stevejrogers

batmagadanleadoff wrote: That's what every baseball wife always says in every interview they give. "I didn't know who he was. Or that he was a famous baseball player. I might've heard that he was making tens of millions of dollars but I wasn't hardly paying any attention to that. I didn't really notice the two different Ferraris he was always following me in. I didn't even know what a car was, to tell you the truth." To give her some benefit of the doubt, this was in 1996 we are talking about. Rodriguez was just starting to make a name for himself all the way in SEATTLE. Oh sure he was already making a big splash on the national scene and all (first pick in the 1993 draft), but still, he wasn't at Ken Griffey Jr.'s level yet of being visible everywhere you turned. (Even though Jeter and Nomar were doing that back then). It would be a year later that he started to make a million a year as well. Oh sure he wasn't Felix Fermin by any stretch, but still, she does deserve some benefit of the doubt in terms of her clueless-ness of who he was.

Why was Ashford called up to replace Hubie? And what took them a month to pull the trigger on Straw?

Completely out of my ass. After typing I thought it would be wrong cause I think Ashford is in the players section of the first edition yearbook, which would only be the OD expected roster.

Lets see, 3Bmen 1983...Tucker Ashford?

From Wiki, Roy Campenella of the Nashua Dodgers. Though shouldn't that fact be "unofficial" though as he took over a game after Walt Alston was ejected. Can someone give me a list of all the coaches who "took over" for Bobby Cox after all his ejections? Do you want to fork over all those wins and losses over to those guys? I'm sure whatever the outcome of that game was, it belongs to Walt Alston, not Roy Campenella.

Maybe they figure since Hernandez only wore 17 with the Mets for just 5 years, and some change with the Indians, and actually wore 37 for a longer period of time (1977-6/15/1983), hence it really is a bigger deal on the local level.

="AG/DC":1ipc80a2]By the way tomorrow is the first anniversary of "Oh, my goodness gracious!"[/quote:1ipc80a2] I really don't know what was sadder, that display (which becomes sadder and sadder with each new revelation or situation with Clemens) or the fact that Waldman turned all the negativity she got from it into some sort of attack on women in broadcasting. So much for it being considered one of the "greatest moments ever" at Yankee Stadium though! metirish May 05 2008 06:38 PM Still hilarious. DocTee May 05 2008 06:45 PM This is the first time I ever heard that-- what a moron. metirish May 05 2008 06:48 PM ="DocTee":1a4lj3x4]This is the first time I ever heard that-- what a moron.[/quote:1a4lj3x4] Really? of all the dramatic things ............ DocTee May 05 2008 06:52 PM While 3000 miles is a long way from the NY baseball orbit, it's far enough to keep me insulated from that crap. Rockin' Doc May 05 2008 07:23 PM DocTee - "This is the first time I ever heard that-- what a moron." It was my first time hearing that clip as well. I plan on it also being the last. AG/DC May 06 2008 07:23 AM Happy anniversary, Suzyn and Roger MFS62 May 06 2008 07:46 AM I never noticed before (because I've been thankfully successful in avoiding looking at her), but Suzyn seems to have learned her makeup technique from Vampira. Later soupcan May 06 2008 08:05 AM I was thinking Mr. Spock's sister. Methead May 06 2008 08:15 AM Homer! You've got it set on "whore!" Willets Point May 06 2008 08:33 AM Clemens is channeling Dick Cheney in that pic. seawolf17 May 15 2008 12:11 PM Page 2 Quiz ]7. According to McCready's mother, Gayle Inge, whom did Clemens ask for permission to have a relationship with McCready? (a) McCready's father, Tim ( His wife HA! AG/DC May 28 2008 07:43 AM Stop digging, Roger. Clemens adds to lawsuit against McNamee NEW YORK - Roger Clemens amended his defamation suit against Brian McNamee on Tuesday, adding a new claim of "intentional infliction of emotional distress." Clemens' attorneys also filed a 39-page response to the motion to dismiss that McNamee's lawyers made on March 4. Clemens claims McNamee, his former personal trainer, was "malicious and grossly negligent" when McNamee told baseball investigator George Mitchell last year that Clemens had used steroids and human growth hormone. Clemens also said McNamee defamed him when he repeated his accusations to SI.com. Much of the filing was filled with the legal rationale for why a Texas court should have jurisdiction over McNamee, a New York resident. "When a person who is not a resident of the state of Texas intentionally defames a Texas resident, it is fair and should be expected that they have to defend their conduct in a Texas court before a Texas jury," Joe Roden, one of Clemens' lawyers, said in a telephone interview. Mr. Zero May 28 2008 08:42 AM ]"When a person who is not a resident of the state of Texas intentionally defames a Texas resident, it is fair and should be expected that they have to defend their conduct in a Texas court before a Texas jury" geez. whats next? Pistols at dawn? metsguyinmichigan Jun 10 2008 09:58 AM [url:qij7328c]http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/baseball/yankees/2008/06/09/2008-06-09_source_roger_clemens_host_of_athletes_po.html[/url:qij7328c] Yikes. Is there anything this guy wasn't taking? And how does he wear a cup? That's gotta hurt. Explains the whole "My goodness gracious!" thing. metirish Jun 11 2008 09:47 AM Rockin' Doc Dec 29 2008 07:38 PM Hospital to remove Clemens' name ESPN.com news services HOUSTON -- The Roger Clemens Institute for Sports Medicine, which opened in January 2007, will no longer carry the embattled pitching great's name. The Memorial Hermann Hospital Health Care System announced Saturday that Clemens' name will be removed, effective Thursday, as the fallout from the Mitchell report continues to haunt the winner of 354 major league games and seven Cy Young awards. The facility will be renamed the Memorial Hermann Sports Medicine Institute. In its statement, the hospital said the decision to take off Clemens' name was made "to better reflect its commitment to all sports and athletes" and that "the move reflects the desire to promote the broad range of sports medicine services and programs offered by Memorial Hermann." In November, the New York Daily News reported that Clemens has been asked to end his involvement with a charity golf tournament in Houston that he has hosted for four years. Although Clemens helped raise millions of dollars for the charities associated with the event, the Giff Nielsen Day of Golf for Kids was held Nov. 11 at Houston's Shadow Hawk Golf Club without him. Despite its move to disassociate itself with the pitcher, Memorial Hermann Hospital said "Roger Clemens remains committed to working with us to champion youth sports and develop aspiring baseball players." Clemens donated $3 million to Memorial Hermann for a pediatric wing at Memorial Hermann's Children's Hospital. Clemens has denied using performance-enhancing drugs since he was identified in former U.S. Sen. George Mitchell's report on drug use in baseball. He filed a defamation lawsuit last January against his former trainer, Brian McNamee, who claims he injected Clemens with steroids and human growth hormone. Federal prosecutors also are looking into whether Clemens committed perjury when he testified under oath in front of a congressional committee that he never used PEDs. Clemens is eligible for Hall of Fame election in 2013, but McNamee's allegations may have irreparably damaged Clemens' chances of induction. Clemens has since filed a defamation lawsuit against McNamee. Information from The Associated Press was used in this report. A Boy Named Seo Dec 30 2008 08:48 AM How many peeps in the last couple of years freaked the hell out when their doc sent them to the Roger Clemens Institute for Sports Medicine to get their wonky knee fixed? MFS62 Dec 31 2008 06:40 AM I'm probably the last person to support Clemens. But that's not right. I mean, he was involved in "sports medicine", ... sorta'. Later themetfairy Jan 01 2009 07:24 AM The Dugout[/url:vderl61m] has some fun at Roger's expense. Benjamin Grimm Jan 19 2009 08:17 AM As I type this, there are 25 hours and 44 minutes left in the Bush presidency. My guess is that he WON'T pardon Roger Clemens. But we'll find out for sure soon enough. Edgy DC Jan 19 2009 09:09 AM Can you pardon without a conviction? Would seem kind of perverted to me. Benjamin Grimm Jan 19 2009 09:12 AM Ford pardoned Nixon before he was convicted of anything. Edgy DC Jan 19 2009 10:52 AM Excellent point. Ford, however, still waits beyond the grave for a pardon for those horrid yellow curtains. metsguyinmichigan Jan 19 2009 11:32 AM ="Edgy DC":u450chyv]Excellent point. Ford, however, still waits beyond the grave for a pardon for those horrid yellow curtains. [/quote:u450chyv] Said yellow curtains are depicted joyously in the Oval Office recreation in the Ford Museum across the street! It's actually pretty cool. They have audio tapes of a typical day playing as you enter. Edgy DC Mar 11 2009 01:45 PM Col. Mustard did it in the Jacuzzi with the syringe. Centerfield Mar 11 2009 02:10 PM I would have gone with: "Clemens gets it in the ass at the Yankee Stadium Hottub" Fman99 Mar 11 2009 02:12 PM Oh my, he sullied the Cathedral! Gosh. metirish Mar 11 2009 02:16 PM "Of all the dramatic things I have seen Roger Clemens standing in George Steinbrenners hot tub taking it in the ass"

Speaking of which, I did manage to get that entire night's programing on this tape (they had a card listing the next evening's programing which included the '88 NL East Clincher, so I'm thinking I may have that somewhere as well) and at promptly 11:34 the Sports Tracker returns, and it appears some college hoop action has been added to the rotation! And the tape cuts off at 11:35. Still good quality for a 20 year old cassette! Wasn't that supposedly why Betamax was superior though, that they'd be longer lasting than VHS, or am I getting as fuzzy on the 80s as Kase is?

SteveJRogers wrote: So they chopped it up to fit the hour block so they could show a TAPED doubles tennis match from London? Then again, this was 1988 and local cable programming, so I shouldn't be so surprised. What I mean is, that they probably only were allotted to go to 11:30 that particular evening, with no live action (Edgy, you recall what the date was for that match?) they had to get the tennis stuff in that 2 hour prime-time block, throw the rebroadcast of the horse racing show and call it a night. So they just couldn't get the actual full length Seaver ceremony without going long on their broadcast evening.

FWIW, despite Breenie saying the ceremony would be shown "in it's entirety" it was definitely chopped up to fit the one hour block. Annoying cuts include cutting Murph off as he was going on about someone who was sending well wishes to Tom despite not being there at Shea (no recall of who it was, Ryan?). They did get Seaver's speech and the tribute song in though. So they chopped it up to fit the hour block so they could show a TAPED doubles tennis match from London? Then again, this was 1988 and local cable programming, so I shouldn't be so surprised.

Back on topic, sort of, the oldest Met game I have on tape is the 1999 Wild Card Play-In and since I've only recorded postseason action. The only Met postseason game since that I don't have on tape is Game 6 of the 2006 NLCS.

My family had a VCR right around the early 1980s, but it wasn't the best quality. I tried to tape 1986 postseason games, but nothing came out. I was successful in recording a 1987 ST game off of SportsChannel, but that must have been long since taped over. I do have the Seaver ceremony, not live (I was at Shea that day), but taped from that winter off of SportsChannel. Same night as NFL postseason action on Christmas Eve. Watching the tape now actually, I threw in the tape to record 6 hours straight at 5:24 to go to my Grandmother's house in Throgs Neck (still a habit of mine to go some time earlier, even in the DVDR age). So I caught a good portion of what was then UA Columbia Cablevision's (Southern Westchester County) cable sports tracker which gives updates of the NFL action, and the Sun Bowl, as well as some Vegas odds maker's lines for the next couple of days while playing some Christmas music as it's bed. Very riveting stuff! Especially considering there were only TWO events, and both were final (Alabama beat Army in the Sun Bowl, and the Oilers topped the Browns (two franchises no longer in those cities oddly enough) and they were using two different "cards" for each. One just a simple score, and the line score. And at 6:14 we are presented with the switch over and a title card for that night's SportsChannel programming! 6:30 Thoroughbred Action (Surprised Jody McDonald wasn't the host of the show at this point) 7:00 Tom Seaver Day Remembered (just the ceremony, not the game. I wonder if Tom was in the booth with Ralph, Fran and Rusty that day) 8:00 Nabisco Masters World Doubles Tennis Championship Finals 11:00 Rerun of the Thoroughbred Action. And the lineup card stays on for the next 15 minutes! Thats it, I'm never going to complain about SNY's production values again! Hey neat, just before the show starts they run Gary Thorne (then with the Devils) wishing holiday greetings! YIKES, a very young Mike Breen at the update desk! Yup, this program needs to get on a DVD, STAT!

Just that he was just as guilty as Gary Cohen is when he puts JUST as little more into "ITS OUTTA HERE" when calling a Met home run than an opponent's. As well as the fact that Murph just plain wanted to accentuate the positives of Met players. Sure he wasn't a negative person, but that can be taken as homerism by non fans. The guy sure wasn't a Caray, or a Rizzuto, or a Sterling or a Hawk Harrelson, but one could sense that Murph indeed was a fan of the team he called games for.

mm and you seem convinced that I'm backing down after you and FK argue against the points in my postings.

]While I agree with the general point, there are differences, -Hernandez often makes the point that after making the second out he was so damn disgusted that he just couldn't stand to be in the dugout and watch the season end (though it showed a lack of faith in Gary Carter) as opposed to the infamous card game where legend has it neither man knew of the outcome of the game until their dejected teammates started coming into the clubhouse. OE: Speaking of unfairly treated Mets, I'm LOOPER!

metsmarathon wrote: am i alone in never being able to figure out what the hell steve is talking about, and what his actual point is, because i can't for the life of me figure out what his point is, and whether its his point that he's making, or if he's manufacturing a point on the behalf of some mysterious unmentioned met fan collective... or is it just that when his point gets squashed and refuted that he then attributes it to the mysterious mythical met fan collective which allows him to then distance himself from his own point... i can't tell, because i just can't follow it. Would it be better if I just came out and said, I've heard WFAN and 1050 ESPN hosts and callers, as well as members of the MOFO say whatever?

AG/DC wrote: I just like how you argue how all Met fans except you hold Met heroes to differerent standards, and then you turn around and can't hold Hernandez to anything like the same standard. You and FK like getting the last word on me don't you? So admitting that I really don't care either way, despite listing excuses listed by Hernandez and saying that I see the media and fan's perspective on giving him and Mitchell a pass with the "cute story" approach while giving Henderson & Bonilla hell is another example of me doing a circular argument?

Just for the record, I'm just arguing that I can see people's (media, fans) point in giving Hernandez a pass in the "Well thats what I would have done" vein. Same reasoning for Met fans to be disgusted with Glavine's reaction to his final Met performance (granted that was probably more Glavine/Braves haters having at it with him and if it was John Maine it would have been given the "gee the kid has a good, even keeled head on his shoulder" treatment).

DocTee wrote: Is that a Derek Jeter jersey he has under his arm? Yes, IIRC it was for a charity auction thing.

AG/DC wrote: I'm going to disagree. Rizzutto was a fool in the seventies and a nightmare after. Well whenever IT happened, Rizzuto was at one time actually a pretty decent announcer, but because of his linkage with the Yankee history, and in some respects his age, he was allowed to stay in the Yankee booth untill he announced his retirement.

="AG/DC"]And the Rizzuto character from *61 wasn't anything like Rizzuto from the eighties. Which Yankee fans are you talking about? During one point he was rattling off some birthday wishes, to which the Mel Allen character told him that no one cares, or something to that effect. I've seen it listed in several places as a major anachronism of the movie as Rizzuto wouldn't be the "Rizzuto" Yankee fans love for some time down the road.

="Frayed Knot"] Replace the name 'Hernandez' with 'Delgado' in a similar situation and does he still get the same pass and mystique or does he get skewered for abondoing the team while thinking only of himself? Possible answers: a) No way I'm lying To be perfectly honest, many in the Met fan community would welcome that sort of display from Delgado, especially after this photo after the the last game of the season last year as well as his "About what?" comment about wheither he was disgusted with the current state of affairs with the Mets.

Frayed Knot wrote: NYC (or half of it anyway) not only put up with but embraced Rizzuto as an announcer, complete with all his homerisms, WW's, off tangent stories, dismissals of the entire National League, bad syntax, etc. Apparently though Rizzuto was more of that caricature during the 80s and 90s as he was getting up there in years, and in his prime he really was a polished announcer. This actually was one of the "inconsistencies" Yankee fans mentioned about *61, that Crystal had Rizzuto doing his act from the 80s and 90s when he wasn't that way at all in 1961. FWIW I watched a DVD of Game 5 of the 1977 ALCS that had Rizzuto and White doing the PBP on WPIX and Rizzuto did none of his famous antics. Interestingly also I watched Game 7 of the 1952 World Series off of iTunes, and Mel Allen was doing the national broadcast, and he also put away his usual pro-Yankee shtick. A better Yanqui example would be John Sterling who has been an egomaniacal Yankee pom-pom waver since he first entered the Yankee broadcast booth 20 years ago. On the flip side, Murph's "Happy Recap," the fact that EVERY lazy fly ball was a "line drive," the fact that he rarely (if ever) had a bad thing to say about a Met have been grounds to label Bob Murphy a "homer" by non Met fans through the years.

No, Henderson and Bonilla are NOT a non story because of what they were doing. Again, everyone would have given Hernandez a pass because "he is so much of a winner he hates to even WATCH the final out of his team loosing the World Series live in the dugout" The story with Henderson & Bonilla is that they were doing something completely unrelated, and legend has it they weren't even PAYING ATTENTION to the game. Hernandez at least was watching a TV.

="AG/DC"]SteveJRogers wrote: ="AG/DC"]Hernandez has Another difference is, the Mets go on to lose, where Hernandez watched the final out from is never discussed. Perhaps only in long after the fact books like Pearlman's book, but no one questions Hernandez's leadership. I don't know why you would say that. Because it becomes a non story. And even so the media and fans would have given Hernandez a pass for it because "they would have done the same thing." In fact it probably would have enhanced Hernandez's "winner" mystique based on the fact that he didn't want to face seeing the Red Sox celebrate on his home field after such a great season. Just about anything. Actually, the only reason why it IS a story is because it's one of those quaint "people do silly superstitious things like never moving from their position" sort of stories. AG/DC May 02 2008 11:47 PM If it would be a non-story, then Henderson and Bonilla are a non-story. SteveJRogers May 02 2008 11:52 PM No, Henderson and Bonilla are NOT a non story because of what they were doing. Again, everyone would have given Hernandez a pass because "he is so much of a winner he hates to even WATCH the final out of his team loosing the World Series live in the dugout" The story with Henderson & Bonilla is that they were doing something completely unrelated, and legend has it they weren't even PAYING ATTENTION to the game. Hernandez at least was watching a TV. G-Fafif May 03 2008 03:51 AM From Tom Verducci's masterful 2003 SI profile, "What Is Rickey Henderson Doing In Newark?": ]Mets manager Bobby Valentine removed Henderson from Game 6 of the 1999 NLCS, replacing him with Melvin Mora. New York lost on a series-ending bases-loaded walk by Kenny Rogers. Henderson reportedly was in the clubhouse playing cards with teammate Bobby Bonilla when the deciding run scored. Asked about the incident, Henderson offers a qualified denial: "Kenny Rogers came in the clubhouse, and we was playing cards? If Kenny Rogers made it off that mound and we was playing cards, everybody in America, even the press, would have been there when we were playing. So you can't say that. "Was it an excuse? These two guys [Henderson and Bonilla], you had took us out. We tied the game up, and you took me and him right back out of the game. What for? For defensive purposes that you said? Moore [sic]? That's your judgment, and you're my chief and you're the manager. And I have no say-so. Does it frustrate me? Yes, because during the postseason I feel that's when the people that's gonna rise to the top should rise to the top, and I feel I was always one of them type of players." What he said. AG/DC May 03 2008 07:06 AM Edited 1 time(s), most recently on May 03 2008 07:33 AM Steve, a player who is still available dropping his pants and underpants and making plane reservations is more counterproductive to his team than a player who is out of a game doing anything. Allegedly doing anything. And anybody who can't stand to see his team lose ought to say so with his bat. Frayed Knot May 03 2008 07:19 AM ]the media and fans would have given Hernandez a pass for it because "they would have done the same thing." In fact it probably would have enhanced Hernandez's "winner" mystique based on the fact that he didn't want to face seeing the Red Sox celebrate on his home field after such a great season. Replace the name 'Hernandez' with 'Delgado' in a similar situation and does he still get the same pass and mystique or does he get skewered for abondoing the team while thinking only of himself? Possible answers: a) No way I'm lying Now replace the Game 6 comeback with a Carter pop-out and does the Keith story retain the same warm fuzzy feeling? a) No way I'm going to pretend so AG/DC May 03 2008 07:35 AM Edited 1 time(s), most recently on May 03 2008 10:00 AM Replace "winner" with "whiner" in Steve's argument, though, and it works great. SteveJRogers May 03 2008 08:48 AM ="Frayed Knot"] Replace the name 'Hernandez' with 'Delgado' in a similar situation and does he still get the same pass and mystique or does he get skewered for abondoing the team while thinking only of himself? Possible answers: a) No way I'm lying To be perfectly honest, many in the Met fan community would welcome that sort of display from Delgado, especially after this photo after the the last game of the season last year as well as his "About what?" comment about wheither he was disgusted with the current state of affairs with the Mets. DocTee May 03 2008 09:19 AM Is that a Derek Jeter jersey he has under his arm? SteveJRogers May 03 2008 09:21 AM DocTee wrote: Is that a Derek Jeter jersey he has under his arm? Yes, IIRC it was for a charity auction thing. SteveJRogers May 03 2008 09:50 AM Just for the record, I'm just arguing that I can see people's (media, fans) point in giving Hernandez a pass in the "Well thats what I would have done" vein. Same reasoning for Met fans to be disgusted with Glavine's reaction to his final Met performance (granted that was probably more Glavine/Braves haters having at it with him and if it was John Maine it would have been given the "gee the kid has a good, even keeled head on his shoulder" treatment). AG/DC May 03 2008 10:00 AM I just like how you argue how all Met fans except you hold Met heroes to differerent standards, and then you turn around and can't hold Hernandez to anything like the same standard. SteveJRogers May 03 2008 10:03 AM AG/DC wrote: I just like how you argue how all Met fans except you hold Met heroes to differerent standards, and then you turn around and can't hold Hernandez to anything like the same standard. You and FK like getting the last word on me don't you? So admitting that I really don't care either way, despite listing excuses listed by Hernandez and saying that I see the media and fan's perspective on giving him and Mitchell a pass with the "cute story" approach while giving Henderson & Bonilla hell is another example of me doing a circular argument? metsmarathon May 03 2008 10:20 AM am i alone in never being able to figure out what the hell steve is talking about, and what his actual point is, because i can't for the life of me figure out what his point is, and whether its his point that he's making, or if he's manufacturing a point on the behalf of some mysterious unmentioned met fan collective... or is it just that when his point gets squashed and refuted that he then attributes it to the mysterious mythical met fan collective which allows him to then distance himself from his own point... i can't tell, because i just can't follow it. SteveJRogers May 03 2008 10:22 AM metsmarathon wrote: am i alone in never being able to figure out what the hell steve is talking about, and what his actual point is, because i can't for the life of me figure out what his point is, and whether its his point that he's making, or if he's manufacturing a point on the behalf of some mysterious unmentioned met fan collective... or is it just that when his point gets squashed and refuted that he then attributes it to the mysterious mythical met fan collective which allows him to then distance himself from his own point... i can't tell, because i just can't follow it. Would it be better if I just came out and said, I've heard WFAN and 1050 ESPN hosts and callers, as well as members of the MOFO say whatever? AG/DC May 03 2008 10:23 AM Steve, I didn't say anything about a circular argument. I guess it's not the first time when it's unclear when you're speaking for yourself or on behalf of the media. SteveJRogers May 03 2008 10:26 AM ]While I agree with the general point, there are differences, -Hernandez often makes the point that after making the second out he was so damn disgusted that he just couldn't stand to be in the dugout and watch the season end (though it showed a lack of faith in Gary Carter) as opposed to the infamous card game where legend has it neither man knew of the outcome of the game until their dejected teammates started coming into the clubhouse. OE: Speaking of unfairly treated Mets, I'm LOOPER! AG/DC May 03 2008 10:30 AM And you quote that 'cuz... SteveJRogers May 03 2008 10:42 AM mm and you seem convinced that I'm backing down after you and FK argue against the points in my postings. AG/DC May 03 2008 10:51 AM I know not seem, Steve. I wrote that it's unclear when you're speaking on behalf of yourself or the media (or, as Thon mentions, some group of fans). I didn't say anything about backing down any more than I said anything about a circular argument. Are you arguing that you're not backing down (not that I'm saying you are). Because that would kind of not work with your outcry that I'm insisting on getting the last word in. cooby May 03 2008 12:14 PM SteveJRogers wrote: ="metsmarathon"]am i alone in never being able to figure out what the hell steve is talking about, and what his actual point is, because i can't for the life of me figure out what his point is, and whether its his point that he's making, or if he's manufacturing a point on the behalf of some mysterious unmentioned met fan collective... or is it just that when his point gets squashed and refuted that he then attributes it to the mysterious mythical met fan collective which allows him to then distance himself from his own point... i can't tell, because i just can't follow it. Would it be better if I just came out and said, I've heard WFAN and 1050 ESPN hosts and callers, as well as members of the MOFO say whatever? Steve, you are a nice man and seem to be easily influenced by the opinions of others. But three groups of people that I can immediately think of off the top of my head that you should never ever ever allow to influence you in any way are MOFO posters and ESPN and/or WFAN callers. metsmarathon May 03 2008 07:49 PM SteveJRogers wrote: ="metsmarathon"]am i alone in never being able to figure out what the hell steve is talking about, and what his actual point is, because i can't for the life of me figure out what his point is, and whether its his point that he's making, or if he's manufacturing a point on the behalf of some mysterious unmentioned met fan collective... or is it just that when his point gets squashed and refuted that he then attributes it to the mysterious mythical met fan collective which allows him to then distance himself from his own point... i can't tell, because i just can't follow it. Would it be better if I just came out and said, I've heard WFAN and 1050 ESPN hosts and callers, as well as members of the MOFO say whatever? yes. always cite your source. duh. especially when that source is you. Triple Dee May 07 2008 07:43 AM G-Fafif wrote: From Tom Verducci's masterful 2003 SI profile, "What Is Rickey Henderson Doing In Newark?": ]Mets manager Bobby Valentine removed Henderson from Game 6 of the 1999 NLCS, replacing him with Melvin Mora. New York lost on a series-ending bases-loaded walk by Kenny Rogers. Henderson reportedly was in the clubhouse playing cards with teammate Bobby Bonilla when the deciding run scored. Asked about the incident, Henderson offers a qualified denial: "Kenny Rogers came in the clubhouse, and we was playing cards? If Kenny Rogers made it off that mound and we was playing cards, everybody in America, even the press, would have been there when we were playing. So you can't say that. "Was it an excuse? These two guys [Henderson and Bonilla], you had took us out. We tied the game up, and you took me and him right back out of the game. What for? For defensive purposes that you said? Moore [sic]? That's your judgment, and you're my chief and you're the manager. And I have no say-so. Does it frustrate me? Yes, because during the postseason I feel that's when the people that's gonna rise to the top should rise to the top, and I feel I was always one of them type of players." What he said. Not to beat a dead horse or anything, but I don't believe it was the act of playing cards that infuriated everybody, but rather what Henderson said in his post game comments: "I was heartbroken. I had 2 pairs but Bobby had 3 jacks" That quote would make an awesome sig btw.