Tuesday, October 04, 2005

Okay, really now...

...what the hell is wrong with this guy?


  1. Typical insecure NY'er.

    Ignore facts. Saying if CLE had not tanked we would not have the WC. He may be right - we may have actually won the division in the one game playoff we would have had today.

  2. Ch(ass) is not a typical anything. He is more skewed with more pro-Yankee spin than those whose job it is to make Bush look good. A sorcerer is more qualified for the job.

  3. Hey...on some points he is right, though...There are a ton of fans who are not giving the Yankees credit for coming back and making the playoffs. I tip my cap to them...

    With that said, they will now suffer a quick defeat at the hands of the Angels.

    I also heard lots of Yankees fans saying that the last game didn't matter to the Yankees and that is why they lost 10-1. Hmmm...then why were they made that Texas laid down in their last game? Why did they have their regular starting lineup in?

    It's stupid on both sides. The division was decided on head-to-head...Who cares? In hockey, does anyone care whether or not they go in as the 1 seed or the 8 seed? No, your regular season goal is to make the playoffs. Ask the Bruins who were number 1 and ousted in the first round two years running.

    The bottom line is that the Yankees and Sox have very similar teams. Pretty decent pitching and incredible lineups. Of course, the Yankees have more wiggle room with 70MM more in payroll, but both are heading to the post-season.

    Yes, he was wrong about the Cleveland thing...But who cares?

    We will be in the ALCS and they won't...bottom line...

  4. GR, I don't think he's wrong to point out that the Yankees didn't suck as bad as many predicted. But, at least two things made it a horrible article: (1) it's pretty pathetic to write an entire article just printing selected emails. Not only is it ridiculously lazy, but you get your pick of 1000's of emails so can tell just about any story you want; and (2) the negativity was not only from Boston fans. Many NY fans and media-types gave up on the team long before Boston fans did. And of course there are those of us who knew the Yanks would pull it off somehow...

  5. Yes, I know he picked out of 1000s of emails...Reading this guy is like reading Shaugnessy...Neither of them are any good and both of them make ridiculous claims. When those ridiculous claims do not work out, then they either a) do not mention that they ever wrote such things in the first place or b) change the initial meaning in what they first wrote or c) make a joke about what they wrote.

    No doubt Chass would have had an article about "technicalities" if the Sox had won the division due to some new rule and about how it doesn't matter how you get in...

    Chris Snow (I think) had an article in this vein...He said that Jeter (who did well in math) knew about the possibility of winning the division on Saturday. He followed that with how complicated it all was...Bottom line was the it sounded like Sox fans wanted to be surprised about this...That they were caught off guard. How dumb...If the Sox won on Saturday and on Sunday then that stuff never comes in to play anyway. It's not like the Sox didn't try to win on Saturday.

    All this crap doesn't matter in the end. Chass is a terrible writer. He could have written about the upcoming Yankees/Angels series and the challenges it presents. Instead he makes his column a slanted grudge piece. It doesn't make the Yankees or his writing any better than they are...

  6. Amen. I like the Shaugnessy comparison a lot. Both of them hate the Red Sox.

  7. Shaugnessy at least recognizes his own foolishness - as recognized by him making fun of his secretariat claim on multiple occassions.

    Still they are both idiots.

    And sure they both hate the Red Sox, but as I noted somewhere here earlier, sportswriters generally hate sports and athletes. Sure there are exceptions, but they live on the road, make a fraction of the athletes salary and get lambasted by the same people they are paid to cover. Bad formula.