Rangers in 7. I would say Rangers in 6 if this was a a nuetral site but then again, the Rangers haven’t had too much trouble on the road. I don’t think Lee will win 3 games. Lewis’ spectacular outing in game 6 puts a whole new spin on things and takes some of the pressure off Lee (although at the rate he’s going this post season, the more pressure there is, the better he is).
Yankees is 7 oh wait…
There will obviously be much less interst in the Rangers/Giants world series than there would have been in the Yanks/Phils.
Rangers in 6.
Locally, they’re calling this the Steers and Queers World Series. Gotta root for the local team. Queers in 6.
Rangers in 6. Besides the match ups between Lee and the freak, ratings will drop significantly from last year.
I cannot believe baseball schedules its world series to coincide with the start of the NBA season and the heart of the football season. It is just overkill to be watching baseball in November, plus the world series this year is kind of a dull matchup.
There are just way too many freaking games in a season. thommo77 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I cannot believe baseball schedules its world > series to coincide with the start of the NBA > season and the heart of the football season. It > is just overkill to be watching baseball in > November, plus the world series this year is kind > of a dull matchup.
murders&executions Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > There are just way too many freaking games in a > season. But you need to play a lot of games in a sport like baseball to differentiate skill and luck. Not so much with bastketball where all that matters is how tall the players are (at least statistically).
bromion Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Steers and Queers World Series agreed -> rangers in 5
Then why not 200 games a year? Eliminate interleague play, cut down on some of the nondivision games and there is no need to play your division opponents 16 or 20 times each in a season. Just because a sport is so untaxing that players can play it 5 times a week doesn’t mean it’s a good idea. brain_wash_your_face Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > murders&executions Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > There are just way too many freaking games in > a > > season. > > But you need to play a lot of games in a sport > like baseball to differentiate skill and luck. > Not so much with bastketball where all that > matters is how tall the players are (at least > statistically).
murders&executions Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Then why not 200 games a year? Because 200 are not necessary to establish significance. Everybody’s always saying there should be less games…you know what happens pretty often then? You get two teams that got lucking in the World Series and lots of crappy baseball.
I think it should be cut down to 100-120 games per year. It would significantly reduce strain on pitcher’s arms, who get hurt much more often than position players. Of course that will never happen as cities that sell out/nearly sell out would lose too much money. That would also help balance the disparity in payrolls, which has gotten out of hand.
packattack4 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > > Of course that will never happen as cities that > sell out/nearly sell out would lose too much > money. Ding! Ding! Ding! We have a winner!
packattack4 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I think it should be cut down to 100-120 games per > year. It would significantly reduce strain on > pitcher’s arms, who get hurt much more often than > position players. > > Of course that will never happen as cities that > sell out/nearly sell out would lose too much > money. That would also help balance the disparity > in payrolls, which has gotten out of hand. I think 145-150 games would be ideal. Don’t get rid of inter-league but reduce the number of games. Each team has their “rival” inter-league series. i.e., Cubbies and White Sox play 2 series - one in Wrigley and one on the dirty south side. Get ride of 1 of those series and rotate baseball parks every other year. No need for both teams to play each other in 2 series a year (unless both meet in the WS which would be a sign of the apocalypse). m
higgmond Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > packattack4 Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > > > Of course that will never happen as cities that > > sell out/nearly sell out would lose too much > > money. > > Ding! Ding! Ding! We have a winner! But the teams that sell out all the time have to share revenue with the crappy attendance teams. Lower the amount of total games and you can probably raise prices slightly, and not have to subsidize crappy attendance teams as much since they will have less games where the ballpark is empty.
… Lee who?
bromion Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > … Lee who? Agreed. And Vlad Guerrero … come on. His beer belly didn’t allow him to grab the ball twice. ]Did you go yesterday? I was thinking about going to the game on Saturday, but at this point I don’t know.
I didn’t go. My boss has taken me and some co workers to a few games – incredible seats along the first base line between the dugout and home plate – but for some reason he wanted to take his family to the game instead. Might try to pick up some tickets myself if I can find any and they aren’t absurdly priced.
Who knew the Giants had the most potent lineup in the league