I transposed the numbers for cub/sox, but the MAIN TOTALS are still correct. I cleared them up. However, if you wouldve looked a little harder at my numbers, you wouldve NOTICED that the numbers were transposed because as I said, the TOTALS ARE STILL CORRECT. someone sounds like their nitpicking here. Lunacy? West is that you? Daver? Say man, you call it inferiority, I call it a bias. This isnt a "conspiracy" anymore, because Ive PROVEN BEYOND a doubt that their is a Media Bias against the SOX. You dont see this apparently, because my guess is you DONT want to see it. Thats fine if you dont want to look. But certainly calling me a lunatic, when I have stats to back up my theories doesnt make true smoking crack statements QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Jun 8, 2006 -> 08:49 AM) Wow. That's a pretty big difference... So I have to ask this question, is there bias in the media bias study No. It isnt a "pretty big difference" because the TOTALS ARE STILL THE SAME. Q: IS there a bias in the Media Bias Study? Hangar18: YES, because im out to slam the Chicago Media for their obsession with everything cub.

QUOTE(hi8is @ Jun 7, 2006 -> 04:58 PM) so if the cubs are playing a team like say.... the giants, and say they had some similarities.... which we're mentioned.... those wouldnt be counted as cubs stories in chicago? of course they would.... and if they were in san fran, they would be giants stories..... cubs fans would read about the giants, thus the articles do reach out to the cubs audance. Not sure what your getting at. The way to look at it is, the Tiger stories, esp the one by Toni Ginetti, are "TIGER" stories if we can lift them out of the newspaper, and drop them in the Detroit Tribune or whatever their paper is called.

This is not good at all. NO wonder the guys been terrible all season. Cotts too. We are officially in trouble now with only 1 reliable bullpen person (2 if you want to count McCarthy). Not good at all (the other site would ban you at this point for "worrying" heh heh)

QUOTE(retro1983hat @ Jun 7, 2006 -> 02:05 PM) Technically, the Tiger stories are Sox stories since that is the big series playing right now. the Tiger stories are all about the Detroit Tigers, and how theyve been winning with pitching and more pitching. Theres no SOX angle other than they are in the same division, and Leyland once was a coach in the SOX system

The Media seems to have found its NEW darling. ND receiver/pitcher Jeff Samardzja. *sighs* Tigers get more press today in Chicago Chicago Tribune: 3 cub stories 4 sox stories Chicago SunTimes: 4 cub stories 8 sox stories Standings as of Wednesday June 7th, 2006 Priviledged, Media Owned, Media Favored, 4th place in 2005 Cubs 536 Underdog, Media Maligned, Media Ignored, WS CHamps in 05 Sox 440 350 miles away, plays in other city, plays in other state Tigers 3

Toni Ginetti, the SunTimes writer who once last week, on assignment at UsCellular Field, instead submitted a piece on the cubs, outdoes herself again on Tuesday. Instead of doing a piece on the whitesox, she decides to do a piece on the Tigers. With color pictures. Same with Chris DeLuca. He also does a piece on the Tigers. Almost the same exact story. With color pictures. Did anyone tell them to not work on the same thing? The Tribune outright decides it just doesnt really want to cover the SOX all that much either. With the Cubs playing on Monday, and the SOX off, would the stories favor the WHITESOX, who last week played while the Cubs were off and the Cubs somehow still got more stories? NOPE. Cubs dominated the SOX on tuesday. There were actually MORE STORIES on the Detroit Tigers, than on the WhiteSox on Tuesday. In fact, the TIgers have been getting a lot of press in CHicago the last few weeks for their hotstart, something the SOX couldnt get here at the same time last year. Chicago Tribune: 3 cub stories 1 sox stories 1 tiger story Chicago SunTimes: 4 cub stories 0 sox stories 2 tiger stories Standings as of Tuesday June 6th, 2006 Priviledged, Media Owned, Media Favored, 4th place in 2005 Cubs 529 Underdog, Media Maligned, Media Ignored, WS CHamps in 05 SOX 428 Upstart, 350 miles away from Chicago, reside in other city Tigers 3

QUOTE(sayitaintso @ Jun 4, 2006 -> 10:20 AM) Now i will have to listen to my Cardinal-fan-friend complain about pujols being hurt. What made me mad, was someone on the Flubs saying "hey, nobody felt sorry for us when Derrek Lee went down". Excuse me, the media has been weeping and wailing for you guys for weeks ............

6/5/06 Not a good weekend for the SOX both on the field and in print. The SOX were NOT able to make any significant leeway in the 94 story lead the 4th Place in 2005 Cubs (5th place currently) hold over the World Series Champion Chicago White Sox. The Trib does yet another feel-good story on the surprising 1st Place Detroit Tigers (Tigers have been getting a lot of press in Chicago the last few weeks for being in 1st place-something the SOX werent able to do last year at this time, in their own home city, when they were in 1st Place). The SOX actually lose yet a little more ground to the 5th place team in Chicago. Chicago radio sports talk shows have dominated the airwaves with Cubtalk, something SOX fans have noticably been visibly upset about in complaints to the radio stations....to no avail. The theme in radio seems to be, Losing is a bigger story than Winning. How do we know that? Last Saturday on the flagship station of the SOX, the morning hosts Baum & Olken decided to dedicate the entire show to what was wrong with the "other" team. On and on they went for hours until finally, a caller got thru and said "Who Cares" about the other team, lets talk more about the 2nd place White Sox, theres no reason to talk about the (cubs) right now". Well, the hosts were angered, and Baum Said OK, You want to talk about the SOX, Go Ahead Talk about them. The caller said that was THEIR JOB to bring up the SOX and talk about them. The hosts lambasted the Caller again and said NO, YOU WANT TO TALK SOX, GO AHEAD AND TALK ABOUT THE SOX, and verbally chastised the caller, saying that "Winning is Boring" and thats why they werent talking about the South Siders and nobody wants to talk about winning, theres more to "talk about when your Losing". I was shocked at the Laziness and Indifference of these hosts (though im not surprised, been happening for years and years). I was furious and dialed up WSCR, I got thru and guess what happened? Producer asked my name and where I was, I told him, and he asked what I wanted to talk about. I said I wanted to Talk ABOUT THE SOX. He said SORRY, Call later, they were talking cub right now. I told him they were talking Cub for the last few hours, give it a rest and lets talk about the SOX. He said sorry and hung up on me. I would expect that from WGN, the flagship of that other team, but not from the SOX Flagship station. That other team did alot of Losing in May, and got a ton of attention for it, so now that the tables are turned, and its the SOX that are bumbling and stumbling the last week and a half, will SoxTalk be dominating the airwaves and the newspapers? Um no. Seems the rules have changed mid-stream now in sports radio once again, and now that the other team is "winning", its now the Big story in Chicago. Nice. Chicago Tribune: 3 cub stories 3 sox stories Chicago SunTimes: 5 cub stories 4 sox stories Standings as of Monday June 5th, 2006 Priviledged, Media Owned, Media Favored, 4th Place in 2005 Cubs 522 Underdog, Media Maligned, Media Ignored, WS Champs in 05 SOX 427 Anyone Know how to change the Headline to the Correct Date. IM backward today heh heh

QUOTE(beautox @ Jun 2, 2006 -> 10:44 AM) Don't Kid yourself, i too think the bullpen will be fine but Politte doesn't have "respectable numbers". Im very worried about the bullpen myself. Sure Thornton looked "good" the last 2 games he was out there, but I dont think everyone has settled into their "roles" and Ozz has been stuck "guessing" who is going to show up out of the BP. Jenks has settled down nicely, but you know you cant rely on just ONE guy in your BP. Our starting pitching was a little lacking lately and usually the Offense/Defense will come up and carry us, but that didnt happen.

What did they think was going to happen? Everyone would say "your right, we stink, were not going inside". Ironically, all 3 of these people went inside.

QUOTE(henry wiggins @ Jun 2, 2006 -> 01:39 PM) Thank you. I actually did not start posting just to disagree or stir things up. I grew up in Burnside/Chatham, in Roseland, and in Beverly, where I now live. When I was in my 20's and 30's I lived for 7 years in various north side neighborhoods. I've been a Sox fan since 1967 and I followed Hangar18 here when he got tossed from WSI, because I don't think that his "media watch" is a Cubs obsession, I think it's a media watch. I'm female, 40-never-mind, and spend my work life among futures traders, but in my real life I'm pretty sane. Nice board here. Thanks for the Support by the way, anyone going to the game tonite, Im stopping by Jimbos for a quick brewsky around 6:30. I'll be in my AJ jersey

QUOTE(Steff @ Jun 2, 2006 -> 10:54 AM) Henry.. I read the posts on their board. Very different from what you portray here. You got the s*** ripped out of you. It wasn't because of the trib they think this about the neighborhood. It's because it was true. The area was "dangerous" a long time ago. By the time the Trib bought the other team, the area had already changed over again. They didnt see any reason to remark on that, and continued stereotyping the area as Poor, uneducated and low class. I didnt get the stuff ripped out of me. I posted an article there about the Trixie throwing a baseball at a player, and wondered if theyd heard about it. they didnt. A couple of them thought the reason we get mad at the other team is because were poor, uneducated and the area is full of gangs etc. I politely disagreed with him. I also posted a link showing how in recent times, the near southside, bronzeville, bridgport, pilsen (all areas by the ballpark) were some of the hottest properties in Chicago, dispelling the notion that nobody wants to be over there. Everybody kind of left it at that. How would that Marlin fan know, hes not from here, he only goes by what he hears (wgn/trib)

QUOTE(henry wiggins @ Jun 2, 2006 -> 12:13 PM) With all due respect, the words of undercover cops who worked there, reported 2nd or 3rd or 4th hand, are not credible evidence. http://www.geocities.com/inquisitive79/fal....html#authority Cops in Chicago tend to not be very fond of certain neighborhoods, and cops may very well have personal views that color (no pun intended) what they relate. Got any pics of bullet holes in UD seats? Got any news reports mentioning such bullet holes? Another feature of the race/class aspect of all this is that we city residents tend to get really annoyed when the stereotypes, generalizations, and canards are put about by people who don't live in the city and have not spent any real time in the areas that they say are so horrible. I'm a lifelong resident of the south side, and I can't begin to explain the context and background for some of this to people who grew up in or live now in suburbs or outside of the Chicago area. Imagine sitting in a bar in DelMar CA, over 2,000 miles from Chicago, talking baseball with people. One guy tells me he hasnt been to chicago since the 50's, another guy since the 70's. One guy mentions his family went to Chicago on business and decided to go to a cub game. Are they cub fans I asked. NO he said, they went because they heard it was the best ballpark in baseball. Other guy responds that hes heard that area was "dangerous" and was it really like that still, never hears anything good about the area/the park. So yeah, when guys 2,000 miles away already have the perception that one area is dangerous and the other is great times and heaven, you can imagine why I would be annoyed. Yeah, I keep hearing about the bullet holes, but have never seen pictures of it. Tribune never got around to that part. And my buddy worked that area also (cpd), he never heard of stabbings and beatings inside the Cell, so im not sure whats true or not and when they hear Im from Chicago and a SOX fan

QUOTE(Randar68 @ Jun 2, 2006 -> 10:39 AM) Just noticed this from Baseball America's regional scouting report for the 2006 draft where they list Flores the #1 prospect in New Mexico: New Mexico Junior College, ranked No. 1 for five national juco polls in a row, offered the state's two best arms in Brian Flores, a quick-armed lefthander under control to the White Sox, and righthander Matt Speake. Scouts were reticent to talk about Flores, who was engaged in negotiations with the World Series champions and expecting a six-figure signing bonus. All three of his pitches grade out as average, with a fastball that hits 90 mph regularly, a good curveball and solid changeup. He threw one five-inning perfect game this season, needing just 48 pitches as NMJC won 11-0 for his school-record sixth shutout. As an update on Christian Marrero, he has signed with Clemson and the Sox will not sign him. Might be converted to pitcher at Clemson. Thanks for the INFO

The World Champion White Sox who played yesterday while the Cubs were off, still manage to only get 6 stories while the other team got 7 stories. Not bad considering they didnt even play. The big story in the Trib is by Paul Sullivan (hes the guy who got a Verbal Beatdown by Cub President Andy McPhail & GM Jim Hendry for not being "too negative") complete with cute graphic showing when their players will be back. Despite Winning the World Series in 2005, the White Sox find themselves INEXPLICABLY lagging far behind in media coverage to a team that hasnt won anything since Ice was considered a luxury Chicago Tribune: 4 cub stories 2 sox stories Chicago SunTimes: 3 cub stories 4 sox stories Story standings as of Friday June 2nd, 2006 Priviledged, Media Owned, Media Favored, 4th place in 2005 Cubs 514 Underdog, Media Maligned, Media Ignored, WS Champs in 05 SOX 420

QUOTE(henry wiggins @ Jun 2, 2006 -> 09:37 AM) As a lifelong south sider, I know that Hangar isn't exaggerating about the media coverage of the two teams. It's about more than the baseball teams -- it's about race and class and the perceptions of both in Chicago. It ain't pretty. I went on a Marlins website, and one marlin fan asked the other why SOX fans were so jealous of Cub fans (stereotype propogated by the Tribune-now widely believed myth). Another Marlin fan said it was because SOX fans were "poor" and the area around Comiskey is "rundown" and "desolate" and nobody wants to hang around the park because its "dangerous". Wow, bridgeport is home of gangs and crack houses apparently. Of course the Trib wont hurry anytime soon to quash that stereotype. I told him in no uncertain terms that Bridgeport, TheNearSouthside and Pilsen have been the HOTTEST realestate markets in Chicago Metro for years .........that million dollar homes are just in the shadows of the park, and that the area is actually one of the "safer" ones (compared to wrigleyville). SoxFan1 will say Who Cares what the Trib says, but this is what happens when people start believing Stereotypes. These are all perceptions put out by your Chicago Tribune, in order to make their product look better. Its a clear conflict of interest. Soxfan1 willsay "who cares, its their paper why should they cover the SOX?" in 1981, when the Tribune shocked critics by announcing they were buying the Cubs, Critics said wont that cause a conflict of interest (reporting the news/sox) they said NO, we promise, we will provide unbiased coverage to both teams like we've always done. We see now that was a bunch of BS.

QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Jun 2, 2006 -> 08:40 AM) OK, so I am still curious to see your research for my first question (mainly from the Trib, but any other sources you have), and now I have another question. What is the rest of the Chicago's role in the alleged media bias, and what would be their motivation? Wouldn't it stand to reason if there were so many Sox fans, and the Tribco was catering exclusively to them, that the rest of the media outlets would recognize the profit potential to be exploited from the underserved White Sox fans and jump on their bandwagon? What reason would the Chicago Sun Times for example have to keep a pro-Cubs bias? Theres a guy who posts over at the enemy site WSI, hes a member of the media and lives in Idaho currently, but has been a SOX fan since the 1950's and has also documented the folly that was pay-tv. I'll see if someone cant get him to comment on this for you (or I will have him reach you, the research is stunning) Your questions are Excellent and Poignant. These are questions Ive asked over the years myself. The rest of Chicagos role? the Chicago Tribune is a huge mega-corporation news syndicate, it owns WGN radio and TV, as well as other newspapers throughout the US. They bought the cubs in part, to aid in marketing for their WGN radio/tv division. Back in the day, Wgn was (still is) considered a SuperStation, made available to cable outlets all over the US. That means you could be shoveling snow in Aniak Alaska, and come inside and catch WGN's team on tv. Knowing they had a product (cubs) to help anchor their programming, they (remember, cubs stunk badly at that point) and they decided to market the heck out of the park (cant market winning after all right?) They made sure cubs were marketed big time, in their newspapers, tv,radio and in other newspapers it owns. They had to make sure that you the viewer on cable, wanted to watch cub games instead of the other product available 8miles south, the SOX. The tribune at some point of giving extra and preferred treatment to its cub team, decided that, since it controls the information being disseminated, why not publicize everything BAD about comiskey park and the sox. White sox fans cant help the tribune in response to the cubs. The Cubs are an extension of the Tribune Entertainment Corporation. The Better the Cubs are perceived, the more $$$$ marketing they make. The SunTimes has no excuse. They are the weak-sister stepchild in all of this. They cant think for themselves and simply follow the Lead of the whatever the Tribune does. (Red Eye/Red Streak for example) SunTimes figures, hey theyre catering to Cub fans only, must mean there are only cub fans in this town. The perception that Chicago is a cubs town is now so far stretched on the planet, everyone thinks the SOX play in Detroit (ok thats pushing it) How in the world can a team that is that BAD, get more attention than a team thats consistently good? MARKETING. They have the ability to control what gets reported, so every negative story that can be pushed about the SOX, gets done. Everything positive that can be pushed about the Cubs, gets done so 5 times as much. And on the odd chance something negative happens at WrigleyField or with Cub fans? SWEEP IT UNDER THE RUG (murder in front of field/Underaged Drunk Trixie whipping baseball at JJones/Drunk Cub fans fighting with police on Lplatform) People in the far reaches of the planet wont hear about that stuff. What they will hear are the Daily routines of William Ligue, every court date he has, what recent Speeding Tickets he received. IS that really news? Sure, SoxFan1 will say "Who cares man, let them talk all they want" or " That doesnt affect the SOX" or "your just crazy" or "you must love the cubs so much to talk about this' or "your beating a dead horse man, things will never change" well it does. For years, the media did stories on how this town isnt big enough for the SOX, and that Cub fans quadruple them. People started believing that. I'll bet people here believe that too. But the SOX winning the World Series did something. Suddenly, the SOX sold out all of their season ticket base for the first time in Franchise History! Were talking about a team that has been around for 105 years. They will get 3,000,000 fans (hopefully) for the first time in history, and will mark the 1st time EVER in Chicago History that BOTH teams draw 3 Million Fans. That certainly flies in the face of "there are no SOX Fans" "cub fans outnumber sox fans" "they'll never draw 3million, too many cub fans". Where are these fans coming from? They arent cub fans thats for sure. 2 million showed up for the WS Parade! The SOX themselves were extremely surprised (kennywilliams "we didnt know there were this many of you) (rickmorrissey jackass tribune/cub apologist wrote afterwards that of the 2million, most were cub fans out to see a parade, they werent all sox fans) And that was glossed over in favor of a team that sold 600,000 in one day. Somehow that is a bigger story than the other? Not really, the Chicago Media simply chose what they were going to tell people. Im getting away from your question, but the SunTimes continueing the ProCub bias is only because the Tribune keeps doing it. The Trib is the SunTimes direct competitor. Hey if theyre serving BaconCheeseburgers you better get BaconCheeseburgers on the menu too. The SunTimes are Idiots. So are morons like Jay Idiotti, Mike "yellow" Kiley, and Carol "lets give Kerry a nickname" Sleazak.

Man, that was about as discouraging a loss as ever .......... This bullpen needs to be addressed

QUOTE(Steff @ Jun 1, 2006 -> 04:50 PM) And look at that.. it's selling WITHOUT the Sox being in the paper as much as the Cubs... Kind of took a poop on your own theory right there Henry.. Kind of. Except what Im saying is that they wont mention anything then. they'll just ignore this and do a feature on why AJ is the biggest "jerk" in baseball. The SOX selling out all of their season ticket base for the 1st time in their history, was quickly pushed by the wayside of the Trib talking about how thier team sold 600,000 tickets in one day. I still like ya Steff

QUOTE(Steff @ Jun 1, 2006 -> 04:14 PM) ^ I hate to admit it.. but when I went into Jewel the other day I saw no bags with Sox on them and I complained.. Ive got a better story, and I'll bet NOBODY here ever knew this has happened. I went to the Target near my house (on Roosevelt downtown). There was a giant kiosk of Cubjunk, tshirts, shorts etc, with 2 separate hanger kiosks with more cubcrap. Next to it, hidden behind it, was 1 hanger kiosk, and only about 7 Sox shirts. There was nowhere the amount/selection of SOX shirts, so I asked the MGR, hey why arent there more SOX shirts and displays, we did win the World Series after all. The Mgr LAUGHED and said I was like the 10th person looking for SOX stuff. He said they cant KEEP ENOUGH sox stuff on the shelves and said the whole kiosk was filled a couple times and soldout already so they moved the kiosk away. He said SOX stuff flying out the doors was unheard of and its selling great. I asked how did that compare to Cub junk. Said it didnt compare, even in 03, at another store, the stuff sold, but not like how SOX stuff is flying. He said he triples the amount of stuff available to them when they order. You would think that one of the lazy reporters here in this town of 5million people, 2 major newspaper dailies, might mention this very positive piece of news. It is great news ..........

QUOTE(Steff @ Jun 1, 2006 -> 04:19 PM) Oh bulls***. If the media had that much control over attendance there would be NO ONE at Comiskey. And last time I checked... I write the check for my season tickets without help from a media outlet. Sox fans who aren't obsessed with the Cubs go for the product not the atmosphere. That's that. And the atmosphere around Wrigley is more lively - note I did NOT say better. 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". Steff, you have some good points. some. the Media used to have control over attendance at Sox park. We won the Series. They cant control that anymore. (both teams may have 3 million, first time in history) You write a check for SOX tickets. Great. You arent who Im talking about (you know better) Attendance has been CRAP in Pittsburgh for a while now, because they are NOT A GOOD TEAM, and bottom of their division. You dont think if the media helped the Pirates and told everyone how that is the greatest park in baseball, everyone should go no matter what, that that wouldnt help? YES, you are right, (which is the point im making) those "stupid asses" as you call them DO fill the park up no matter what, theyre there for the Cold Beer and Chicks. The old ladies from Iowa are there because the tourbuses dont have directions South on 94. Game of the week, in which that team was on, the announcers commented on how they sold the most tickets in one game, and everyone in the city is clamoring for those tickets, people love them thats why its always "full". They didnt mention that the team just south also is having a Ticket Problem, everyone in the city is clamoring for those tickets, people love them, and thats why The Cell has been always "full" this season. People fill one park because the team are Champions. People fill another park because they were told the stadium is awesome.

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. the peanut thing is a good point. The availability of bags with both logos was a marketing thing. The makers of those peanuts, figured, how can we sell MORE of the peanuts over our competitors? A bag of nuts is a bag of nuts right? They (shrewdly) decided to sell peanuts with logos of BOTH teams. More bags with the little league logo northside team distributed up north, more of the WS Champs logo distributed down south. Of course, it is funny to go to a store and see only the northside peanuts left, and all the SOX ones gone! that is just a company capitalizing on fan allegiance. As for Old Style, they have no excuse. They were always known as a midwest beer, and way back in the day, they were able to get a distribution deal to sell in The Urinal. It was a coup for them, but when Budweiser also became the "official" beer, OldStyle Foolishly (depending how you look at it) decided they were going to hitch thier Wagon to the Cubs Cart. They werent happy that Bud was the official beer, so OldStyle they decided they were the beer of the fans, and aggressively put the team LOGO on their cans and packaging (knowing that those fans are also imbeciles and will buy Anything with the logo on it). What you saw was more of a Beer War than anything but with that team winning the 98 "wild card championship", OldStyle stepped their campaign to defcon5 status. The fact that they dont care that some SOX fans may actually like their beer too is fact enough to how they market their product. They "believed" there were "more" of their fans to market to, so go for it. (anyone remember in 04, they had those giant cardboard IVY walls with "This is the year" on it, and on the packaging? HAHAHAHAHAHAHAA) that team crashed and burned and the brewery looked like FOOLS (mastercard/ATA also) basing whole marketing campaigns on the fortunes of one team. So OldStyle jumped on the cubwagon first because of their distribution in the Urinal, and 2nd because they thought that team was about to start a dynasty.