Texsox

Damnit. I will just miss being in town for Hawaiian shirt night.

I kind of miss the days when I wouldn't have noticed it cared. Sometime around spring training I'd look at who was in camp. New marketing slogan, free for the team to use Ignorance is bliss.

I really like him so I hope they trade him to a contender.

OK. They were usually 25th in spending from what I saw.

I'm looking at their resume's. We don't know what they could have done if that spending was a few years ago.

I agree with all the negatives about bringing in all these KC folks. Here's the only potential way I see this working out for us, (and I don't believe it will actually happen.) These guys are actually really good at their jobs but couldn't win because of payroll limits. They actually spend less than we do. We've at least have had recent years in the top ten payrolls. Again, I'm clutching at straws and scraping the bottom of the barrel to try to find anything positive.

Or they are and the current owners are bailing early.

^ TL/DR ^ f*** JR, RH and TLR.

How many different ways can we be told this franchise sucks 95% of the time?

We hardly knew you. Bye

I'm surprised that my football playing, can't stop thinking about football, students believe Fields will be great and the Bears should trade the pick, move down, and get him a receiver or add to the O-Line.

Thank y'all. My students were discussing the draft and I plagiarized y'all and picked up some football cred with them.

Agreed. I wonder if they could have done that without giving up a Giolito, Lynn, or other MLB roster spot and creating another hole. Either because of payroll or needing to trade.

If the Charlotte Knights were my main team I'd be so stoked for the season to begin. Then crushed to discover those guys are heading north.

It is a different approach. I feel like we swapped a little quality for quantity. In hindsight that would have been better the last few years. But like you, it is a bit confusing in my mind if it's the way to win a playoff series.

No

I agree that based on quality and lack of balance it should have been rejected.

I heard from a D1 college assistant coach (credibility??) that he expects it to be written into some contracts. So basically you have the local car dealer deciding if your running back is going to play in the bowl or not. Colleges fucked up by not paying players themselves, now they will have to live with the mess.

Thanks for the blurb.

And JR will never admit it as long as there is a chance he could play that card again.

Great point. I'm also thinking losing 1-4 is faster than losing games 1-8 (assuming we can score a run.)

No he hasn't been censored but several people here want him to be. That would be censoring what a newspaper publishes if you believe they shouldn't be allowed to publish this. I believe adults should be allowed to read or not read what they want. I tell that to folks that want to ban or censor stuff I agree with. I'm not going to turn around and say but it's ok to ban or censor it I don't want to read it. I just won't read it. I also believe it's fair that, like The Athletic, I won't be reading anything more from that rag mag.

To summarize 1. The abuser is the type of human I loathe. He used his power and fame to abuse people. I hope there is a special place in hell for people like that. 2. The article is poorly written as an independent journalistic work. It is horribly one sided and annoying and frustrating to read based on #1. Further it is crap like this article that will lead the AI evolution in developing content. 3. I believe adults should have the choice in what they read or don't read and do not support censorship.

Not at all. Jail time, fines, banned from baseball are punishments. And I agree it is a poorly written article. It certainly isn't balanced. I don't believe the negative articles that were written should be considered part of his punishment. He deserved a lot more punishment than a negative article. Anyone reading the article can see his life was ruined by what he did. He didn't get away with it like happened for most of history. If Nightingale turned this into a book, you would be at the university wanting it banned from the library, I'd be advocating for not banning.

That seems like two different issues. I object to what seemed like a poorly written, one sided, article. I don't object to there being an article. I'm unimpressed if we consider any article to be the punishment. I think he deserves something far now severe than a nasty article.