Jump to content

RedRamage

Moderators
  • Content Count

    22,621
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by RedRamage

  1. Yes and no... I mean, I don't think it'll be water cooler talk beyond Spring Training, honestly... but at the same time I think it will be one of those things that it brought out and discussed on occasion. Any time there's a "questionable" something that happens in a WS: "This is the first time since 2017 that there's a cloud over the WS results..." or "Player X is assumed of cheating, but even if he did it doesn't taint team-Y's WS win like the Astros team cheating back in '17." Or anytime the Astros make it to the post season or WS again: "This is the first WS appearance since the 2017 and 2019 seasons.... accomplishments which were marred by sign stealing..."
  2. Okay, we may not know who has specifically admitted to cheating, but conventional wisdom is that they all pretty much did, isn't it? I mean this isn't like steroids where it's reasonable to think that some people did and some didn't on a given team. I don't think a particular hitter said: "I don't want you doing that while I'm at bat... don't his the trash can." Furthermore, if any hitter did come out and say they told the Astros not to do it when they were at a bat, it wouldn't be too hard to go back and check, would it? I just assume any hitter for the Astros during those years cheated. Coming out and publicly admitting it wouldn't make me think less of them... in fact, it might make me think (slightly) higher of them.
  3. My understanding was that MLB gave some level of immunity to the players to get testimony though... am I wrong on that?
  4. Very interesting take six-hopper... Thank you. I do wonder what secrets they still need to keep though? I mean, everyone knows they cheated with the banging. The players have more or less acknowledged that it happened, didn't they? The coaches and front office have largely been held accountable. I suppose there's the rumor of the buzzer/wire... but isn't that even largely accepted at this point? I can't imagine what more there is out there that would need to be hidden. Of course, if the Astros DO settle, then the answer is probably a lot.
  5. I watched quite a bit of it over the weekend and my general thought was: "It's football..." and that's a good thing. There's none of the "EXTREME football league" none of "We're going to be even better than the NFL!" aspect to it. Just good football with a few key changes. Just like every other pro-football league it's going to have to see if it makes sense financially, but I was just as entertained by watching any of the XFL games as I would have been watching any two NFL games I had no rooting interest in. Commenting specifically on some of the rule changes, I'm virtually in lock step with Hongbit: Liked transparency in communication, liked kick off and punt rules. Not a fan of the clock stoppage. The conversion rules seem gimmicky, but might provide some interesting finishes. On thing I did NOT like was every time you listened in on replay review or coach/player communication the announcers had to comment: "It's it so cool that we can do this?" "It's it interesting that we can just talk to the coach during the game?" "It's it great that we can listen in on that conversation?" That part was almost as annoying as finding out that Stafford used to go to school with Kershaw.
  6. I can't imagine though that baseball in general wouldn't look at the splits themselves, even before the cheating was revealed. If you see a guy who's otherwise effective but just stinks against one team, then I think he'd have a job still.
  7. Probably not... but if he's successful and I'm a relief pitcher who faced the Astros in the last few years and didn't fair well and I'm out of work right now I'm definitely going to file a suit.
  8. https://www.detroitnews.com/story/sports/mlb/2020/02/10/mondays-baseball-ex-blue-jay-bolsinger-sues-astros-sign-stealing-scandal/4720583002/ I'm against this and hope it fails miserably in court. I'm not totally against the idea of forcing them to forfeit the postseason share, but the idea that a pitcher can sue for "interfering with and harming his career" is not good at all. The problem is two fold: 1. There is no way to prove how much the Astro's cheating cause him to lose his job in the majors. It may have been the catalyst but one bad outing isn't enough to force an entire league to not look again at a pitcher who had promise. There's also no way to prove how much the cheating did or didn't help the Astro's in that outing. Maybe instead of allowing 4 hits, 3 walks and 4 runs in 1/3 of an inning he only allows 3 hits, 2 walks, and 3 runs and the Blue Jays still drop him. 2. I'm not sure the Astro's did anything illegal. Don't get me wrong, they cheated, but was it illegal outside of baseball? There are things with-in the game that stand outside of normal laws. For a reverse example, if some throws a ball at me and hits me... well, I could sue him for that. But if it happens on a baseball diamond it's accepted as part of the game. I'm not sure there is a legal leg to stand on here. Of course, I'm not a lawyer at all, so I might be completely talking out of my butt. If this guy is successful though... can you imagine the follow up suits? Any other marginal reliever who faced the Astros in any "cheating" season and then didn't pitch in the majors again could have cause to say he lost his job because, in part, the Astros made him look bad. And starting pitcher who was demoted to reliever... heck any pitcher who later signed a new contract could allege that he made less because the Astros damaged his reputation by cheating.
  9. I get the feeling that if Jeter played for anyone but the Yankees and had the same career that he's be a much more liked guy by most of the baseball world. I think a lot of the Jeter "hate" is because he's a Yankee and many fans are reluctant to give props to any Yankee player.
  10. Buzzer or not, it doesn't seem like it's any worse. I mean if there's clear evidence of a buzzer I suppose you could say that you have a smoking gun that this particular player knew and actively participated in the cheating where there's a (very flimsy) defense that "sure... someone banged on a trash can while my client was at bat... but he didn't know why it was happened, and he certainly wouldn't have condoned or gone along with it if he had." I think MLB has accepted that all the players all knew what was going on and all benefited, to some degree, from it. They chose not to punish them directly for whatever reason. Whether the message delivery was via audio signal or electronic vibration is sorta meaningless.
  11. Yeah but... only due to a large number of injuries including the Stafford. Now, that's not to say that I think the Lions would have been 13-3 without any of the key injuries, but I think they would have been more in the 8-8 range.
  12. So, Narwhal, but not narwahl... Sea Unicorn? https://www.milb.com/milb/news/connecticut-tigers-rebrand-as-norwich-sea-unicorns/c-312063120
  13. "When I got back to the house, it was like a wave hit me. All of a sudden, my head felt like it was split wide open. Like someone had put a coconut in a vice and cracked it. It felt like my head was going to blow up and separate from my body." Been there, done that! Years ago I had a herniated disk in my back. I got a shot to try and deaden the pain (which didn't work) but the shot punctured my spinal column... no big deal, it would have healed up on it's own. A week or two later I went in for surgery and the doc had to shave off part of vertebrae get at the disk to push it back in place... also no big deal. EXCEPT... the very spot of bone that was removed was right over the spot where the needle hit my column... without the bone applying pressure on the puncture it didn't heal right and about a week after surgery it popped open. Now, I wasn't leaking out of my body like Jenks was, but it was pooling up in my lower back. And the headache he's describing is just beyond agonizing. Just shockingly painful and throbbing. Now, I was never in life or death danger, fortunately, but yeah... that's a pain that it just amazingly powerful.
  14. I'm trying to remember (which is always a bad idea given my memory) but how did Mando know what planet Baby Yoda was on? Was he told by the people hiring him? I agree that in order to make the story interesting that the tracker can't have unlimited range. If the range was unlimited then being a Bounty Hunter wouldn't be hard... I mean I suppose you still need to deal with apprehending the bounty and possibly fighting at the end, but that's grunt work more than skill or intelligence. And on the flip side if any can know where Mando is with the BY at any time it's just a matter of each episode essentially being: Go here, do this, run away before getting caught. It sorta becomes the A-Team in space then. (From a "real science" stand point it wouldn't make sense for an unlimited range tracker either, but then neither would a tacker that could home in on DNA in a single system or even a single planet so we're well into SciFi science here, which is fine... it's a scifi show so I don't have any issue with that.)
  15. No, just no... Blough did not look fine... he made a number of poor throws. Further, this is a guy without NFL tape. Once defense start getting tape on him they'll be able to do a better job of game planning. I'm not saying keep Stafford at all costs, but if we went into 2020 with Blough as the starting QB I'd assume a 12 loss year at least.
  16. It probably wasn't reasonable to expect a win with a 3rd string QB in... but man alive it should have been the offense that cost us the win... instead it was the defense. Honestly, the defense has been horrible all year long.
  17. Are you talking about that pass right near the endzone when there was some pretty obvious P.I. on the the defender that would likely have been called if reviewed putting the ball at that spot anyway?
  18. Yeah, I did a bit of looking after I ranted... should have done that first. I thought this was going to be the new mustang... as in: "no more muscle sports car, instead electric SUV for you." I didn't realize that this is going to be a line *along with* the muscle car. I still think it's a bit odd of a choice... I mean Porsche, Jag, etc... those are brand just introducing a new model. It's not like Porsche called their's the 911-E. But it's more understandable and acceptable.
  19. I have no problem with the idea of an electric cross over... but why call it a Mustang? I mean, you're just begging for it to fail in my opinion. Mustang fans are NOT going to be interested and it'll get huge amounts of backlash for the name in my humble opinion. It just isn't going to work. Again, this is not a bash on an electric SUV-cross over. But it would be like having a new superman but instead of a super powered alien it's a rich guy with no super powers who instead uses a lot of martial art training and gadgets to beat up criminals... but we're insisting that this is the new superman.
  20. I think JBK does has a point that this is a team activity and that makes it worse than a guy using PEDs on his own. This is a team activity and so goes deeper than just one person. That said, I question whether PEDs during the worst of the epidemic was really just isolated individuals without team knowledge. Granted, it likely was team organized, but I doubt that most teams were ignorant of what was going on.
  21. No, for four reasons: First, I won't trust someone who bet on their own team to win would never be on their own team to lose. Betting is the cardinal sin of baseball (and sports in general) and everyone knows that. If you're so a-moral that you're willing to bet anyway, I don't believe that you'd be moral enough to ONLY bet on your team to win. Second, if you're betting on the game you are doing something that is highly illegal within the sport and so have a strong design to keep it quiet. Further, you run the possibility of being in debt to people who have a huge interest in being able to control games and could easily apply pressure for you to fix a game, even one you're not betting on. You are in a highly compromised position. Third, even assuming you only ever bet on your team to win and assuming that you never got into huge debt or successfully resisted any attempt to coerce you into losing a game, there's still a problem of the spread. You can still win or lose a game and win the bet if it beats the spread. You could simply not try to win by as much. Fourth, let's say #1 and #2 don't come into play and when you bet you only ever bet for your team to win without any regard to a spread, there's still another problem: What about when you don't bet? Especially as a manager Pete Rose has the ability to sit or play star players which could dramatically influence the outcome. Further, he could decide to keep a struggling pitcher in a game because he hadn't bet on that one and would rather the pitcher just take his lumps rather than use up bullpen arms which he might need in a game he is betting on. With stealing signs many of these issues disappear: 1. You're not stealing sign to get worse. If you're willing to cheat you're scum, but you're scum interested in winning. You don't cheat to lose. 2. This is still an issue for sign stealing. If someone caught you they could lean on you to try and fix games or threaten to report that you cheated. 3. Obviously betting spreads have nothing to do with sign stealing. 4. There isn't any incentive to not try as hard as possible simply because signs can't be stolen this game. If the camera broke one game, for example, the manager isn't going to decide not to play a star player because there's no incentive to win. EDIT to add: Please don't misunderstand here... I still think this is a major problem and I do NOT agree with people like the author of the linked story above that "this 'scandal' is fun. It’s one of the first fun scandals we’ve had in sports in decades." To me this is a major crime... less major than gambling, but still a major crime. I would like to see punishments akin to those caught using PEDs.
  22. I agree that this is pretty serious and I think it needs serious punishment. BUT... I don't put in on the level of gambling for one big reason: The assumption is with sign stealing that you're trying to improve your team and win more. As bad as that is you can count on them still trying as hard as possible. There's really no point in stealing signs to try and play worse. With gambling there's always the concern of fixing a game. That's what makes it so terrible... that a player or players or manager would intentionally throw a game is the reason gambling is the worst crime in sports. Again, that's not to say that this is bad (at least imho) and should be punished (again, imho) but I wouldn't put it at the same level of gambling.
  23. What I don't understand is why Lou and Tram weren't both voted in together. I agree that they are both borderline, but both seemed certain to get in these days. So why didn't anyone figure that it makes sense that two guys who played together for so long as a double-play combo... who are being considered in part because of longevity of their careers... why would they not be considered together? About the only reason I can think of is that they didn't want people to assume they got in BECAUSE they played together for so long. But I don't know that anyone would really have argued that they didn't deserve it and only got the nod because of the tenure.
  24. Here's a Detnews story on it: https://www.detroitnews.com/story/sports/nfl/lions/2019/11/15/cleveland-browns-myles-garrett-suspended-rest-season-using-helmet-as-weapon/4202755002/ Suspensions (according the link above): Browns defensive end Myles Garrett was suspended for at least the rest of the regular season and postseason by the NFL on Friday for using a helmet “as a weapon” and striking Pittsburgh quarterback Mason Rudolph in the head. Steelers center Maurkice Pouncey was suspended three games for punching and kicking Garrett Browns defensive tackle Larry Ogunjobi was suspended for one game. He shoved Rudolph to the ground from behind during the melee. Now, looking at the video in the above tweet, I'm a little surprised that Rudolph didn't get some punishment as well. Maybe not a suspension, but a fine wouldn't be out of line. It's pretty clear that Rudolph was trying to rip off Garrett's helmet (see 20-25 second mark in video). Obviously this does not excuse Garrett at all... but my guess is Rudolph's actions caused Garrett to lose it. Again, clearly does NOT excuse Garrett ripping off Rudolph's helmet (two wrong's don't make a right) and absolutely does not excuse him hitting Rudolph with the helmet after words.
×
×
  • Create New...