Pods22

So I think we are going to go to Buffalo Wings and Rings pregame and then take the shuttle over to the game. They are having an Elvis show from 4:30-6. Then we will hang out and watch the post game show at the park. We may go to Buffalo Wings and Rings after for the Elvis show which if I remember correctly is from 11-12:30am. That is TBD though.

Hey everyone. Anyone going to Elvis Night? Do they do anything before the game at the park? I have never been in before game time. I hear that Buffalo Wings and Rings is having an Elvis Show before and after the game, so that is an option if the park doesn't really do much for pregame. Let me know

People who do not wait for you to get off the elevator before they get on. People who do not move out of the door way of the train to let people off.

QUOTE(southsideirish71 @ Jan 9, 2007 -> 10:40 AM) Picked up 2 for Sunday. Everyone tries for Saturday right off the bat. Tickets were gone for all 3 days in under ten minutes. Thanksfully I got Friday's. I hope they keep the kids at home this year.

QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Dec 14, 2006 -> 10:13 AM) Meh, that stuff is urban legend for the most part. I don't think a lot of people realize that lots of the admins of ST and WSI know each other, and are pretty good friends. Lots of us tailgate together and talk to each other. Why the hostility? Can't everyone just get along?

QUOTE(Hangar18 @ Dec 12, 2006 -> 01:31 PM) Hey! thats a Good Question actually. I did ask about that, but apparently, theres also another private party going on in the backroom that took up the "drink package" according to the owner. Were going there today to check on the lighting and im going to bring it up again with him, but yeah, We definitely should have a Drink Special for this ...... I'll let you guys know tomorrow about this Our drummer brought up us wearing Santa outfits ........... but I was a scrooge and nixed it, heh heh Thanks I will not be there it was just a suggestion. I will be on my couch thinking about how I do not have to listen to your crazy ideas. Pretty bad excuse by the bar for not offering a drink package if you ask me.

QUOTE(Hangar18 @ Dec 11, 2006 -> 11:26 AM) Say, now that you mention it, I should be working for them We would all be screwed.

QUOTE(Sox1422 @ Dec 12, 2006 -> 12:00 PM) What kind of band is it? Is there a $__ all you can drink? Why did you not get a drink package? You could have seen if the bar had something for a few hours for a set amount.

QUOTE(KansasSoxFan @ Dec 9, 2006 -> 10:23 AM) Judging from the "Reinsdorf speaks" thread, everyone must know about this except me. Someone please enlighten me. Why was MB wearing a Cardinals cap? Because he is a fan. Who cares what hat he was wearing?

QUOTE(Hangar18 @ Nov 29, 2006 -> 02:12 PM) Few people I know are having a schedule conflict, Friday nites being optimal times to wash hair apparently. It was suggested we do a Hair-Washing thing Friday nite, for those who wish to partake That actually sounds like they would rather be somewhere else instead. Can't say I blame them.

QUOTE(Hangar18 @ Sep 18, 2006 -> 04:15 PM) So I cant cheer for the guy and wish him the best? Thats Foolish talk if you think I want him to beat us every chance he can. Frank is going to hit the SOX and any other team no matter what. Him having a great weekend against us and putting the nail in the SOX coffin is the SOX own fault, they shouldnt have given away all those games this year. I could think of WORSE players getting hits on us. Shoot, I remember Carl Yazstremski crushing a ball into the upper deck of Old Comiskey, in his final at-bat. The homerun pretty much cemented their win against us in the 9th. Know what happened? The 10,000 people or so there ALL GAVE HIM A STANDING OVATION. And he wasnt even a White SOX player. So those are all bad fans too? Thats Sick alright That is not sick. It was the first time Big Frank was back in the house and he deserved it for everything he did in Chicago. You rooting him on this weekend is dumb but not surprising.

7/24/06 and 7/19/06 i dont need to even say anymore.

If AJ is not playing then I sure the hell do not want to watch.

I will start to put more faith in Pods when he doesnt look like a little leaguer in left field.

Hells ya Juan!

there ya go joe

lets go Garland! FOR THE LOVE OF GOD

QUOTE(Hangar18 @ Jun 28, 2006 -> 10:21 AM) there are 158 other posts about that other team, in a thread dedicated to that other team. Might want to rethink who is "obsessed". I have and you are still more obsessed with the team then anyone i have every came encounter with.

QUOTE(Hangar18 @ Jun 28, 2006 -> 10:04 AM) Im SICK SICK SICK of Jim Hendry and anyone else associated with that other team, constantly making GRATUITIOUS references to having the "best fans in the world". Memo to Cubs: SOX fans are the best fans in the world. DAMMIT! I missed it! Theres nothing like having a GOOD LAUGH at the Cubs' expense ..... Most think it is a good laugh you are obsessed though.

QUOTE(Hangar18 @ Jun 28, 2006 -> 10:04 AM) Im SICK SICK SICK of Jim Hendry and anyone else associated with that other team, constantly making GRATUITIOUS references to having the "best fans in the world". Memo to Cubs: SOX fans are the best fans in the world. DAMMIT! I missed it! Theres nothing like having a GOOD LAUGH at the Cubs' expense ..... Every team claims to have the BEST fans. So save it. This is not to say the Sox dont have great fans because we do. You just need to stop watching anything affiliated with them. Save yourself from an early heart attack for nothing

QUOTE(zach61 @ Jun 21, 2006 -> 01:07 PM) And these stories make the Sox look bad and the cubs look good? Which stories make the Sox look bad and drive fans towards the cubs and why? These stories make him look like stereo typical fan who hates a team more then he likes his own.

QUOTE(CanOfCorn @ Jun 20, 2006 -> 10:02 AM) This has to do with money. They could have stopped with the guy that molested the girl, but noooo, the family wants money. And who better to go after than a website that is free and open to anyone that wants to sign up! Let's not worry about the parents who should be sued for 1) a suit that should never have been brought in the first place and 2) not watching what their own daughter is doing. Actually, switch 1 and 2 around and that's a little closer to the truth. The thing of it is that this girl was at the age where her profile was private to everyone but her friends list. If you are 14 and younger no one can see your profile. So exactly what was this girl doing.

QUOTE(JimH @ Jun 20, 2006 -> 11:51 AM) Well since we have a daily thread from Hangar about supposedly proving a media bias, I think it's only fair we have a daily thread as a question clearinghouse for Hangar. Since there are so many posters who have asked so many legitimate questions, most of which Hangar fails to answer, maybe we can put them into one nice neat thread so we don't get Hangar always asking "what page was THAT question". So here are the questions thus far today, because unlike Hangar I think we should start fresh with this, ignore all the previous legitimate questions he hasn't answered and just start with todays. 1. Just wondering hangar, do you have proof of this "running wild" stuff and "disproportionate coverage"? (question in relation to spring training coverage and hangar claiming a spring Cub bias) 2. Or is this just like all the rest of your data, your subjective opinion? (related to #1) 3. Also why would one team dominate coverage when the focus is looking forward, i.e. to the 2006 season? Isn't that subjective reasoning on your part, i.e. the way you personally want it to be? (related to #1) 4. Where do you get the impression the Sun Times tries to mimic everything the Tribune does? (oops Hangar answered this one, he said both papers have little red boxes around the city) 5. Why are you telling us the Sun Times goes out of their way to help promote the Cubs? 6. you never answered my repeated question about "media ignored" White Sox. Last week you admitted it was an ill turned phrase, yet yesterday you included it again. What gives? 7. Trib policy the last couple of decades? Please explain what that is. Are you privy to it? And not your usual dust in the wind theories Hangar. Tell us about the Tribune policy, in detail, without your editorial spin on it. 8. Cub fans that want to see the White Sox too now? Who said that? (technically counts as 2 questions) 9. Um...why doesn't it count? Because you say so? They had 90 wins that season. One game playoff or not...it's official (re: '98 Cub season) 10. Hangar, can you please explain the ongoing disrepancy of how you count and how SS2K5 counts and how I count? Re: the Tribune. (Hangar sort of answered this one, the response was basically "it depends on the time of the day that I count" 11. Please define "Media Historically Ignored". Also I think it's very fair to ask you to provide some proof for that statement. (technically not a question, one request of several that were made). 12. Yes, like the big picture on the back page of today's Sun Times trumpeting the Sox-Cards series. You know, the one you ignored in your count/commentary? (in relation to hangar saying pictures with a Cub theme should count, but he ignored a big Sox related picture on the full back page of the Sun Times) 13. Or are we dealing with selective representation and fact reporting here? (relating to question 12, but basically it is a big picture/overall question) 14. How have you proven that the times and trib are out to make the Sox look bad? (from zach61) 15. Exactly what do 1982 attendance records have to do with today? What do 1982 attendance records have to do with a media bias? Aren't you the one who finally admitted yesterday that there were a number of factors which led to Cub popularity, outside of media? (the 3 in 1 special question) 16. Here is an idea, why don't you begin to realize that as long as you count wrong, people will challenge you? (again, more of a request) 17. Also, please answer the question about "Historically media maligned" and explain how that's better than "Media ignored" ... with proof please. (was sorta asked in question #11 but since I had to ask twice I thought why not list it here twice) That's 17 and it's not even noon yet. 18. didn't you admit yesterday that yes, there were in fact other factors which caused the Cubs to become significantly more popular, unrelated to the media? Are you flip flopping on that admission today? (just two more and we can change the thread title to "Let's Play 20 Questions With Hangar" ) Good luck on getting answers from him. IT will will be like pulling teeth. He is right because that is that. There could be a 100 Sox articles and he still would not be satisfied. Glad some questions all the bull s*** he talks.

QUOTE(Hangar18 @ Jun 20, 2006 -> 02:47 PM) if you found my counts to have been wrong frequently as you say, did you mention it over at the other site? Methinks you didnt. I also notice how you only bring up the shooting in "lakeview". How convenient. For those of you who were paying attention, the murder happened right after the game, with a fan who was at the game, walking across the street, from the stadium. Shooting happened early Thursday evening. CLTV and WGN, who initially covered the incident, noticably pointed their cameras AWAY from the lovely wrigly marquee. They showed the spot where it happened, and one couldnt help but still note the ballpark right in the background. both stations initially reported it as a "shooting at cubby bear". completely wrong. It was in the street in front of the park, not at the bar. Other stations who had cameras there did point northwards (not south) getting part of the ballpark in the shot. SunTimes did have the incident on its front page. Tribune? Apparently wasnt as "newsworthy" as the fans running on the Cell Field to be put on the front page. Tribune relegated the story to a quick blurb, in its metro section. Again, if anyone was paying attention, there was a firestorm of backlash towards the trib over on that other site. Everyone noticed the blatant way it was portrayed and it dominated sports talk radio the rest of the weekend. Online, the Trib used the word "lakeview" and "northside" in portraying the incident. Funny, because after the backlash within 48 hours, the word "wrigleyville" was sprinkled into the stories, and the Trib finally made mention of this on its front page, DAYS after the incident. Someone from that newspaper came online and actually debated the thinking as to WHY they portrayed the incident as they did. Muscatel isnt telling you the full story, as I dont expect him to. After all, everyone knows its not in the best interest of the Tribune to downplay bad news when it comes to the cubs right? Everyone knows that this never happened right? Hangar makes this stuff up as he goes along. Every poster of that other site knew he was full of it .................. His Media Watches werent from 2002 like he says. He just started it this past April and they told him to shove off, his information is fake and biased. Nice job Muscatel, you really uncovered the anti-conspiracy didnt you?! WELL DONE! There never was a conspiracy after all !!! Hip HooraY! But seriously, Muscatel, if thats your real name, tell us why you never challenged this back in 2002? 2003? 2004? 2005? Surely I mustve fabricated something in that time-span? most of your stuff is bias....you want the sox to be underrated so you have something to b**** about. miserable individual