Gregory Pratt

I know someone who licked dogs*** off of someone's shoe for a dollar and a dare.

He's not all that good anymore, but he isn't being brought in to Ace. It's still nice to see a player return to his hometown for the end. It's a shame he left but that's the power of union loyalty and money.

Glavine is back with the Braves.

Someone wrote in a book I'm reading, "MASH became a series about Vietnam once removed to Korea." What does that mean? I never watched the show so I know. Is there truth to that? Was MASH really a bad look at Korea? Did it have anything to really do with Korea?

QUOTE(Heads22 @ Nov 18, 2007 -> 10:13 PM) It's borderline f***tarded to do that and you know it. Why even risk it? What do they have to prove at this point? the cave mouth shines by pure force of will i look down on the world from the top of this lonesome hill and you can run, and run some more from here all the way to singapore but i will carry you home in my teeth in the great hall you drink red wine you chew meat off the bone i beat down the new path to the castle i come naked and alone i laid my son on the bier, i burned the wreath fire overhead, water underneath you can stand up or you can run you and i both know what you've done and i will carry you home i will carry you home i will carry you home in my teeth

I can't imagine what it'd be like if someone ended Brady's season. I've read about what happened to McMahon, twice. I don't know if that'll happen to Brady but I don't blame Belichick for taking that risk to make his point. I'm sure Brady's on board and they're all grown men who know what they're doing.

I definitely laughed when that just happened.

I have no problem with that. But what I mean isn't to "gloat" or anything -- I genuinely have trouble expressing why I admire it so much. I'll have more later, once I figure it out.

QUOTE(jackie hayes @ Nov 18, 2007 -> 09:37 PM) Nobody's complaining about NE playing here. They've complained about NE going for it on 4th down up by 38 in the 4th quarter. So, Al and John, stop b****ing and defending NE against phantom attacks. I can't hate those two any more than I do now. I have trouble expressing just how much I admire New England's shoving it up the league's ass.

I can't stop smiling. New England is awesome.

Bill Belichick is my new sports hero.

The next...Mariano Rivera?

QUOTE(Gene Honda Civic @ Nov 18, 2007 -> 04:29 PM) Not planned at all... My favorite Vasgersianism of the game has to be the Edgar Bergen reference... Timely! Who cares if it's "planned"? Oscar Wilde used to plan quips. Everybody does.

MO MO MO I loved that exchange from the announcers.

Great article:

You know what I mean. Those were the days when the mob ran everything! And there are a million other differences but yeah, there are some parallels. It is true that the Commish can do n-eh-thang he (or she) wants.

The Commish can do whatever the hell he wants under the best interest of baseball clause. Doesn't mean that I consider it "cheating" or that it should be if it's not against baseball's rules. I wouldn't have banned the Black Sox; they probably would have been punished. But the game back then, and society, were so different.

To Balta: Well, yeah, I just said he is a cheater, then. To Jackie: right. On "why it has to be spelled out" by the game: because. I wouldn't say that someone is cheating at Monopoly because they're taking steroids; there's nothing in Monopoly's rules about steroids. Unless the game and institution itself says, "Don't take steroids, it's against our rules," I don't think you're cheating at that game. You're just breaking the law. It's kind of moot, since it was put out there by Vincent, but to be a cheater at a game you have to violate that game's rules, not the country's which are different.

QUOTE(StrangeSox @ Nov 16, 2007 -> 08:24 PM) Why should baseball, or any sport for that matter, have to make rules explicitly banning illegal substances? By running their operations in countries that list steroids as controlled substances, there is a de facto rule. There's something about that that I'm not fully comfortable with. I just mean: if the game doesn't consider it cheating to use these drugs and so doesn't ban them, then using them becomes a legal matter for the player but not one at his workplace.

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Nov 16, 2007 -> 08:13 PM) But, I think I just pointed out...as of 1991, it was clearly against MLB's rules, according to the statement laid down by the commissioner, to use steroids. The problem was that the rule was not enforceable, as the Union wasn't bargained in on it, and you could probably spend some time arguing over what exactly was banned and what wasn't since "Steroids" is a pretty generic classification. So, here's the question I'll put back to you which I think is the more accurate one: do you consider him to be a cheater if he broke an unenforced rule, and an unenforceable (at the time) rule? Because, if that memo from Commissioner Vincent is setting the rules MLB plays by, Mr. Bonds broke that rule but knew at the time that MLB couldn't punish him for it. Yes, I do. I was genuinely asking -- is there a rule he broke? I do know that for a long time Barry Bonds and many others had issues with steroids because they considered it cheating and believed it tainted the game but as to whether or not there was a rule he was breaking was up for discussion. But yes, I'd call that "cheating." I wouldn't if it were just a law.

QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Nov 16, 2007 -> 06:53 PM) He broke the law (regardless of MLB rules) to gain a competitive edge. How is that not cheating? It's a question posed to me by someone I've spoken with. "Bonds may go to prison and I'm sure he broke the Law several times, but whether or not he cheated, as in breaking baseball's rules, is what I'm more interested in." I laughed, but I know exactly what it means and it's an interesting discussion. I've come to the belief that if it isn't against Major League Baseball's rules, then it isn't cheating in Major League Baseball to do such a thing. Certainly, the fact that it was illegal is a consideration to be given, but that makes him a criminal rather than a "cheater" if we take "cheating" to be "breaking the game's rules". And another Q, for those of you who know the rulebook: is it a formal rule that you couldn't, or shouldn't, steal signs? It's somewhat a tangent but I'm curious.

Where do you get the idea that he wants to trade for Pierre?

QUOTE(Soxbadger @ Nov 16, 2007 -> 04:57 PM) Tony Gwinn's head became huge. Was that guy on steroids? It is definitely possible. /Devil's advocate ... I would like to know -- why is Bonds a "cheater" and what rules did he break? Didn't his juicing, and McGwire's/Sosa's juicing/everybody else's juicing come before it was a Major League rule? Or am I missing something?`

Selig is vigilant?

QUOTE(fathom @ Nov 16, 2007 -> 04:06 PM) Wow! I don't think I could disagree more with this comment. Marmol has the potential to be an all-world closer for the next decade. He reminds me so much of K-Rod. It doesn't help the comparison that Danks is nowhere near as old as Hill