Steff

QUOTE(diegotony06 @ Jul 2, 2007 -> 11:52 AM) Wow. I won't even comment on this post. Or this one. Oh darn. I was so looking forward to another of your 4 letter word filled posts.

QUOTE(WCSox @ Jul 2, 2007 -> 11:43 AM) Would you also believe that I have a bridge in Brooklyn for sale? Some ocean front property in Arizona..?

QUOTE(The Critic @ Jul 2, 2007 -> 11:20 AM) I wasn't trying to imply that you said that, Steff. I was just referring to all the talk of bandwagon fans lately. I don't always see a difference between being a "discerning fan" who doesn't go to games when the team doesn't perform, and being a "bandwagon fan" who only goes when they do. People can make the argument either way - someone who goes to Sox games no matter what can call themselves "die-hard fans", yet that same person may mock Cubs fans who go to games no matter how bad the team is. Oh, I know. I just wanted to make it clear for J-MAN since from his post it seemed he didn't see it the previous times I stated it. LOL.. I guess I can be mocked since I continue to pay

QUOTE(iamshack @ Jul 2, 2007 -> 11:08 AM) You sure as hell do imply that you are more knowledgable and that your opinion somehow matters more, Steff. And you know what, I absolutely believe that you do know more than most and I value your opinion more than most. I guess I just wish that you would not preface it so often in the fact that you have been a member of the "12k crowd" and just let your opinions rest on the fact that you are an intelligent, loyal, and dilligent fan of the team. Because while you certainly do understand this team and organization, there are plenty of people in that 12k crowd that don't know jack sh*t despite years and years of going to the Park. If I do that I apologize as it is not my intention. And AGAIN, I was using the 12K crowd to make a point about the Sox fan base being a "do something and I will reward you with my money" crowd, a point Critic made above nicely, not to make a point that they know any more than anyone else. Trust me... we've had some real morons around us over the past 30+ years. Unfortunately where our tickets have been over the years we have our share of the high income, baseball illerate, cell phone talking, camera waving jerks. And I would put at least 20 other posters here ahead of me in terms of the level of detail they know about this team.

QUOTE(The Critic @ Jul 2, 2007 -> 10:41 AM) Sox fans always pride themselves on being knowledgable and demanding performance, otherwise "we vote with our wallets". It's one of the main differences I hear Sox fans claim when discussing Cubs fans vs. Sox fans. Based on this theory, if demanding and knowledgable Sox fans rewarded the Sox' success with increased spending or new season ticket purchases, it stands to reason that these same fans would reduce or drop those season ticket plans following a bad season & trades of guys like Buerhle, Dye and Iguchi. I don't know if that qualifies as "bandwagoning", but I can see where a fan of another team could see it that way. I do believe that we'll see a significant drop-off in season ticket numbers. I doubt it would drop to 12 or 13, but 15 or 16K sounds likely to me if the Sox go the route of trading their impending free agents for prospects that many fans wouldn't be familiar with. THANK YOU!!!!! And for the record I didn't, and wouldn't, call that "bandwagoning"

QUOTE(J-MAN @ Jul 2, 2007 -> 10:21 AM) Great post! Like you I have been a Sox fan longer than I can remember and finally bought season tickets last year. I don't consider myself a band wagon jumper - has always been a Sox fan who went to games when he could - the world series team pushed me over the edge and we were fortunate enough to get a friend to take half the games. Awesome! That's TWO of you. How about the other 15 thousand.... :brickwall

QUOTE(The Ginger Kid @ Jul 1, 2007 -> 06:25 PM) why don't you f'n enlighten me then - what deal was on the table for JD that Kenny said no to? You didn't f'n ask me, but IMO there was no f'n deal for f'n JD on any f'n table.

QUOTE(kapkomet @ Jul 2, 2007 -> 09:29 AM) I ended up getting a Envy - which I think will do everything I need it to. I accessed soxtalk on it this weekend and it came up pretty fast and just like it does on my blackberry service, so I can't complain. I don't even know what that it, but in any event good luck and have fun with it. # still the same, right?

QUOTE(kapkomet @ Jul 2, 2007 -> 09:27 AM) That looks pretty good, Queen! Question for you, though (I hope you see this soon...) - when you click the button to take a picture, how long does it take to reset until you can take another picture? Is it pretty quick? Also, when you go to take the picture, how long does the camera take to take the picture? Steff, is this more in line with what you have for a camera? I might have misunderstood what you were saying all the way up in the thread here. This seems like it's a decent camera? Mine has the option to take one right after the other just like a non-digital camera, and it also has the "slow" option where it will auto correct focus, red eye, etc before taking the picture. If I use the "slow" option it takes a couple seconds, and yes we've missed a lot of good smiles using that mode.

QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Jul 2, 2007 -> 08:35 AM) Ack, those were two different things... 3 way bulbs And smaller sized bulbs for ceiling fans Sorry! Then yes, and yes to both of your questions. QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Jul 2, 2007 -> 08:35 AM) Neither our Wal-Mart or Meijer has either. I'll have to try the home stores then... Target or Menards. That's where I buy them. Menards sells ceiling fan lights in bulk. 12 pack I think is the biggest. QUOTE(kapkomet @ Jul 2, 2007 -> 08:34 AM) I don't think he meant three way bulbs for ceiling fans... Then he should have been more clear.

QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Jul 2, 2007 -> 08:27 AM) A question for the Soxtalk enviornmental wing... Do they make the energy effecient lightbulbs in 3 way form (for the 50-100-150 lamps), and do they make them in a smaller form for things like ceiling fans? Menards has a huge light bulb variety. I've bought 3 ways there but only for table lamps. I didn't even know ceiling fans were made with 3 way options.

http://www.cnn.com/2007/HEALTH/06/2...eck/index.html# (CNN) -- Michael Moore's "Sicko," which opened nationwide Friday, is filled with horror stories of people who are deprived of medical service because they can't afford it or haven't been able to navigate the murky waters of managed care in the United States. art.sicko.family.jpg A couple featured in Michael Moore's "Sicko" leave a London hospital with their newborn. It compares American health care with the universal coverage systems in Canada, France, the United Kingdom and Cuba. Moore covers a lot of ground. Our team investigated some of the claims put forth in his film. We found that his numbers were mostly right, but his arguments could use a little more context. As we dug deep to uncover the numbers, we found surprisingly few inaccuracies in the film. In fact, most pundits or health-care experts we spoke to spent more time on errors of omission rather than disputing the actual claims in the film. Whether it's dollars spent, group coverage or Medicaid income cutoffs, health care goes hand in hand with numbers. Moore opens his film by giving these statistics, "Fifty million uninsured Americans ... 18,000 people die because they are uninsured." For the most part, that's true. The latest numbers from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention say 43.6 million, or about 15 percent of Americans, were uninsured in 2006. For the past five years, the overall count has fluctuated between 41 million and 44 million people. According to the Institute of Medicine, 18,000 people do die each year mainly because they are less likely to receive screening and preventive care for chronic diseases. Moore says that the U.S. spends more of its gross domestic product on health care than any other country. Again, that's true. The United States spends more than 15 percent of its GDP on health care -- no other nation even comes close to that number. France spends about 11 percent, and Canadians spend 10 percent. Like Moore, we also found that more money does not equal better care. Both the French and Canadian systems rank in the Top 10 of the world's best health-care systems, according to the World Health Organization. The United States comes in at No. 37. The rankings are based on general health of the population, access, patient satisfaction and how the care's paid for. So, if Americans are paying so much and they're not getting as good or as much care, where is all the money going? "Overhead for most private health insurance plans range between 10 percent to 30 percent," says Deloitte health-care analyst Paul Keckley. Overhead includes profit and administrative costs. "Compare that to Medicare, which only has an overhead rate of 1 percent. Medicare is an extremely efficient health-care delivery system," says Mark Meaney, a health-care ethicist for the National Institute for Patient Rights. Moore spends about half his film detailing the wonders and the benefits of the government-funded universal health-care systems in Canada, France, Cuba and the United Kingdom. He shows calm, content people in waiting rooms and people getting care in hospitals hassle free. People laugh and smile as he asks about billing departments and cost of stay. Not surprisingly, it's not that simple. In most other countries, there are quotas and planned waiting times. Everyone does have access to basic levels of care. That care plan is formulated by teams of government physicians and officials who determine what's to be included in the universal basic coverage and how a specific condition is treated. If you want treatment outside of that standard plan, then you have to pay for it yourself. "In most developed health systems in the world, 15 percent to 20 percent of the population buys medical services outside of the system of care run by the government. They do it through supplemental insurance, or they buy services out of pocket," Keckley says. The people who pay more tend to be in the upper income or have special, more complicated conditions. Moore focuses on the private insurance companies and makes no mention of the U.S. government-funded health-care systems such as Medicare, Medicaid, the State Children's Health Insurance Program and the Veterans Affairs health-care systems. About 50 percent of all health-care dollars spent in the United States flows through these government systems. "Sicko" also ignores a handful of good things about the American system. Believe it or not, the United States does rank highest in the patient satisfaction category. Americans do have shorter wait times than everyone but Germans when it comes to nonemergency elective surgery such as hip replacements, cataract removal or knee repair. advertisement That's no surprise given the number of U.S. specialists. In U.S. medical schools, students training to become primary-care physicians have dwindled to 10 percent. The overwhelming majority choose far more profitable specialties in the medical field. In other countries, more than one out of three aspiring doctors chooses primary care in part because there's less of an income gap with specialists. In those nations, becoming a specialist means making 30 percent more than a primary-care physician. In the United States, the gap is around 300 percent, according to Keckley. As Americans continue to spend $2 trillion a year on health care, everyone agrees on one point: Things need to change, and it will take more than a movie to figure out how to get there

QUOTE(knightni @ Jul 2, 2007 -> 01:40 AM) I went to a Fred Meyer Jewelers in my mall, they weren't real expensive. A lot of today's watches will only be opened by jewelers. Walmart, drug stores, etc. - won't touch them. ^^ That's your best bet. Whatever you do, DO NOT go to one of those little watch stands in the middle of the mall. Those people have no idea what they are doing.

QUOTE(max power @ Jul 1, 2007 -> 08:35 PM) Jeez, that's a bit harsh. Not everyone has enough money to even make that a decision. And not just cash strapped college kids are Sox fans. There are plenty of folks with plenty of disposable income who choose not to spend money unless the Sox are winning. That's my point. QUOTE(bighurt574 @ Jul 1, 2007 -> 10:26 PM) The new 15-18k of season ticket holders, did they come out of nowhere? I would imagine most had been buying tickets to some number of games a year and used the World Series run as a reason to take the plunge and buy season tickets. Does that make them bandwagon fans? No, and I never said it did. It makes them "what have you done for me lately" fans. The ones that follow the team, but don't shell out the cash until there's a chance of an appearance in the post season. QUOTE(iamshack @ Jul 1, 2007 -> 10:06 PM) What would you expect after winning a World Series title? The season ticket base to decrease? Believe me, we all appreciate those fans who stuck it out while the organization was struggling through the mid-to-late 80's and early nineties, and certainly again in the late nineties and 2002-2004. However, you often imply that because you and some other loyal fans have been buying season tickets for years, that you somehow know far more than the rest of the fanbase or are somehow more entitled to your opinion or are somehow more correct in your opinions. I disagree. You are certainly a loyal fan for laying out the cash for the season tickets over the years. But plenty of others have been laying out as much cash as they feasibly could for the team, including myself. There are a hell of a lot more knowledgable and dedicated Sox fans than your "12k crowd." I never said such a thing, and I don't know why you keep attempting to make my words out to be something more than they are. I said they are "what have you done for me lately" fans. That does not equal bandwagon jumpers in any way, shape, or form. As for me thinking my opinion or knowledge is greater because I spend money... that's you just making s*** up because I would never say such a think because it's NOT TRUE, especially on the knowledge part. Yes, I am aware many others have been dishing out money to see the Sox... and I am also aware there are many more knowledgable Sox fans out there. I never said there weren't so if you could stop implying that I did, I would appreciate that. QUOTE(max power @ Jul 1, 2007 -> 08:37 PM) Think about the younger people, too. Some of the sox biggest fans are in their teens. They don't have money. And when they do, they will replace the older fans that will move on to spending their money on something else. QUOTE(JDsDirtySox @ Jul 1, 2007 -> 08:36 PM) Whats your prediction Steff? No idea. But I trust the Sox will do what is right for the team long term.

QUOTE(iamshack @ Jul 1, 2007 -> 04:12 PM) I'm really getting tired of this 12k crowd nonsense that you continue referring to. You're not taking into consideration any of the fans who are too young to have had season tickets pre-05' or those that are reaching the point in their career where they have enough dispensable income to afford season tickets for a baseball team. I'm 30, been a fan since 1983, and yet, I've been in school for 20 years of my life. I've not yet reached a point (certainly for some fault of my own while in my twenties) that I can afford season tickets. That doesn't mean I don't attend 20 + games a year and watch nearly every one of the remaining 142 on television. I also consume as much public information as is available, and consider myself a very knowledgable fan. Certainly, there are some bandwagon jumpers in the past few years. But believe it or not, there are more than 12,000 true and knowledgable fans that have been attending games for years and years. The season ticket base had been hovering between 12K and 15K before 2006 for nearly two decades. It was a solid pattern as new ones would join, old ones would fall off. Regardless, that decade of fans WITHOUT a World Series win in 70+ years bought tickets. There is no need to spout off about being a knowledgable fan. I never said anything to imply you weren't. And don't put words in my mouth and claim I said there weren't more than 12K TRUE fans. There are many more. They just don't put their money where their mouth is. They watch from home. Then... they come out when the team wins. Some bandwagon jumpers...? Some...? When the base goes from just under 30K back down to the mid teens that'll show how many bandwagon jumpers there were. Hell.. many have already jumped off. There is no longer a wait list for tickets. QUOTE(JDsDirtySox @ Jul 1, 2007 -> 08:30 PM) Back to Mark Buehrle now... Am I the only one who still thinks a deal to keep him with the Sox is gonna get done? Naa.. there's a lot of you. Hang in there.

QUOTE(Tony82087 @ Jul 1, 2007 -> 04:03 PM) It's really hard to judge because of the time we all spend focusing on the Sox, but what "fandom" isn't a What have you done for me lately crowd? I think thats pretty common, but maybe Sox fans are more extreme? I'm not. And most season ticket holders, the 12K crowd, not the "Oooo... I got Sox season tickets, look at the pretty WS logo..." are also not that way. I would agree that extreme is an excellent word to describe it.

QUOTE(santo=dorf @ Jul 1, 2007 -> 03:58 PM) What's the difference in Jermaine's trade value if he's on the DL or if he's being held out of the lineup because he's hurting? Zero.

QUOTE(fathom @ Jul 1, 2007 -> 03:37 PM) The organization was peeved at Dye when he made mention of the fact that he'd like to play for Ron Washington. Then, they got really upset again when they felt he wasn't making it seem like he'd be upset if he was traded. They're trying their best to trade him right now, I can guarantee you that. I'm just grateful that we didn't extend his deal. Jermaine Dye had two of the most memorable seasons in Sox history his first two years here, and I'll give him the benefit of the doubt and just forget about this year once he's traded. I do not think you are correct on that. Not at all. Not even a little bit. Time will tell. Though that wasn't even the point of my post. Sox fans are a "what have you done for me lately" crowd. If Mark was pitching like he did the 2nd half last year everyone would be screaming not to give him any more money.

QUOTE(MurcieOne @ Jul 1, 2007 -> 12:57 PM) I understand that Dye isn't playing well right now.... but you have to see where Dye is coming from on this right? WS MVP 2-3 in MVP Balloting last year signed a pretty s***ty deal 3 years ago, played hard.... GM says no negotiations during the season.... breaks that rule for someone else. You have a family, don't want to move them etc.... Jermaine is just frustrated, because whatever bargaining power he accumulated last season with his great season is gone because of injuries and his poor play. No one cares about the facts. If Mark was pitching s***ty right now the majority would be screaming about what a s***ty player he is and to trade him. JD couldn't get a bad word said about him for the past 2 years - same as Kenny.

QUOTE(quickman @ Jul 1, 2007 -> 11:17 AM) Well when did we do that in the past with free agents. Thats not how we every built teams. Nothign has changed except your expectations. The players want money first, that brings their security blanket. next there wives get involved because they don't want to move and they want to live in there own house. Quite frankly if Buehrle wasn't married or his wife pregnant right now it wouldn't mean a damn thing. So this enters another dimension. Buehrle is askign for the clause, thats the right thing to do for his family. The sox countered with a limited clause, and they have very good and sound reasons for that. If they can't agree then its over. Good negotiation, good asks and good money. KW then should be judged on what he gets back. Sorry even Roger clemons bounced from team to team, same with maddox. Take emotion out of it. I think this and your previous post should be stuck at the top and be required reading before any further posting on this topic can be made.

QUOTE(quickman @ Jul 1, 2007 -> 11:06 AM) Fathom why so emotional? With the exception of this year the sox have been in contention for many years, they are usually one player short and its not necessarily the prime players. last year we won 90 games and we would have won the division if Buerhle was himself and andersen was slightly decent. We easily could have won 6 more games if not for those two underperformers alone. Once you get emotional about players every perspective gets lost except the emotion. Buerhle was going to get 14 million a year and a typical Buerhle season is about 14 or 15 wins. Thats a million dollars a win. I think that is pretty fair and who knows what the market will be later. Buehrle wants added security and the sox want a way out of the contract (via Trade) if they deem so at a particular time. I think thats fair as well. No team should be handcuffed. In fact I would argue the sox were handcuffed on contraras this year until he said he would waive his no trade to the mets. I am actually not siding with anyone but it seems that this contract with a limtied no trade clause is somewhere in the middle of what both wanted. Excellent post TQ.

QUOTE(Tony82087 @ Jul 1, 2007 -> 10:16 AM) Thanks for the advice.... *Can't find those damn rolleyes...* I did say for most. You are excused.

QUOTE(Tony82087 @ Jul 1, 2007 -> 09:43 AM) It's best just to ignore it. Or don't. It's not that difficult, for most, to maintain a level of respect and maturity.

QUOTE(Scwible @ Jul 1, 2007 -> 08:46 AM) What a bunch of crap. I'll give Jose a no trade but not Mark because he can't deal with those kind of contracts, WTF is that? Another day of throwing s*** on the wall and repeating what happens to stick...

QUOTE(fathom @ Jun 30, 2007 -> 01:52 PM) Yes, but there's heavy rumors that many of the "sources" during the last week were members of Buehrle's family. Definitely not directly, but definitely people they told things to assure it would get to the media. Very smart and it makes the Sox look like what many of the fans think they are anyway. Greedy selfish bastards. Point for Mark's camp.