Lip Man 1

I wonder how they will embarrass themselves tonight? Inquiring minds want to know...😆

I don't think anybody including JR is "content" with losing, he has always wanted to win but as I've said before he wants to win HIS WAY. Big difference. His way is not paying players what the market is giving them, not going outside the organization to fill key positions, not dealing with certain agents and not firing those who aren't performing both on the baseball side and the non-baseball side unless he absolutely has to. Hell he even is still hoping a salary cap comes into play to break the MLBPA. Given those parameters he's satisfied with the way things are but blames outside forces (including the fan base) and situations that are causing him to do it his way. It's total BS of course. He does, of course, love the low payroll given all the money he's getting from national and international deals that MLB has worked out.

Like my dad always said, "you get what you pay for..."

Like I said Getz seemed to make it clear based on his comment about helping long term that Elko is not in their plans. Why these other stiffs and has been's keep getting chances are beyond me.

In Baltimore Bill Melton lost a pop up around foul ground at third base, it hit him in the face and broke his nose.

Chicago now trails just the Red Sox (30) with 27 errors -- proved too much for the White Sox to overcome. The club is now 3-15 on the road and has lost 14 games in which it led at one point. Fundamentals are an unknown word to this organization. https://awfulannouncing.com/mlb/ozzie-guillen-white-sox-embarrasing-loss-reaction.html

Another game with three runs or less. Another game with a crushing fundamental error. 3rd game this year the Sox took a lead in the 7th inning or later and lost. We should be used to this by now shouldn't we? Nothing changes until new ownership, it's really that simple.

May 6, 1964 - Dave Nicholson hit what may have been the longest home run in MLB history. On this night in the fifth inning, in the first game of a twin bill versus the A’s, Nicholson blasted a shot off future Sox pitcher Moe Drabowsky that went over the roof and was found across the street in Armour Square. Some Sox fans claimed they heard the ball hit the top of the roof but White Sox officials said when they found the ball it had no signs of tar on it nor was it scuffed. Long time Chicago baseball reporter Jerome Holtzman was at the game and claimed he saw the ball bounce back up after hitting the roof and then go back out of sight. Nicholson’s shot went over the roof around the 375-foot sign in left center field. It was found 135 feet from the base of the wall. Plus, you have to add in the elevation needed to get the ball over the roof, approximately 70 feet. Hitting a ball on to the roof or over it required a ground-to-ground distance of at least 474 feet. Unofficial estimates place the drive as traveling 573 feet eclipsing Mickey Mantle’s shot at Griffith Stadium in Washington in 1956. That shot went an unofficial 565 feet. For the night Dave would hammer three home runs and drive in five RBI’s in the twin bill as the Sox swept both games, 6-4 and 11-4. The post script to the story is that a few months later on July 12 in Kansas City the next time Drabowski faced Nicholson he hit him in the forehead with a fastball that opened a gash which required stiches.

The Sox CAN afford to pay good players they CHOOSE not to blaming everything and everyone from the fan base to the stadium. BIG difference.

Remember just last week Getz said something along the lines of they only prioritize players who may be able to help them long term. I saw that and immediately thought that leaves Elko out.

I'll bet your house but I sure as well wouldn't bet mine...not with this dysfunctional organization/team.

Spoke with Nancy yesterday and today she was bringing her organ accessories to the park at 1PM. Sox are going to supply the organ itself, she wanted to set everything up and get some practice in. It will be in her old location at the park. She said that Brooks wasn't part of bringing her back but it was Jeff Szynal, who runs the scoreboard operations and is the Sox historian who was the driving force.

https://www.chicagotribune.com/2025/05/06/nancy-faust-chicago-white-sox-organ/

Fourth time shut out this year. 24th time in 35 games the Sox scored three runs or less (68.5%)

When I speak with her I always ask "is this the first lady of White Sox baseball?" 😉 LOL. Given all that's she's done not only for the Sox but for baseball I've always wondered why she isn't in the Hall of Fame? They do allow "contributors" to the game to be allowed in, she certainly deserves it.

From what I was told by an individual involved in setting the date for Nancy's retirement, several dates were suggested and it was finally agreed to the date in September if I remember right. To be fair to JR, the date happened to be during one of the Jewish high holy holidays and he wasn't able to attend. Some were saying that was deliberate so that he wouldn't have to hear it from the crowd. All I can tell you is Nancy was hurt by the fact that they didn't attend. I heard from Nancy this morning and she is really excited to be able to play again for Sox fans at home. Don't know the dates or how many times she'll play, she does live in the area in the spring and summer and goes to Arizona in the late fall and winter.

Sox memory serves the Sox are 2-10 vs. teams in the A.L. Central.

Agreed.

Brooks has always been very friendly to me over the years as well. I know the entire Nancy situation didn't play out well, it was pretty clear they were forcing her out in favor of canned music. Even her retirement ceremony left a bad taste, they changed the date for it several times and neither Brooks nor JR was even there for it according to a person very, very close to that whole affair. I know Nancy was hurt because of that.

But his defense could be a factor moving forward, he already has seven errors if I remember right. That's a Tim Anderson pace.

Given the Sox lost 27 games last year where they led in the 7th inning or later, maybe not having a lot of saves isn't all bad. 😆

Great move. I know from speaking with her over the past few years she and Brooks didn't see eye to eye. Maybe they patched things up.

When was the last time the Sox went 3-3 on a homestand?

As I wrote for the book chapter and posted the excerpt a little earlier in the thread. I'll repost it here since it looks like you missed it: "Einhorn’s idea was brilliant, but the timing was wrong. If SportsVision had come along even five years later, its chances for success would have been much greater. If the idea had first been conceived in a baseball crazy market like Detroit, Baltimore or St. Louis and worked, it would have been easier to accept. For that matter, if Chicago was simply a one team town, it probably would have worked because fans wouldn’t have had any choices. In Chicago though, the Cubs were still offering fans their games for nothing, which added to the resentment felt by Sox fans. For the most part an entire generation of baseball fans in Chicago grew up without watching or being able to watch a number of Sox games every season during the 1980s." "Over time both Eddie Einhorn and Jerry Reinsdorf commented on SportsVision, the idea, the execution and the aftermath; Einhorn in particular defended the decision telling Bob Logan, “If you want people to come, you can’t give the product away. That’s the way it’s been done everywhere else except Chicago for years. The best organizations, the ones that draw the most people at the gate, don’t go that way. They have limited TV.”

That was part of it as I wrote in the chapter. What I posted was simply an short conclusion from it. By the time Einhorn came up with his idea of moving the Sox off of ‘free’ TV in May 1982, Chicagoans were conditioned like no other city, to getting virtually the entire baseball season for nothing. The bottom line was that when the Sox announced what they intended to do; they were met with a bunch of angry fans who rightly or wrongly expected the right to get virtually an unlimited number of games for nothing. Adding to that anger was the fact that the nation, especially Chicago, was going through an economic recession, not seen since the early 1970’s. People were out of work and simply could not afford the hook-up fee, let alone the monthly charge to get the sports programming. Reinsdorf though understood the reality of the situation when in 2004 at a luncheon promoting the start of the new Comcast Sports Network-Chicago regional channel he said, "Unfortunately, Chicago wasn't ready for us. There wasn't cable of any consequence, and we were on subscription pay-TV. I don't remember how many subscribers there were, but I know that more than that number went to Radio Shack and bought the parts for their own boxes." How to sum up the experiment known as SportsVision? Well you could do a lot worse than to say, ‘A brilliant idea that simply was ahead of its time, limited by historical factors as well as technological shortcomings.’