BBTV

Here's a summary of my thoughts on Trout, that nobody should really care about.

1. I don't blame anyone for

a) taking a huge contract when it's offered, no matter what other goals they're sacrificing

b) wanting to play in LA(ish), in a place with perfect weather and where there's no microscope or pressure.  It's an easy life, and one that anyone would love.

c) not demanding a trade, for whatever reason - even if it's out of loyalty to the people that gave him that money in the first place.  I have no problem with Trout or how he's carried himself or any choice he's made.

2. The HOF should have higher standards than it does.  It should be above simply the "best players".  Otherwise it should be called "the Hall of Best Players".  It should be for the players who more/less you "can't tell the story of the game" without.  That sounds a little dramatic, I just can't think of a better way of putting it.

As much of a scumbag as he is, Curt Schilling is a lock HOFer in my book.  He was a star in one of the most significant WSs in the past 50 years, and not only starred in Arizona, but did it in Boston.  And sorry - but performing on that stage in that city simply matters more.  Same with NY and other places.  That's NOT NOT NOT to say that to be a HOFer you have to have played in those areas.  Absolutely not.  But it certainly gets you bonus points.

Mike Trout has meant zero to the history of the game.  I'd love for someone to tell me how the "story of the game" would be any better had he never played.  He hasn't contributed to a championship team or even played in meaningful games on a big stage, and hasn't racked up his stats in games that matter, or on a team that matters.  One or the other might change things.  If the Angles are playing meaningful october games and simply come up short, but he's great, then that's good enough.  Or if he's piling up his stats while playing for the Yankees, even if they're not winning, that matters too because it shows he can play through pressure, and the inarguable fact is that playing for some teams gets you more exposure and "fame" than playing on other teams.

Mike Trout will absolutely make the HOF based on his numbers alone, and the voting patterns of the writers.  It's a shame that we will likely never see what Mike Trout could have been, and I don't blame him one bit for his choices, but those choices have rendered him irrelevant (so far.)

35 minutes ago, Silver_Star said:

 I wholeheartedly disagree with you.

I'd say to put up your dukes, but your arms are too short to box with god.

Gray complements orange and brown so well.  It's a perfect autumnal palette, for the team that looks the most autumnal.

I'd advocate for them to add gray as an official color - maybe even replacing white in some of the striping, or even having gray pants on the road (though if it was up to me, they'd only have orange pants.) 

9 hours ago, Dynasty said:

I didn't think the removal of white trim would make a difference, but I think the Yankees really are better without it. It's subtle in the eyes of other people, but I immediately noticed it when seeing highlights.

I think that's been a bit of a controversial subject on these boards for years, with a slight majority favoring dropping white.  I really don't know that there's any team that needs a white outline on their gray uniform, or that looks better with one than they would without.  I'd be fine with the Phillies dropping their white, although it's been less obnoxious since the "standardization" of 2019.

Gray was the best color for the Browns, and I'll fist fight anyone - with my own internet fists, mind you - that disagrees.

But pretty much any other color is better than brown, so I guess I'll take white.

I hadn't noticed the change in sheen from gloss to satin.  Gotta say that the satin in that photo looks really good, but you can never go wrong with a traditional gloss or semi-gloss.  I'd vote satin, but the move back to gloss is probably a lateral vs a downgrade.

I wish they'd return to their lighter brown and the orange from before when they "reddened" it all those years back (I forget the terms they used for each color - I know "seal brown" was one of the browns (I think the lighter version?) and I forget the reasoning for changing the orange... but they shouldn't have.))

LOL the Eagles traded Hasan Reddick (50 sacks in past 4 years, 17 in 2022) for a 2026 3rd-round pick.  That's all they could get for him.  

He was bitter that he signed a contract and outplayed it, so they let him find a trade partner, but if he doesn't get a new deal from the Jets, what was the point?  Ironically, the Eagles signed the Jets top pass rusher in this offseason, so it was kinda a trade.

But 2026?  We're not even at the 2024 draft, and we're trading 2026 picks?  That's crap I thought was exclusive to NBA, where draft picks don't really mean anything anymore.

I’ve never been more ashamed of the Phillies. Literally celebrating losing (the powder blue wild card flag). Was certain they wouldn’t pull this crap. 
 

I'm intrigued by the cannonball rule.  I'd love to see the range on those things, and how accurate they can get with their anticipated "drop".  I'm guessing they couldn't fire them straight forward, or they'd kill their own team (if behind the offense), or potentially kill their own WR or RB if behind the D.  They'd have to have an arc that would drop on the opposing offense (preferably accurate enough to fall on the QB/center), and I'm not sure they could do that without hurting themselves too (they could simply sub out all the good players for the play they're going to fire the cannons, but then you've killed (literally) your depth.)

My problem with the cannonball rule is it's venturing too close into the baseball rule where every so often one of the balls detonates (or deadly spikes shoot out of it... can't recall) whether it goes into the field of play or into the stands, so you'd have to put your cell phone down if anyone hits a foul ball. 

I've been thinking more about that rule, and in the interest of fan/player safety, I think they should limit total casualties to 5/game.  The problem is, not even the umpires know which balls are equipped with the spikes, since they can't be marked without ruining the gimmick.

But again, we're not replacing the gorilla.  It ain't broke, doesn't require fixing.  Just needs a new labor deal.  Maybe a certain number of bananas on game day and better health care (I've heard they want these guys present at every game, even though it's the humans - not the gorillas - that tend to get injured... though that could change if someone fires a cannonball that hits a gorilla, which is yet another reason why we need to be more realistic with some of these proposals.)

9 hours ago, GDAWG said:

 

It's going to come to a point where he has to demand a trade.  It may not be now, but it would have to be soon if things get worse for the Angels.  Whether or not the Angels will acquiesce to his trade demands, remains to be seen.  

There's only around 3 teams that can afford his salary unless the Angles eat half of it, and I think we know where he wants to play.  The problem is his health, and he'd have to play the field because said team already has a DH that can't play the field.

But it would be nice to see if he can actually perform in games that matter, and in front of crowds that care.  I feel very strongly that he isn't even a HOFer now, because he's had literally zero impact on the sport and not shown that he can play when it matters.  Nothing in this history of MLB would have unfolded any differently had he never been born.  And it's not even about championships at all.

3 hours ago, MJWalker45 said:

Does Cincinnati get his bones, though? I mean his name is literally on the collar of their jerseys. 

There's enough bones in the human body so that each player on Cincinnati and Cleveland could get one, and each team could choose one time during the game to bring out their bones (clip that for the 'no-context posts' thread).

I assume the popular bones would be the bigger ones like the femur, but I'd love to see them somehow piece together a hand and throw it so that it bats down a pass, or piece together a foot and throw it such that Deshaun Watson gets kicked in the face by the decayed foot of his own team's founder.

41 minutes ago, McCall said:

They still get paid for a certain amount of time even if it's called not long after employee start times.

Some travel a ways, or have to pay for transit, and also coverage for kids, so it's not worth it.  As a former stadium employee (granted for football which was only postponed once in my tenure) it's really not worth it, even for the ones that need every $.   The certainty of the situation and the ability to have time to replan for child care or whatever else, outweighs the hour of minimum wage (or whatever) they'd be paid.

I’d be more terrified of a Texan than of a lion, eagle, bear, titan, Tank, ram, etc. 

39 minutes ago, Red Comet said:

Hell, why not have different animals for different stadiums? Thanksgiving afternoons would certainly be spiced up with a lion on the field. 

5 minutes ago, FiddySicks said:

As long as the Bucs can shoot off real cannon balls from their ship, I’m good with it. 

Can't start going with team-themed gimmicks.  Don't want this to get gimmicky and silly.

Besides - what are the Browns going to do - excavate and bring out Paul Brown's skeleton for a play?  To let the defenders throw his bones at the other QB?

I don't see a need to fix the gorilla rule and make things even more complicated for average fans to understand.  The only reason I'd change it to pythons or condors is if the gorillas went on strike.

Please stop with these silly and impractical rule changes.

OMG replay officials make about the worst call I've ever seen on a cut-and-dried out-of-bounds call.  How the hell can reviews occur when they're plain and obvious, and then the referees announce that it's clear and obvious the other way?

Not sure what the spread is in this game, but it's basically like saying "we've reviewed the call and determined that 2+2 = 5".

The funny think is that this is about the first 30 seconds of NBA basketball I've watched all year, and I turn it on during a replay that to my naked eye without any context should not have even occurred, and then they reverse what seemed like a completely obvious out-of-bounds play.  And it decides the game.

Anyone who thinks there's not fixing or "tilting" going on is a fool.  Literally anyone that doesn't think there's some manipulation is a fool.

EDIT:

I watch 7 minutes of basketball (that represents 40 seconds of action) and see a total fix.  If anyone saw that replay (the first one) and can argue that it should have been overturned, I'd love to hear the explanation.

Referee bullcrap reversal of a clear call decides the game.  It's so bad they shoudl be suspended and investigated for gambling.

20 minutes ago, infrared41 said:

 

Weather forecasting is much better now than it was in the "old days." For example, last week a meteorologist I follow on YouTube said that Minneapolis was going to get blasted by snow this week. Guess what happened in Minneapolis this week. It snowed. A lot.

 

If the forecast says there is a 99% chance of rain and the radar shows that it's 99% going to rain, what exactly are we waiting for? I like that teams are being proactive and not making fans waste their time sitting around for 4 hours in the rain to see if the game gets called.

To be 100% fair, the forecast for Phillies opening day last year was horrific, and they postponed it a day ahead of time like this year.  It ended up being 80 degrees and sunny, while the next day ended up being a typical early-spring cloudy-chilly day.   But there wasn't a single model that predicted anything other than rain.  Something flukey happened.

I'd much rather err on the side of giving the fans the most time necessary to make a decision.  And it's one of the several reasons I hate this new scheduling format - it creates more situations where fans can be held hostage because there's fewer opportunities (none, in some cases) to make up games, so they just have to sit through delays.

No new stadium in any northeast or midwest city shoudl be constructed without some kind of Safeco-ish umbrella-ish cover.  Not a full dome, but a cover.  Prices are too high to have to sit or wait through multiple delays or get rained on or have a clinching NLCS game like in 2022 where the field was a complete trainwreck and pitchers could barely grip the ball.

4 hours ago, Burmy said:

So now we're cancelling games because of "forecasted" weather...I miss the old days when the call was made on the actual gameday.

If it ends up being nice and sunny, then it was called for nothing...

Lame take, especially for weekday game days where people have to take off from work and then may have to take off a second day, or drive down to a game (which can be hell) and be held hostage till the make up their mind. 
 

Fans should always be given as much notice as possible - especially in a case where there’s a built-in off day and it’s not a situation where they can’t make up the game. 
 

The first week or two of the season should only be held in places where it doesn’t rain or where there’s domes. It’s downright stupid to open in Philadelphia, or even worse Detroit, or Chicago, etc. in March. 
 

EDIT also for the stadium employees and vendors, it’s better for them to not have to pay for transit to/from a game that get cancelled and they make no money, then have to do it again the next day. 
 

Bad take. 

I think if they’re going to legislate gorillas out of the game, they could be replaced with giant eagles or condors or some bird that could either 1) snatch players up in its talons and carry them to… anywhere it wants to, 2) intercept balls, or 3) block field goals. 
 

it’d be the same one play a game rule, there’s just be a much lower injury risk (except in the case where the bird carries the player away and drops him somewhere from a high height). 
 

I think giant snakes are also a good alternative, but large birds could work too. 

4 hours ago, Red Comet said:

 

The best time to deploy a gorilla would be 4th and short. Can’t do a toosh push with a 500 pound ape who can bench press a Chevy truck in the way. I’m calling it the Kamikaze Kong formation. 

Again, it is, and has always been, one play a game. 

1 hour ago, McCall said:

The returners can only move once they catch the ball or the gorilla is within 5 yards of them, in which case they must run towards the gorilla, to make the catch. This will be known as a "Kamikaze Kick-Off". If they make the catch AND survive, they get the ball from the 50 yard line. If they only make the catch, the surviving team members get the ball from the 40. If the returner survives, but fails to make the catch, from the 30. If they fail to survive or make the catch, the ball is given to the kicking team, barring a touchback.

What if he makes the catch but the gorilla rips him in half and carries his upper body (which still has the ball) forward into the end zone? TD for the kicking team? 
 

But remember, gorillas can only be deployed once a game (though I have to re-check the rules on this), so I’m not sure if kickoffs are the best place. 

40 minutes ago, infrared41 said:

 

We gotta get the gorilla involved in this somehow.

I heard there was an uptick in gorilla concussions (but maybe it was concussions caused by gorillas?) but either way, they’re now unionizing, with Dr. Zaius (a chimp, yes, but still an ape) as their chief negotiator, so in the event of a strike, we may need to find some scabs. 
 

Im thinking that since we’re tinkering with the rules in order to reduce concussions, what about deploying gigantic pythons or boas to patrol the deepest parts of the field, so they can wrap around runners that break through the secondary and bring them down? Or maybe once a game, you can let one loose against the offense and it can wrap and sack the QB?

Like maybe a few defenders hold it and then throw it over the line when the ball is snapped so that it can wrap the QB around the neck or waist?
 

Maybe instead of kickoffs they could do free kicks like after safeties? Then a team could either kick it off or punt it, and the “on-sides kick” would just be a special punt that either falls fast, or is so hard that it bonks off of someone’s helmet and is caught by the kicking team. 

BLUE COLLAR, because marketers will have you believe that every city is BLUE COLLAR and that everyone in every city BRINGS THEIR LUNCH TO WORK IN A PAIL.  If you'll excuse me, I'm off to my management job in a downtown office building where I'm going to post on blogs about how certain athletes aren't "philly guys" because they're not BLUE COLLAR like me.  Hopefully my assistant doesn't disturb me by bringing me my coffee while I'm in the middle of posting.

8 hours ago, burgundy said:

 

Yes, the kicker needs to get the ball somewhere between the 20 and the goal line. If it lands in the endzone and stays inbounds, the returner has to either down it for a touchback to the 30, or they can choose to return it. If the ball hits inside the landing zone and bounces into the endzone, then downing it would be a touchback to the 20. If it lands short of the landing zone, regardless of bounce, the ball is placed at the 40.

 

I wonder if we'll see some attempts at low-angle, line-drive kicks to try and bounce them into the endzone. They don't need the hangtime anymore for players to get downfield, and the coverage can't even move until the ball is caught or touches the ground.

 

So the hardest sport to explain to anyone just got exponentially harder.  It's no wonder the sport isn't followed globally nearly as much as literally every other sport.  Way too much "if then then that, buttttttt if this and this, then instead of that, there's this, but this can be negated if the player does that, but only if there's 2 minutes or fewer left, otherwise that becomes this again, and this is nothing.  And now let's talk about tackling.   You can tackle like this, as long as you don't do that, but if you can do that, but if you only do it half way, otherwise this happens, but.......

I don't even know if I hate the play or not because I've never seen it, but I hate that the rules get more and more complex and difficult to follow every year.  I'd be almost embarrassed to have to and explain the rules to someone that's never seen it before.

So the "onsides kick" is now a totally separate "thing" from a kickoff.  The cool thing about it was that it was sorta like exploiting a loophole in the rule, and could be done by surprise.  But now if you have to declare your intent and there's totally different formations, it's fundamentally different from a kickoff, and is essentially a special "gimmick" play that can be used to retain possession.  And when it's so premeditated, and with the rule changes of the past few years, it's basically complete chance that you'll get it as opposed to having a good play ready to go.

I'm all for player safety and if the stats show that the new kickoff is safer then ok, but there should still be some loophole to allow for an "onsides kick" within the new formation (though I have no idea how.)

Question though - since the touchback is now the 30, does the kicker need to pooch it to fall in the "zone", rather than use his full leg?  I do like that part - kickers have become way too much a part of the game, so anything to reduce their impact - whether it's pushing the kickoff back to the 30 (or even 25 based on today's kickers) or narrowing the goal posts is a-ok with me.

With today's kickers, if you get a touchback and start on the 30, you only need to get 27 yards to have a shot at a 60-yard FG, which is no longer a mind-blowing achievement.  It kinda defeats the original intent of the game, and the goalposts should be narrowed to reward teams for gaining yards, not just having a good kicker.  

1 hour ago, WBeltz said:

They wear them in the post-season.

Some teams have rotating captains during regular season (hence no patch) and then permanent ones for playoffs (hence patch). The eagles were a team that didn’t use regular season captains or patches until the Pederson era, but I think they had post season patches before the.  

It's not even worth wasting bandwidth posting about this.  Anyone getting fired up about it is fooling themselves.