RyanB06 Posted October 27, 2005 Share Posted October 27, 2005 Well, my dear hot head fan... let's deal that your team has yet to win one World Series in the 21st century specially after the big collapse of the 2004 ALCS. I don't know where you have got your information from but the Yankees have won the World Series this Century. The beat the New Yprk Mets five games to one in 2000. In Case you don't know the year 200 is part of this Century. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/21_centuryAnd besides it's a dumb statement because it's only been 5 full seasons since the Yankees last won a World Series. That's not a long time, certaintly less than most teams. Wikipedia is wrong. There was no Year Zero, so any year ending on "000" ends a century, not starts a new one.Thus, the 20th Century ended in 2000, and Swiss' assertion is correct.Nice try, though. Sodboy13 said: As you watch more basketball, you will learn to appreciate the difference between "defense" and "couldn't find the rim with a pair of bloodhounds and a Garmin." meet the new page, not the same as the old page. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VitaminD Posted October 27, 2005 Share Posted October 27, 2005 The city needed it more than the sox franchise did. Chicago has been so starved for a baseball title that this is a much needed aphrodisiac, but it's not the cure. Boo-hoo. We're all crying for Chicago and their thirst for a baseball title. I guess they were just going out of their minds, getting by on only 6 NBA titles and a Super Bowl in the last couple decades to sustain them. Oh, won't success EVER come to the shores of Lake Michigan???Good God, this is as bad as listening to Red Sox fans bemoan their title drought. Because all the Celtics, Bruins and Patriots titles didn't count, right? "Start spreading the news... They're leavin' today... Won't get to be a part of it... In old New York..."In order for the Mets' run of 12 losses in 17 games to mean something, the Phillies still had to win 13 of 17. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CS85 Posted October 27, 2005 Share Posted October 27, 2005 The city needed it more than the sox franchise did. Chicago has been so starved for a baseball title that this is a much needed aphrodisiac, but it's not the cure. Boo-hoo. We're all crying for Chicago and their thirst for a baseball title. I guess they were just going out of their minds, getting by on only 6 NBA titles and a Super Bowl in the last couple decades to sustain them. Oh, won't success EVER come to the shores of Lake Michigan???Good God, this is as bad as listening to Red Sox fans bemoan their title drought. Because all the Celtics, Bruins and Patriots titles didn't count, right? I put the baseball part in there for a reason. Somebody must've taken a dump in your cornflakes. I'll spare an argument. Quote "You are nothing more than a small cancer on this message board. You are not entertaining, you are a complete joke." twitter Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VitaminD Posted October 27, 2005 Share Posted October 27, 2005 Well, my dear hot head fan... let's deal that your team has yet to win one World Series in the 21st century specially after the big collapse of the 2004 ALCS. I don't know where you have got your information from but the Yankees have won the World Series this Century. The beat the New Yprk Mets five games to one in 2000. In Case you don't know the year 2000 is part of this Century. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/21_centuryAnd besides it's a dumb statement because it's only been 5 full seasons since the Yankees last won a World Series. That's not a long time, certaintly less than most teams. Wikipedia is wrong. There was no Year Zero, so any year ending on "000" ends a century, not starts a new one.Thus, the 20th Century ended in 2000, and Swiss' assertion is correct.Nice try, though. This is a revelation. How an otherwise-reliable source like wikipedia can allow and accept such a flagrant gaffe is shocking.Worse still, the link for further explanation takes you to their entry on "20th century". In that, Stephen Jay Gould bases his argument on the century ending at 1999 partly on the notion that the "first decade" of the Christian Era only had 9 YEARS. Yet a decade is defined as a 10-year period.I've never seen evidence of the existence of a "Year Zero". As such, the first year of the present system was Year 1 A.D., which means the 100th year was 100 A.D. Extending this out, the 20th century ended with its 100th year... 2000.Better luck this century, Yankees fans!------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------As for poop in my cornflakes, yeah - comments like yours pooped in the cornflakes. It rings hollow to hear fans from cities who've been gorged with success to bellyache that they're suffering from a drought. Talk to fans in Cleveland or Philadelphia. Those are fans suffering from real droughts. "Start spreading the news... They're leavin' today... Won't get to be a part of it... In old New York..."In order for the Mets' run of 12 losses in 17 games to mean something, the Phillies still had to win 13 of 17. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eriqjaffe Posted October 27, 2005 Share Posted October 27, 2005 Great. The White Sox won and broke the curse. There was never a curse, except the one that ESPN and Fox made up to make the World Series seem sexier. True Sox fans never leaned on that crutch, we always knew exactly whose fault the title drought was.Oh, and BTW:The parade is FRIDAY, not Monday:http://chicagosports.chicagotribune.com/sp...-home-headlinesSupposed to kick off at the Cell around 11, and wind its way up to the Chicago River and Wacker Drive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Swiss Posted October 27, 2005 Share Posted October 27, 2005 I can actually tell you right now, Swiss isn't a bandwagoner.Well, my dear hot head fan... let's deal that your team has yet to win one World Series in the 21st century specially after the big collapse of the 2004 ALCS. Who me? Because I was defending you there.Besides my team hasn't won since 1990 and hasn't had a winning season this century. Sorry me!!! This last sentence WASN'T for you, it is for J. Quincy King. I'm going to correct it right now!-------------About the end of the 20th century, there is a link from U.S. Naval Observatory: http://aa.usno.navy.mil/faq/docs/millennium.htmlThat is very accurate from scientists and US Naval staff.Not just Wikipedia that used to be a very good info resource but it is often plagued by errors (because it's too open to every contributor that may not know very well what is writing about). It's great to be young and a Giant! - Larry Doyle Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Swiss Posted October 27, 2005 Share Posted October 27, 2005 The city needed it more than the sox franchise did. Chicago has been so starved for a baseball title that this is a much needed aphrodisiac, but it's not the cure. Boo-hoo. We're all crying for Chicago and their thirst for a baseball title. I guess they were just going out of their minds, getting by on only 6 NBA titles and a Super Bowl in the last couple decades to sustain them. Oh, won't success EVER come to the shores of Lake Michigan???Good God, this is as bad as listening to Red Sox fans bemoan their title drought. Because all the Celtics, Bruins and Patriots titles didn't count, right? I put the baseball part in there for a reason. Somebody must've taken a dump in your cornflakes. I'll spare an argument. Baseball is king in Boston and Chicago.That's why people bemoan the bad luck of their ballclubs despite the recent success of their NBA, NFL and NHL teams.Don't forget the famous phrase of Reinsdorf about trading all six NBA rings for one World Series ring......and the bad try in baseball of Michael Jordan. It's great to be young and a Giant! - Larry Doyle Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ProvidenceRI Posted October 28, 2005 Share Posted October 28, 2005 Great. The White Sox won and broke the curse. Now they'll do like the Red Sox did: enjoy their run during the next season, fall flat in the playoffs, and when all is said and done they'll become just another team.GO BREWERS IN 2006! Yes, you're right, that's what the Red Sox did. Our 2 best pitchers were hurt, so we were screwed.We have the best players on our farm system, and apply Moneyball tactics with a real bank roll, so I am not worried.Can we finally get a salary cap on MLB baseball? It seems that you have to spend $75 million to be competitive... These salaries are ridiculous.1 New York Yankees $208,306,8172 Boston Red Sox $123,505,125 3 New York Mets $101,305,821 4 Los Angeles Angels $97,725,322 5 Philadelphia Phillies $95,522,0006 St. Louis Cardinals $92,106,833 7 San Francisco Giants $90,199,500 8 Seattle Mariners $87,754,334 9 Chicago Cubs $87,032,93310 Atlanta Braves $86,457,302 11 Los Angeles Dodgers $83,039,00012 Houston Astros $76,779,00013 Chicago White Sox $75,178,000... 26 Cleveland Indians $41,502,500 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclopsis Joe Posted October 28, 2005 Share Posted October 28, 2005 I still call the Atlanta Braves to win it next year..as A WILD CARD.*happy now Nats/Mets/Marlins/Phillies fans? You're allowed to win one...one!* I don't speak for democrats, democrats don't speak for me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roger Clemente Posted October 28, 2005 Share Posted October 28, 2005 The best thing about it....Journey's, but especially Steve Perry's, popularity sky-rockets 2000%$50 says he gets a ring.--Roger "Time?" Clemente. Follow me on Twitter if you care: @Animal_Clans.My opinion may or may not be the same as yours. The choice is up to you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.