batmagadanleadoff

Grab some popcorn and fire up the ol� DeLorean Time Machine because tonight, SNY and the Mets dig deep into yesteryear�s archives to shake the cobwebs from your memories. Does anyone still remember the iPhone? How about the Iraqi war? Tonight, it�s another Mets Classic from 2007 -way way back when the uniforms were black and the President was white. It�s the Mets vs. the Rockies tonight, all over again. Don�t bother looking for Jane Jarvis. Also starring Willie �I Will Sac Bunt for Food� Randolph as the manager and Burt Mustin as the batboy

Didn't MGIM end his Mets losing streak in Cincy last season? I vaguely remember a discussion about Skyline Chili on this forum last season.

="Kong76":nozh3c50]You're the one who asked what if. If it's true, then it was a scoop. Other than that, I have no interest in playing sneaky professor word games with you.[/quote:nozh3c50] No problem. But I didn't think I was playing sneaky word games.

="Kong76"]batmag: But what if that's true? <<< Uh ... scoop A story or fact; especially, news learned and reported before anyone else. He listened carefully, in hopes of getting the scoop on the debate. (definition courtesy or Wiktionary) A story or fact.... "or"

Not as funny as Irish's Family Guy clip, but consistent with the theme of this thread:

="Kong76":110kwfn8]Better safe than sorry last couple days of February, I guess. If he's hurt, how long before someone blogs/scoops that the Mets dropped the ball by letting Santana incorrectly compensate for the leg and damaged his arm?[/quote:110kwfn8] But what if that's true? Kong76 Feb 28 2009 12:42 PM batmag: But what if that's true? <<< Uh ... scoop A story or fact; especially, news learned and reported before anyone else. He listened carefully, in hopes of getting the scoop on the debate. (definition courtesy or Wiktionary) Frayed Knot Feb 28 2009 12:43 PM I heard he's dead but the team doesn't want to admit it!!!! batmagadanleadoff Feb 28 2009 03:14 PM ="Kong76"]batmag: But what if that's true? <<< Uh ... scoop A story or fact; especially, news learned and reported before anyone else. He listened carefully, in hopes of getting the scoop on the debate. (definition courtesy or Wiktionary) A story or fact.... "or" Kong76 Feb 28 2009 04:04 PM You're the one who asked what if. If it's true, then it was a scoop. Other than that, I have no interest in playing sneaky professor word games with you. Frayed Knot Feb 28 2009 04:54 PM From A. Rubin's blog: Johan Santana says doctors told him it's the triceps tendon that is causing stiffness in his pitching elbow. With pitching coach Dan Warthen and manager Jerry Manuel already on the bus for Lakeland, Fla., Santana said he'll wait until Sunday to map out a plan for pitching. But it's clear he won't be in a Grapefruit League game for a while. Santana said he hopes to throw a light bullpen session on Sunday. He then wants to face hitters in a batting-practice-style setting two or three times before entering a game. With potentially two days rest in between each BP, we're possibly talking two weeks before a game appearance. Edgy DC Feb 28 2009 07:21 PM ="Benjamin Grimm":v03fqqv6]Why do something that puts you at a disadvantage against about two-thirds of the opposing pitchers?[/quote:v03fqqv6] Because, in theory, it doesn't put you at a disadvantage against them. They can't pitch inside against you, and you're two steps closer to first. If you can't do it, your skills are certainly putting you at a disadvantage, but, then, we have no idea how good or bad he has ever been hitting righthanded against righties. It's not his ability, but his relative ability, that forces the issue. batmagadanleadoff Feb 28 2009 08:25 PM ="Kong76":nozh3c50]You're the one who asked what if. If it's true, then it was a scoop. Other than that, I have no interest in playing sneaky professor word games with you.[/quote:nozh3c50] No problem. But I didn't think I was playing sneaky word games.

Wouldn't that make Francesca a hermaphrodite? Not that there's anything wrong with that. No. I think there is something wrong with that. I was thinking of the Seinfeld line that applied to gays, but not necessarily hermaphrodites.

="Fman99":9bre7exc]Someone should punch him in the you know where and kick him in the you know what.[/quote:9bre7exc] **** and cock. batmagadanleadoff Feb 27 2009 08:44 PM Wouldn't that make Francesca a hermaphrodite? Not that there's anything wrong with that. No. I think there is something wrong with that. I was thinking of the Seinfeld line that applied to gays, but not necessarily hermaphrodites. LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr Feb 27 2009 09:27 PM Something about the image of him going down to friggin' Mets camp and chatting with players only via phone from a confined booth, fiddling his Diet Coke-filled gunt, seems very fitting. Nymr83 Feb 27 2009 11:42 PM ="bmfc1":1dqc6os1] FAN management blew it when they let Russo go and kept Francesa. Russo knows how to run a talk show, Francesa does not.[/quote:1dqc6os1] They blew it when they didn't take the opportunity to kick them both to the curb and replace them. metirish Feb 28 2009 05:20 AM ="LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr":3jc3me60]Something about the image of him going down to friggin' Mets camp and chatting with players only via phone from a confined booth, fiddling his Diet Coke-filled gunt, seems very fitting.[/quote:3jc3me60] Funny and true... Benjamin Grimm Feb 28 2009 05:25 AM ="batmagadanleadoff":srmd9d3o]="Fman99":srmd9d3o]Someone should punch him in the you know where and kick him in the you know what.[/quote:srmd9d3o] **** and cock.[/quote:srmd9d3o] You punch him in the neck and tell him is sister is a ****. As for Mike and the Mad Dog, they're both idiots, but only Mike is contemptible. dgwphotography Feb 28 2009 05:56 AM I'm hardly a prude, but that's one word that should be censored. I consider it to be the ugliest word in the English language.... Kong76 Feb 28 2009 06:22 AM No, not a prude, but you're historically a bit of a good boy scout here. I find Derek or Jeter much more offensive and Fman is just funny. Fman99 Feb 28 2009 06:48 AM ="LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr":101fav9d]Something about the image of him going down to friggin' Mets camp and chatting with players only via phone from a confined booth, fiddling his Diet Coke-filled gunt, seems very fitting.[/quote:101fav9d] I like it, it's worthy of a cartoon. Alas I have no artistic talents, aside from spinning a tapestry of profanity and juvenile laughs. Now is the "gunt" refer to his gut or his ****? Or is it that fat roll above the nethers that some heftier folks have? I've also heard that referred to as the FUPA (Fat Upper Pubic Area), pronounced "foo-pah", and the AIF (Ass-in-front) which rhymes with "chafe." (ironically) Nymr83 Feb 28 2009 05:21 PM ="Iubitul":lk7phxbo]I'm hardly a prude, but that's one word that should be censored. I consider it to be the ugliest word in the English language....[/quote:lk7phxbo] Nigger? Benjamin Grimm Feb 28 2009 08:32 PM Yes? dgwphotography Mar 02 2009 11:28 AM ok - two words. The fact that that word is even in your vocabulary and not in mine says something...

When the game's over, I will announce that this is the end.

batmags proclaims that the Mets are the team to beat!

Rey Ordonez just lined a single to left. Replays confirm that the batted ball actually clears the infield before taking its first bounce. The Daily News will report that Ordonez is ready to challenge for the league's batting title

="Fman99":2orau98g]I have two replicas that I got on special, one black and one white/pinstripes. Each of them cost me $20 or so. The white was is a Beltran jersey -- the letters/numbers are just blue. It's clearly a knockoff but I don't care. The black one is a BP jersey, no number or name on it.[/quote:2orau98g] MLB makes Mets jerseys with blue numbers on the back. So that alone wouldn't automatically mean that your jersey is a knockoff. MLB licensed Met shirts come in many, many styles and at various price points. I used the term counterfeit (and its synonyms) in reference to bootlegged jerseys made without the consent of MLB. The top of the line legit retail authentics sell for anout $250.00. So there is a huge price range below that, for the counterfeiters to exploit. They'll sell you a $50 jersey that might not look right and might not survive more than a few washes.

="LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr":2c3a88u8] Ah, but if I cannot detect a flaw, to me, is the flaw really there? If an 0-2 curveball bends in, but nobody's around to watch it, does a 2007 season really end?[/quote:2c3a88u8] Ask the pitcher that pitched the 0-2 curve. Fman99 Feb 25 2009 08:51 AM I have two replicas that I got on special, one black and one white/pinstripes. Each of them cost me $20 or so. The white was is a Beltran jersey -- the letters/numbers are just blue. It's clearly a knockoff but I don't care. The black one is a BP jersey, no number or name on it. batmagadanleadoff Feb 25 2009 09:09 AM ="Fman99":2orau98g]I have two replicas that I got on special, one black and one white/pinstripes. Each of them cost me $20 or so. The white was is a Beltran jersey -- the letters/numbers are just blue. It's clearly a knockoff but I don't care. The black one is a BP jersey, no number or name on it.[/quote:2orau98g] MLB makes Mets jerseys with blue numbers on the back. So that alone wouldn't automatically mean that your jersey is a knockoff. MLB licensed Met shirts come in many, many styles and at various price points. I used the term counterfeit (and its synonyms) in reference to bootlegged jerseys made without the consent of MLB. The top of the line legit retail authentics sell for anout $250.00. So there is a huge price range below that, for the counterfeiters to exploit. They'll sell you a $50 jersey that might not look right and might not survive more than a few washes.

="LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr":14ly9gy8]Like anything else, spend enough time and attention on it, and you find a nice deal-- grabbed an authentic (BN w/ tags) pinstriped 2006 Beltran (no last-season Shea patch) and Mitchell-and-Ness 1986 Mookie over the last month for 90 between the two.[/quote:14ly9gy8] Sometimes, good deals can be had. I picked up an uncustomized 1995 Mets authentic on ebay a few months ago. I'd like to customize it, but don't know where to take it to get the proper '95 Mets specs lettering and numbering. If I wrote that most of the recent vintage authentic ebays are unauthentic, I'd say that just about every Mitchell & Ness (any year) on ebay is counterfeit. Eighty-six style Mets M&N jerseys are very popular on ebay. The very few legit ones I've seen on ebay over the last two years were selling for close to $200. One of the problems in discerning the authenticity of these jerseys on ebay, where you don't get to touch the item, and are limited to whatever photos the seller decides to provide is that it's easier to prove a counterfeit than it is to determine whether the jersey is legitimate. If I can see a flaw in the jersey, I can determine that the jersey is a fake. But a jersey isn't necessarily legitimate just because I can't detect a problem by browsing the item: the defect might not be visible. Anyway, I think that I always see a flaw in the M&N's. Also, those jerseys retail for, sometimes more than $300. A buy it now on one of those for $50 or so would make me skeptical, if anything. I'm not trying to imply that your M&N is a fake; I assume you found a good one. I'm just sharing some general observations. LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr Feb 24 2009 10:55 PM ="batmagadanleadoff":2jeqh1yk] If I can see a flaw in the jersey, I can determine that the jersey is a fake. But a jersey isn't necessarily legitimate just because I can't detect a problem by browsing the item: the defect might not be visible. [/quote:2jeqh1yk] Ah, but if I cannot detect a flaw, to me, is the flaw really there? If an 0-2 curveball bends in, but nobody's around to watch it, does a 2007 season really end? It's entirely possible Mookie is a fake; then again, it compares pretty favorably to any other M & N product I've ever had the pleasure of running under my fingers (went to school in Philly, and was lucky enough to work near the M & N store, so I've clocked plenty of lunch-break drool time over double-knit), and the same seller relisted the jersey a few times when it didn't draw the big opening bids he seemed to be soliciting (150-plus, then 125-plus). Then again AGAIN, though-- and this is my real point, I think-- if it feels legit enough to me, and the flaws are imperceptible, it's worth the bones. Unlike the killjoy who speculates in Star Wars figures, I'm buying to enjoy. Centerfield Feb 25 2009 08:06 AM Good luck with getting that name printed on the back. Even Kelvin found it hard to get that done. batmagadanleadoff Feb 25 2009 08:42 AM ="LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr":2c3a88u8] Ah, but if I cannot detect a flaw, to me, is the flaw really there? If an 0-2 curveball bends in, but nobody's around to watch it, does a 2007 season really end?[/quote:2c3a88u8] Ask the pitcher that pitched the 0-2 curve. Fman99 Feb 25 2009 08:51 AM I have two replicas that I got on special, one black and one white/pinstripes. Each of them cost me $20 or so. The white was is a Beltran jersey -- the letters/numbers are just blue. It's clearly a knockoff but I don't care. The black one is a BP jersey, no number or name on it. batmagadanleadoff Feb 25 2009 09:09 AM ="Fman99":2orau98g]I have two replicas that I got on special, one black and one white/pinstripes. Each of them cost me $20 or so. The white was is a Beltran jersey -- the letters/numbers are just blue. It's clearly a knockoff but I don't care. The black one is a BP jersey, no number or name on it.[/quote:2orau98g] MLB makes Mets jerseys with blue numbers on the back. So that alone wouldn't automatically mean that your jersey is a knockoff. MLB licensed Met shirts come in many, many styles and at various price points. I used the term counterfeit (and its synonyms) in reference to bootlegged jerseys made without the consent of MLB. The top of the line legit retail authentics sell for anout $250.00. So there is a huge price range below that, for the counterfeiters to exploit. They'll sell you a $50 jersey that might not look right and might not survive more than a few washes.

="metsguyinmichigan":su1ipn29]I only buy the authentics because I'm a stickler. But I'd have really good luck with eBay. I got a black Santana home jersey last year for about $50, and it's the real deal. And there are others on there, too. Patience is the key with ebay, of course.[/quote:su1ipn29] Your experience is the exception. Most of the (un)authentics on ebay that claim to be of very recent vintage are counterfeit. LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr Feb 24 2009 09:35 PM Like anything else, spend enough time and attention on it, and you find a nice deal-- grabbed an authentic (BN w/ tags) pinstriped 2006 Beltran (no last-season Shea patch) and Mitchell-and-Ness 1986 Mookie over the last month for 90 between the two. metsguyinmichigan Feb 24 2009 10:23 PM ="batmagadanleadoff":1n5l2uny]="metsguyinmichigan":1n5l2uny]I only buy the authentics because I'm a stickler. But I'd have really good luck with eBay. I got a black Santana home jersey last year for about $50, and it's the real deal. And there are others on there, too. Patience is the key with ebay, of course.[/quote:1n5l2uny] Your experience is the exception. Most of the (un)authentics on ebay that claim to be of very recent vintage are counterfeit.[/quote:1n5l2uny] Sure, on ebay, you always have to be careful. But if you know what to look for, you can do OK. batmagadanleadoff Feb 24 2009 10:35 PM ="LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr":14ly9gy8]Like anything else, spend enough time and attention on it, and you find a nice deal-- grabbed an authentic (BN w/ tags) pinstriped 2006 Beltran (no last-season Shea patch) and Mitchell-and-Ness 1986 Mookie over the last month for 90 between the two.[/quote:14ly9gy8] Sometimes, good deals can be had. I picked up an uncustomized 1995 Mets authentic on ebay a few months ago. I'd like to customize it, but don't know where to take it to get the proper '95 Mets specs lettering and numbering. If I wrote that most of the recent vintage authentic ebays are unauthentic, I'd say that just about every Mitchell & Ness (any year) on ebay is counterfeit. Eighty-six style Mets M&N jerseys are very popular on ebay. The very few legit ones I've seen on ebay over the last two years were selling for close to $200. One of the problems in discerning the authenticity of these jerseys on ebay, where you don't get to touch the item, and are limited to whatever photos the seller decides to provide is that it's easier to prove a counterfeit than it is to determine whether the jersey is legitimate. If I can see a flaw in the jersey, I can determine that the jersey is a fake. But a jersey isn't necessarily legitimate just because I can't detect a problem by browsing the item: the defect might not be visible. Anyway, I think that I always see a flaw in the M&N's. Also, those jerseys retail for, sometimes more than $300. A buy it now on one of those for $50 or so would make me skeptical, if anything. I'm not trying to imply that your M&N is a fake; I assume you found a good one. I'm just sharing some general observations. LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr Feb 24 2009 10:55 PM ="batmagadanleadoff":2jeqh1yk] If I can see a flaw in the jersey, I can determine that the jersey is a fake. But a jersey isn't necessarily legitimate just because I can't detect a problem by browsing the item: the defect might not be visible. [/quote:2jeqh1yk] Ah, but if I cannot detect a flaw, to me, is the flaw really there? If an 0-2 curveball bends in, but nobody's around to watch it, does a 2007 season really end? It's entirely possible Mookie is a fake; then again, it compares pretty favorably to any other M & N product I've ever had the pleasure of running under my fingers (went to school in Philly, and was lucky enough to work near the M & N store, so I've clocked plenty of lunch-break drool time over double-knit), and the same seller relisted the jersey a few times when it didn't draw the big opening bids he seemed to be soliciting (150-plus, then 125-plus). Then again AGAIN, though-- and this is my real point, I think-- if it feels legit enough to me, and the flaws are imperceptible, it's worth the bones. Unlike the killjoy who speculates in Star Wars figures, I'm buying to enjoy. Centerfield Feb 25 2009 08:06 AM Good luck with getting that name printed on the back. Even Kelvin found it hard to get that done. batmagadanleadoff Feb 25 2009 08:42 AM ="LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr":2c3a88u8] Ah, but if I cannot detect a flaw, to me, is the flaw really there? If an 0-2 curveball bends in, but nobody's around to watch it, does a 2007 season really end?[/quote:2c3a88u8] Ask the pitcher that pitched the 0-2 curve. Fman99 Feb 25 2009 08:51 AM I have two replicas that I got on special, one black and one white/pinstripes. Each of them cost me $20 or so. The white was is a Beltran jersey -- the letters/numbers are just blue. It's clearly a knockoff but I don't care. The black one is a BP jersey, no number or name on it. batmagadanleadoff Feb 25 2009 09:09 AM ="Fman99":2orau98g]I have two replicas that I got on special, one black and one white/pinstripes. Each of them cost me $20 or so. The white was is a Beltran jersey -- the letters/numbers are just blue. It's clearly a knockoff but I don't care. The black one is a BP jersey, no number or name on it.[/quote:2orau98g] MLB makes Mets jerseys with blue numbers on the back. So that alone wouldn't automatically mean that your jersey is a knockoff. MLB licensed Met shirts come in many, many styles and at various price points. I used the term counterfeit (and its synonyms) in reference to bootlegged jerseys made without the consent of MLB. The top of the line legit retail authentics sell for anout $250.00. So there is a huge price range below that, for the counterfeiters to exploit. They'll sell you a $50 jersey that might not look right and might not survive more than a few washes.

These days, jerseys come in all price points. The teams try to accomodate every budget. Authentics represent the top of the line in retail and are very close to what the players actually wear on the field. The material, lettering and numbering is exactly what the pros wear. Pros jerseys are available in every even numbered size from 40 on up. (Theoretically, a pro could wear a size 38, or even smaller, I suppose, but I've never seen a pro jersey in a size below 40) Retail authentics however, are available only in every other even numbered size. So 40, but not 42; 44 but not 46, and so on. Pro jerseys, unlike retail authentics are ofter custom tailored to the players own personal tastes. These alterations come in the form of tapering at the stomach area, sleeve lengthening, extra shirt length to tuck in, or backs that are longer than the front. None of these alterations are available at the retail level. Also, the tagging on authentics is slightly different than on the game used shirts; anyone armed with this knowledge can easily distinguish an authentic from a "gamer". This is all sort of nitpicking, though. Authentics are terrific looking shirts in their own right, and look like the real thing to anyone who isn't trying very hard to distinguish the authentic from a game used. Nothing even close to an authentic existed when I was a kid. I sure would've liked going around in an authentic Milner jersey, or a Wayne Garrett jersey, when I was young. Good luck with whatever you select.

="Kong76":eyqm7cfx]Side note: I don't do names and numbers on my jerseys. If someone wants to buy me a jersey with a name and number, I'll take a road grey with either Koosman, Matlack, or Kingman on it. I almost got a Carter #8 moons ago, they way he turned out I'm glad I didn't succumb to the temptation 'cause I probably wouldn't wear it.[/quote:eyqm7cfx] Since you (sort of) raised the issue, what do you think of a jersey style customized to a player who never wore that particular style? Like for example, buying a current style road grey Mets jersey with the black drop shadows and customizing it to, say, Matlack, who never played in a Mets jersey that had the color black, and never wore a Mets jersey that had his last name across the top of the back? Kong76 Feb 22 2009 12:50 PM Probably a bad idea mixing eras, I get carried away. Guess I'll stick to no names and no numbers. Edgy DC Feb 22 2009 01:21 PM I think I'll get a full jersey when the Mets sign somebody with my last name, so they'll mass-produce it and make it affordable. The cost of the customizing is killer. Gwreck Feb 22 2009 04:07 PM You don't have the correct poll choice. The answer is: they're fine, regardless of age. I have a few which are generally only worn to the games. Of course, nothing in black is acceptable. Fman99 Feb 22 2009 05:18 PM ="Gwreck":2orazl7m]You don't have the correct poll choice. The answer is: they're fine, regardless of age. I have a few which are generally only worn to the games. Of course, nothing in black is acceptable.[/quote:2orazl7m] Actually there is an "OK only in blue" choice for the color purists out there. Benjamin Grimm Feb 22 2009 05:40 PM I hate the black uniforms, but the black t-shirts look pretty good. Gwreck Feb 22 2009 06:10 PM ="Fman99":2ltu58ot]Actually there is an "OK only in blue" choice for the color purists out there.[/quote:2ltu58ot] Yabbbbut I've got a gray one too, which is just fine as it matches the road uniform. I'll vote that category though. Edgy DC Feb 22 2009 06:47 PM Yankee jerseys and shirts with the players' names on them --- highly disapprove. seawolf17 Feb 22 2009 07:27 PM ="Edgy DC":21habvpp]Yankee jerseys and shirts with the players' names on them --- highly disapprove.[/quote:21habvpp] Absolutely; it's simply wrong. But Mets? Yes on all counts. I have an orange Santana, a blue Carter (although I wish they made a Hernandez), and a black Reyes I got as a gift this holiday season. G-Fafif Feb 23 2009 05:25 AM Huge believer in the jersey t-shirts: affordable, portable, delightful for my needs. The jersey is way too big an investment for a player who may be a passing fancy. The rare gray NEW YORK 42 tee, a winter '02-'03 gift from Mrs. Fafif, pops up now and then. I can wear that around the house. I'm thrilled she never spent the bucks on an actual VAUGHN 42 jersey, for it wouldn't be worn anywhere. Tees through the years in rough chronological order of acquisition: Hundley, Alfonzo, Ordonez, Baerga, Olerud, Reed, Ventura, Piazza, Vaughn, Reyes, Martinez, Wright, Delgado, Beltran. themetfairy Feb 23 2009 05:42 AM I have to rethink my answer about this. I was thinking of a particular style of t-shirt yesterday, but now that I'm thinking about it I realize I was mistaken. If we're talking about Mets t-shirts with player names and numbers, I'm cool with those. Zvon Feb 24 2009 02:43 PM I say anything goes when it comes to T-shirts. John Cougar Lunchbucket Feb 24 2009 03:36 PM Yeah, ts are ok with me, don't have any and would only get one on sale or something. I can see turning 70 years old, and your kids pitching in to get you an authentic road jersey with your name and No. 70 on the back. Looks great on my dad. OlerudOwned Feb 24 2009 03:46 PM ="G-Fafif":3ar9illj]Huge believer in the jersey t-shirts: affordable, portable, delightful for my needs. The jersey is way too big an investment for a player who may be a passing fancy. The rare gray NEW YORK 42 tee, a winter '02-'03 gift from Mrs. Fafif, pops up now and then. I can wear that around the house. I'm thrilled she never spent the bucks on an actual VAUGHN 42 jersey, for it wouldn't be worn anywhere. Tees through the years in rough chronological order of acquisition: Hundley, Alfonzo, Ordonez, Baerga, Olerud, Reed, Ventura, Piazza, Vaughn, Reyes, Martinez, Wright, Delgado, Beltran.[/quote:3ar9illj] Coincidentally, I picked up a totally authentic Vaughn jersey on clearance at Modell's for $20 once.

="Gwreck"]="metsguyinmichigan"]Just found out they're going to wear that cap with the patch all season! If only that were true. More likely, they're going to wear that cap in the 15 games of the year that Charlie Samuels and the Mets deign to actually wear their proper uniform, and they'll wear some godawful black or blue-and-black caps the other 147. I bet you're right.

="LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr":sf1yfzjh]Ah. Okay. (Pause.) (Pause. Takes long sip of beer.) No, it was a good one, really.[/quote:sf1yfzjh] Welcome aBordick! Did you steal my allotted amount of avatar memory to make yours bigger? Well, whatever the deal is, enjoy your avatar. While it lasts. At about the 800 post mark, your avatar will probably disappear for a couple of hundred posts. So now that everyone's on board, here we go again: Next week, Marlon intends to reveal his blueprint for the 2009 season, in which Anderson is named NL MVP and the Mets beat the Brewers in the 7th game of the NLCS after substitute Manager Willie Randolph calls for a sac bunt with two outs in the bottom of the ninth and nobody on base.

="Frayed Knot":360rewuf]It's sailing over my head. Neither the 'blueprints' nor the Willie references are making sense.[/quote:360rewuf] I was making fun of Marlon's tendency (okay, he only did it once as far as I know) to blueprint the future of the Mets. The joke being that if the Mets were supposed to win two out of every three remaining games just cause Marlon scripted it -- why stop there? For the same amount of ink, Marlon could've just as easily insisted on three out every four, or seventeen out of every eighteen, or a 98 HR season for our Mr. Anderson. Or that the Mets would win the World Series no matter how many remaining games they won. Or a cure for asthma. I'd put that in my blueprint If I ever got down to writing one. http://cranepoolforum.net/phpbb2/viewtopic.php?p=224723&highlight=blueprint&sid=5c96215a5a07492995262fd9010e73d1#224723 LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr Feb 19 2009 05:27 PM Ah. Okay. (Pause.) (Pause. Takes long sip of beer.) No, it was a good one, really. batmagadanleadoff Feb 19 2009 05:36 PM ="LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr":sf1yfzjh]Ah. Okay. (Pause.) (Pause. Takes long sip of beer.) No, it was a good one, really.[/quote:sf1yfzjh] Welcome aBordick! Did you steal my allotted amount of avatar memory to make yours bigger? Well, whatever the deal is, enjoy your avatar. While it lasts. At about the 800 post mark, your avatar will probably disappear for a couple of hundred posts. So now that everyone's on board, here we go again: Next week, Marlon intends to reveal his blueprint for the 2009 season, in which Anderson is named NL MVP and the Mets beat the Brewers in the 7th game of the NLCS after substitute Manager Willie Randolph calls for a sac bunt with two outs in the bottom of the ninth and nobody on base.

="John Cougar Lunchbucket":ppn6sdtg]Can someone explain what it is with the brothers who don't take the stickers off the bill?[/quote:ppn6sdtg] Yesterday, I spent about 10 minutes pondering that same exact thought. Perhaps Marlon ordained it in last year's blueprint? themetfairy Feb 19 2009 09:17 AM Much better than the Domino's patch. Although I still prefer this one - SteveJRogers Feb 19 2009 09:50 AM From what I gather it is a Citigroup issue. They wanted a version of their Citi Field logo to be the uniform logo, so the caps and other merchandise will get the patch that isn't an Epic Fail. metsguyinmichigan Feb 19 2009 02:45 PM Just found out they're going to wear that cap with the patch all season! Benjamin Grimm Feb 19 2009 02:48 PM Yuck. Centerfield Feb 19 2009 02:49 PM No patch. No orange dot. Stop defacing my hat. Gwreck Feb 19 2009 02:50 PM ="metsguyinmichigan"]Just found out they're going to wear that cap with the patch all season! If only that were true. More likely, they're going to wear that cap in the 15 games of the year that Charlie Samuels and the Mets deign to actually wear their proper uniform, and they'll wear some godawful black or blue-and-black caps the other 147. LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr Feb 19 2009 04:52 PM It seems that whether it�s in regard to replenishing the major-league lineup (win-now-sort-of), restocking the minors (draft-well-but-don�t -sign-anyone-above-slot) or off-field stuff (this-Madoff-business-doesn�t-affect-our-budget-but-we�ll-be-alarmingly-frugal-anyway-despite-3-or-4-new-for-2009-partially-publically-funded-revenue-streams), our franchise plan is �Serving two masters/pleasing none.� So, you know, the two-different-patches rigamarole fits. Sigh. Gwreck Feb 19 2009 05:50 PM ="LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr":a0q1jn0f]It seems that whether it�s in regard to replenishing the major-league lineup (win-now-sort-of) restocking the minors (draft-well-but-don�t -sign-anyone-above-slot) or off-field stuff (this-Madoff-business-doesn�t-affect-our-budget-but-we�ll-be-alarmingly-frugal-anyway-despite-3-or-4-new-for-2009-partially-publically-funded-revenue-streams), our franchise plan is �Serving two masters/pleasing none.� So, you know, the two-different-patches rigamarole fits.[/quote:a0q1jn0f] I count 3 or 4 large exaggerations there. MFS62 Feb 20 2009 07:01 AM We don't need no steenking patches. Later Fman99 Feb 20 2009 10:03 AM ="John Cougar Lunchbucket":20ip55fb]Can someone explain what it is with the brothers who don't take the stickers off the bill?[/quote:20ip55fb] The Doobie Brothers? They don't wear hats. MFS62 Feb 20 2009 10:26 AM ="John Cougar Lunchbucket":pzznudbs]Can someone explain what it is with the brothers who don't take the stickers off the bill?[/quote:pzznudbs] Are you talking about store/ price stickers? My daughter told me a few years ago that used to be a sign of pride that the hat was stolen, rather than paid for. Later batmagadanleadoff Feb 20 2009 10:29 AM ="Gwreck"]="metsguyinmichigan"]Just found out they're going to wear that cap with the patch all season! If only that were true. More likely, they're going to wear that cap in the 15 games of the year that Charlie Samuels and the Mets deign to actually wear their proper uniform, and they'll wear some godawful black or blue-and-black caps the other 147. I bet you're right. Benjamin Grimm Feb 20 2009 10:51 AM I just saw a clip (on "Mets Hot Stove Report") of Francisco Rodriguez's press conference, and it looks (although it was hard to tell for sure) that his blue Mets cap had a white button on top. (Hmmm, didn't the Brooklyn Dodgers have a white button on their caps?) OlerudOwned Feb 20 2009 12:58 PM ="John Cougar Lunchbucket":1j28k4gy]Can someone explain what it is with the brothers who don't take the stickers off the bill?[/quote:1j28k4gy] Someone probably started doing it to be different, and everyone else wanted to be different too. LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr Feb 20 2009 04:30 PM ="Gwreck":1phroxm2]="LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr":1phroxm2]It seems that whether it�s in regard to replenishing the major-league lineup (win-now-sort-of) restocking the minors (draft-well-but-don�t -sign-anyone-above-slot) or off-field stuff (this-Madoff-business-doesn�t-affect-our-budget-but-we�ll-be-alarmingly-frugal-anyway-despite-3-or-4-new-for-2009-partially-publically-funded-revenue-streams), our franchise plan is �Serving two masters/pleasing none.� So, you know, the two-different-patches rigamarole fits.[/quote:1phroxm2] I count 3 or 4 large exaggerations there.[/quote:1phroxm2] A little drama-queen-y, to be sure. (Once I hit Madoffville, I figured I might as well gun the accelerator.) Offseason-that-felt-much-too-long + Fumbling-something-stupid-and-easy-like-commemorative-patch-design = A dull, exaggerative boy.

It's true that the Mets are getting their asses kicked everywhere, coverage-wise: even in The New Yorker magazine:

Now I don't get it. Is my joke bombing? Does it suffer from logic? Or what? Help me out. I can edit it. Tinker with it, if need be.

="Edgy DC":3ly8ox42]I don't get it. Anderson is somehow responsible for Willie Randolph now?[/quote:3ly8ox42] Marlon controls everything. What Marlons says, goes. So long as it's in his blueprint. Blueprint. Get it? attgig Feb 19 2009 07:55 AM that's the money you can be saving with geico. GEICO! (yeah, your blueprint is that random....) my sig. batmagadanleadoff Feb 19 2009 08:06 AM Now I don't get it. Is my joke bombing? Does it suffer from logic? Or what? Help me out. I can edit it. Tinker with it, if need be. Frayed Knot Feb 19 2009 10:59 AM It's sailing over my head. Neither the 'blueprints' nor the Willie references are making sense. attgig Feb 19 2009 12:34 PM oh and colon cleansings are a shortcut to losing weight. no workout regimen was involved. just not eating well for 25 days. he wanted an outwardly show that he's better, but if you're an athlete, you better be taking in calories and using them to gain strength. I have even lower hopes for this sack of.... Edgy DC Feb 19 2009 12:37 PM I'm sorry. You somehow know that he hasn't worked out? attgig Feb 19 2009 12:41 PM you go 25 days eating 600 calories, tell me how much energy you can really use to work out. maybe he picked it up later on in the winter. who knows. but the fact that you go with a 25 day colon clense... that screams shortcut. 17 pounds on a 25 day colon cleanse is pretty standard in terms of weight loss going through that procedure (yes, i've done research before). so, if you loose that weight during the clense, and you're still at 17 pounds total... how much lean weight can you really build up afterwards? Edgy DC Feb 19 2009 12:58 PM ]who knows? According to your previous post, you do. And you also seem to know that (1) his failures of last season were due to lack of muscle mass, and (2) that hasn't changed. Give me a break. Your sig lines suggest that whatever comes in, you'll spin it to your agenda. And that's what you're doing. themetfairy Feb 19 2009 01:26 PM I thought that the lunch had to be less than 600 calories, and he was having two shakes a day in addition to that. attgig Feb 19 2009 02:58 PM right. I explained my reasoning. and i attacked using shortcuts to give a number to the media to prove something... not a lack of muscle mass. yeah. i have my opinion of marlon. I don't hide that. but for someone who was under the mendoza line for so much of the season... there really isn't much to root for. Edgy DC Feb 19 2009 03:26 PM There's also no reason to superimpose a moral argument against a guy bacause you don't like his statistics. batmagadanleadoff Feb 19 2009 05:12 PM ="Frayed Knot":360rewuf]It's sailing over my head. Neither the 'blueprints' nor the Willie references are making sense.[/quote:360rewuf] I was making fun of Marlon's tendency (okay, he only did it once as far as I know) to blueprint the future of the Mets. The joke being that if the Mets were supposed to win two out of every three remaining games just cause Marlon scripted it -- why stop there? For the same amount of ink, Marlon could've just as easily insisted on three out every four, or seventeen out of every eighteen, or a 98 HR season for our Mr. Anderson. Or that the Mets would win the World Series no matter how many remaining games they won. Or a cure for asthma. I'd put that in my blueprint If I ever got down to writing one. http://cranepoolforum.net/phpbb2/viewtopic.php?p=224723&highlight=blueprint&sid=5c96215a5a07492995262fd9010e73d1#224723 LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr Feb 19 2009 05:27 PM Ah. Okay. (Pause.) (Pause. Takes long sip of beer.) No, it was a good one, really. batmagadanleadoff Feb 19 2009 05:36 PM ="LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr":sf1yfzjh]Ah. Okay. (Pause.) (Pause. Takes long sip of beer.) No, it was a good one, really.[/quote:sf1yfzjh] Welcome aBordick! Did you steal my allotted amount of avatar memory to make yours bigger? Well, whatever the deal is, enjoy your avatar. While it lasts. At about the 800 post mark, your avatar will probably disappear for a couple of hundred posts. So now that everyone's on board, here we go again: Next week, Marlon intends to reveal his blueprint for the 2009 season, in which Anderson is named NL MVP and the Mets beat the Brewers in the 7th game of the NLCS after substitute Manager Willie Randolph calls for a sac bunt with two outs in the bottom of the ninth and nobody on base.