http://www.kansascity.com/mld/kansascity/s...als/6308951.htm

 

This guy is a genious

"The Royals, barring a collapse, are going to win this division."

 

A wise lumberjack once said.........TIMBERRRRRRRRRRRRR

lol... that guy is a schmuck

http://www.kansascity.com/mld/kansascity/s...als/6308951.htm

 

This guy is a genious

LMFAO!!!! What an idiot.

ahhh can you say counting your eggs or something like that.

http://www.kansascity.com/mld/kansascity/s...als/6308951.htm

 

This guy is a genious

The part that truly makes him look like a dumbass is where he refers to the twins manager as "shaken" and the sox manager "weary" . What a f***ing dufus. Way to write fairytales. They let anyone write columns these days, dont they?

can we make send this article back to him now....................

Between this article and today's article, this guy is quickly becoming my favorite comedy writer

Well Jerry Manuel does make me sleepy when he talks. But this guy is still a dumbasso marte.

Between this article and today's article, this guy is quickly becoming my favorite comedy writer 

ohhh that is a classic.

 

comedy writer.

 

 

I like reading this guys articles. Saying we have Carl Everett like its a bad thing. I'd take Everett over Micheal Tucker anyday.

 

He makes a big deal out of Carlos Beltran, too. Yet, he failed to mention that he had been hurt this season. I think he is more important to that team than Joe Randa.

 

I can't wait to see what this guy will write when the Royals are out of the race, sitting in third place.

I like reading this guys articles. Saying we have Carl Everett like its a bad thing. I'd take Everett over Micheal Tucker anyday.

 

He makes a big deal out of Carlos Beltran, too. Yet, he failed to mention that he had been hurt this season. I think he is more important to that team than Joe Randa.

 

I can't wait to see what this guy will write when the Royals are out of the race, sitting in third place.

and that is when we should email his office with these old article so he can

chew on it.

This guy is an idiot. He doesn't even have his facts straight.

Here's a little trivia question for you: Do you know how many teams in the last 50 years have blown a seven-game lead at the All-Star break? Go ahead. Take a guess. Twenty? Ten? Five? You have your guess?

 

The answer is two. San Francisco lost a nine-game lead in 1993 (actually, Atlanta took it away on the last day of the season after going an astounding 54-19 in the second half. The Giants won 103 games and lost the division).

 

And the Boston Red Sox famously blew a nine-game lead in 1978, a nightmare finished off by Yankees shortstop Bucky Dent, who hit the decisive home run in the one-game playoff.

 

That's it. Two teams in 50 years. Every other team with this big a lead at the All-Star break -- 31 of them in all -- finished the job. Few even had to put up much of a fight. Those 31 teams won their divisions by an average of an overwhelming 12 games.

 

 

Let's see .. the '64 Phillies blew a, what was it?, 9 game lead with 2 weeks left in the season to the Cardinals.

 

 

Anyone here ever hear of the '69 Cubs?

 

 

The Angels blew a big lead to Seattle just a few years ago. Can't remember the year.

 

This guy says two in 50 years, and I think of 3 off the top of my head.

This guy is an idiot.  He doesn't even have his facts straight. 

Here's a little trivia question for you: Do you know how many teams in the last 50 years have blown a seven-game lead at the All-Star break? Go ahead. Take a guess. Twenty? Ten? Five? You have your guess?

 

The answer is two. San Francisco lost a nine-game lead in 1993 (actually, Atlanta took it away on the last day of the season after going an astounding 54-19 in the second half. The Giants won 103 games and lost the division).

 

And the Boston Red Sox famously blew a nine-game lead in 1978, a nightmare finished off by Yankees shortstop Bucky Dent, who hit the decisive home run in the one-game playoff.

 

That's it. Two teams in 50 years. Every other team with this big a lead at the All-Star break -- 31 of them in all -- finished the job. Few even had to put up much of a fight. Those 31 teams won their divisions by an average of an overwhelming 12 games.

 

 

Let's see .. the '64 Phillies blew a, what was it?, 9 game lead with 2 weeks left in the season to the Cardinals.

 

 

Anyone here ever hear of the '69 Cubs?

 

 

The Angels blew a big lead to Seattle just a few years ago. Can't remember the year.

 

This guy says two in 50 years, and I think of 3 off the top of my head.

He also didnt mention that you play your in division teams like a gazillion times now, so the leads arent difficult to overcome.

This guy is an idiot.  He doesn't even have his facts straight. 

Here's a little trivia question for you: Do you know how many teams in the last 50 years have blown a seven-game lead at the All-Star break? Go ahead. Take a guess. Twenty? Ten? Five? You have your guess?

 

The answer is two. San Francisco lost a nine-game lead in 1993 (actually, Atlanta took it away on the last day of the season after going an astounding 54-19 in the second half. The Giants won 103 games and lost the division).

 

And the Boston Red Sox famously blew a nine-game lead in 1978, a nightmare finished off by Yankees shortstop Bucky Dent, who hit the decisive home run in the one-game playoff.

 

That's it. Two teams in 50 years. Every other team with this big a lead at the All-Star break -- 31 of them in all -- finished the job. Few even had to put up much of a fight. Those 31 teams won their divisions by an average of an overwhelming 12 games.

 

 

Let's see .. the '64 Phillies blew a, what was it?, 9 game lead with 2 weeks left in the season to the Cardinals.

 

 

Anyone here ever hear of the '69 Cubs?

 

 

The Angels blew a big lead to Seattle just a few years ago. Can't remember the year.

 

This guy says two in 50 years, and I think of 3 off the top of my head.

I'm not sure, but this might be a case of curving the truth. Maybe the teams you mentioned had less than a 7 game lead at the ASB but built their leads higher later in the season. Then, they gave up the lead late in the season.

I love it when people tell the story so the numbers are in their favor.

I could care less what some columnist from kc thinks anyways, he's just trying to keep the hometown folks happy.

This guy is an idiot.  He doesn't even have his facts straight. 

Here's a little trivia question for you: Do you know how many teams in the last 50 years have blown a seven-game lead at the All-Star break? Go ahead. Take a guess. Twenty? Ten? Five? You have your guess?

 

The answer is two. San Francisco lost a nine-game lead in 1993 (actually, Atlanta took it away on the last day of the season after going an astounding 54-19 in the second half. The Giants won 103 games and lost the division).

 

And the Boston Red Sox famously blew a nine-game lead in 1978, a nightmare finished off by Yankees shortstop Bucky Dent, who hit the decisive home run in the one-game playoff.

 

That's it. Two teams in 50 years. Every other team with this big a lead at the All-Star break -- 31 of them in all -- finished the job. Few even had to put up much of a fight. Those 31 teams won their divisions by an average of an overwhelming 12 games.

 

 

Let's see .. the '64 Phillies blew a, what was it?, 9 game lead with 2 weeks left in the season to the Cardinals.

 

 

Anyone here ever hear of the '69 Cubs?

 

 

The Angels blew a big lead to Seattle just a few years ago. Can't remember the year.

 

This guy says two in 50 years, and I think of 3 off the top of my head.

But technically, what was the lead each of those teams had at the All-Star Break. If they were under 7 games, he'd "technically" be right. Not so much as not getting his facts right as it is manipulating those facts to tell more than they really should.

This guy is an idiot.  He doesn't even have his facts straight. 

Here's a little trivia question for you: Do you know how many teams in the last 50 years have blown a seven-game lead at the All-Star break? Go ahead. Take a guess. Twenty? Ten? Five? You have your guess?

 

The answer is two. San Francisco lost a nine-game lead in 1993 (actually, Atlanta took it away on the last day of the season after going an astounding 54-19 in the second half. The Giants won 103 games and lost the division).

 

And the Boston Red Sox famously blew a nine-game lead in 1978, a nightmare finished off by Yankees shortstop Bucky Dent, who hit the decisive home run in the one-game playoff.

 

That's it. Two teams in 50 years. Every other team with this big a lead at the All-Star break -- 31 of them in all -- finished the job. Few even had to put up much of a fight. Those 31 teams won their divisions by an average of an overwhelming 12 games.

 

 

Let's see .. the '64 Phillies blew a, what was it?, 9 game lead with 2 weeks left in the season to the Cardinals.

 

 

Anyone here ever hear of the '69 Cubs?

 

 

The Angels blew a big lead to Seattle just a few years ago. Can't remember the year.

 

This guy says two in 50 years, and I think of 3 off the top of my head.

I'm not sure, but this might be a case of curving the truth. Maybe the teams you mentioned had less than a 7 game lead at the ASB but built their leads higher later in the season. Then, they gave up the lead late in the season.

I love it when people tell the story so the numbers are in their favor.

I could care less what some columnist from kc thinks anyways, he's just trying to keep the hometown folks happy.

I think you probably hit it right on the nose. So this dude twisted his facts or didn't bother to do any research.

just like the trib did last yr with the ivy dieing.

I love this

 

The Royals, barring a collapse, are going to win this division

 

LMAO. Talk about a jinx. Maybe this guy should just stop writing. He's worse then Peter Gammons.

The Angels blew a big lead to Seattle just a few years ago.  Can't remember the year.

1995. It came down to a 1-game playoff, and Griffey scored from 1st on a double to end the game. It was pretty awesome.

Actually, the Angels 2002 season was much more fascinating than the Royals party (which the Sox are finally startin to piss on) this year...