geniusMoment

I still think some of you are missing my point. If you look back at my first post I discussed why I felt stats were skewed, two of the reasons I said were because some hitters come through in the clutch better than others and another is because some get the majority of their hits off of bad pitching. Sanders was my example of getting hits off of bad pitching. Uh oh, I said Sanders name again, now there will be another post describing how I am obsessed with him.

Its just common sense that someone will hit better off of bad pitching. But, some players are famous for being mistake hitters, when facing a big pitcher in a big game there is good chance you will not get a mistake. I am not obsessed with Reggie Sanders, I mentioned him once, you guys responded, then I responded. No I would not pinch hit Cairo for Sheffield, but that is just taking it to a stupid level, I am talking about players with equal skills here.

Actually, during that season Sanders still only hit off of the bad pitchers for the most part. He is your classic mistake ball hitter. When facing a good pitcher you may not get any mistakes. Sanders is actually my example of someone who feasts on bad pitching and is crappy against good pitching, making his stats skewed. He still got the hits, but I would never want him up against a good pitcher with the season on the line. Which was the entire point of my first post to begin with. There are certain hitters I want to come up in big situations, and certain hitters I do not want to come up, not always relating to their overall stats.

I know, but that was not due to the profitability of the company. It was due to the interest on the loans he took out, something that got much worse when he went on ppv. Heyman was always behind. Go read the ECW bankruptcy statement, all of his assists and debts are listed.

I am surprised no one has used that as a gimmick poster yet. The drunk nature boy.

Come on now, that halloween commercial Pete did for the WWE a couple of years ago where he turned away trick-or-treaters until kane showed was great. Pete deserves to be in it just for the line, "I left some tickets for Bill Buckner, but he couldn't bend over to pick them up." "The city of losers."

Bored and Al go back and read my post. I did not say Sanders did not come through with runners in scoring position, I said he choked against good pitching. He is the classic example of feasting on bad pitching and choking when facing someone who can spot the ball. I am only talking about his days in Cincinnati, where I saw virtually every one of his games, he might have improved since then. It used to be, throw a high and tight good fastball and Reggie would swing right through it every time. Maddux, Glavine and the Atlanta pitching staff exposed this hole in sanders swing during the 1995 playoff series against the braves where Sanders only had I think 1 or 2 hits. You say that clutch hitting does not make any sense because players always try their hardest, that is true, but some players are smarter than others. Some players know how to adjust their swing in certain situations. Also who says a hitter must become better than he usually is, the other hitter with the same skill level might just choke. They both have the same skill level but I would want the player who plays well under pressure, not the choker. Do you know what it feels like to come up to bat with the entire game on the line, facing a pitcher with great stuff. I know on my team there are certain guys I want up in that situation and certain guys I do not want up. I will admit it, I have choked under the pressure before, its damn hard to hit the same with the game on the line.

You are kidding me, right Al? Some players play well under no stress, the second a stressful, meaningful, situation occurs they choke. Hitting for a high average with runners in scoring position is a kept fact, that many times remains high or low throughout ones career, not always relating to their overall average. There are certain players I want to come up with the game on the line, and certain ones I do not, and yes I am talking about players of the same skill level. I cannot believe that someone who is a baseball does not consider this to be true. Some players only get the guy in from third 20% of the time while some are willing to use a short quick swing, just trying to get the bat on the ball. I have also come to know first hand players who feast on bad pitching, Reggie Sanders, and choke when facing big game pitchers. This skews their facts, as their overall facts are good, yet, those good facts mainly come from nothing games.

Look at someones batting average with two outs and runners in scoring position, and just with runners in scoring position in general. Look at someones at bats from the 7th inning on, look at how often they convert runners on third, with less than 2 outs, into runs. See how they hit against good pitching, do they only get hits off of bad pitching. Stats do not reflect a ballplayers true ability unless the stats are broken down into the categories that truly matter. I have seen plenty of hitters who get meaningless hits all of the time but cannot come through when it truly matters, or hitters who kill bad pitching and strike out against good pitching.

At least I can save some money, as WWE does not seem to be releasing any new dvds that interest me. After the Monday Night Wars I have not heard of any new dvds coming out, at least ones I would consider buying.

Mel has been trying to win back his fathers love for years. He has begun building churchs all over the world trying to spread his view of religion. The entire reason he made this movie was to win back his fathers love, a father I do not respect. The entire Mel Gipson story is out there, just do a little research and I am sure most of you will be shocked by what you find. In a nutshell Mel broke away from his fathers wacky religious ideas when he was young, this caused a major problem in their relationship. Over the last couple of years Mel has found religion as a way to get back into the good graces of his father, who for years would not talk to or take money from Mel. I have a major problem seeing this movie knowing the backstory on how it came about.

Did anyone hear the interview Mel Gipson's father gave about jewish people. That is reportedly who Gipson made this movie for, anyone who feels that way about an entire group of people is disgusting. I will not give my money to this family. I am not even jewish but what he said was a disgrace. He claimed the holocaust did not happen and that Jewish people only look out for themselves and will never work hard. There was much more to the interview, he came across as a total nazi.

Actually in countries where children are sexually aware and are taught the human body is a beautiful thing sexual crimes are way down, as is teen pregnancy. By making sex something forbidden you are doing nothing but enticing children, especially if you do not teach them about it at all. If I had a child I would not mind if they saw Janet Jacksons breast, I would simply say that is a human breast. What is wrong with it, what makes a breast any different than an arm or leg? Its skin covering bone, blood and fat.

You know its funny that in other countries, such as England, children can watch stuff such as this and it does not ruin them. In america it turns children into monsters, must be something in the water.

Both my parents are catholic, but I think religion is for suckers therefore I don't give a fuck about this movie. See you guys in hell.

Guess what, if you took a poll of the crowd and asked them would they rather watch trish/victoria for the title or trish/victoria wrestling in cooking oil in g strings they would pick the T&A. WWE should not even do normal woman wrestling, the fans want T&A, give the fans what they want.

After watching Torrie and Sable do the "you can't see me" hand signals it is official they are the two dorkiest people in the world. I don't know how it is possible for someone to lose all sex appeal in a matter of 10 seconds but they managed to accomplish the job. Congratulations ladies

Allow me to clarify my previous post. When Heyman bought ECW, took it over, he did so with no major money in the bank and no backer. You need to work inconjunction with an investment firm of some sort, forming a short term joint venture to get your company off the ground and to deal with opening costs. Instead, Heyman took out high interest loans leveraged against his family's money and the assists of ECW. That is how the company started getting bigger. The problem with his method was all of his profits went back into paying off the high interest loans causing him financial problems in future financial quarters, including bouncing checks to wrestlers. When he went on ppv it took more loans and all of the profit he had saved, he went into it by himself. If the ppv did not succeed his promotion failed, period. The problem was the ppv money does not come in for months, but interest on his debts and payments to wrestler and production companies are due when they are due. This became a death cycle until it eventually failed. Business is the key to success, develope a game plan and run with it, succeeding is the only option.

Actually ECW was financially successful up until they started on ppv's, the cost of ppv's is what drove the company into the crowd, along with the fact that you do not get ppv money until months after they occur. ECW was financially successful, but only on a small scale approach. Paul took out loans from his family and leveraged his company against bank deals with high interest rates, that hurt his finances not the financial profitability of the company. For everything that Paul gets credit for being a good business man is not one of them. I realize how much syndication costs, I sell advertising time for newscorp as part of my internship, so believe me I know quite a bit about television costs.

My ppv's would be co-produced through a corporate joint venture taking away initial start up costs, (satellite costs, production costs, etc...) which would help to reduce the cost of the ppvs which is what killed ECW. By the way a joint venture is a one time only deal between corporate enties in which costs are shared and profits shared through advertising, actual money or future considerations. Much like how Bischoff had his WCW setup through investment firms in New York and Jason Herverys production company.

I would run a promotion, much like how ECW was run in 1994-97, when they financially were successful. First you need money, because syndication is a must for the product. I would begin my promotion in Chicago, as it is a hot bed for wrestling and no major promotion has ever attempted to run there, Chicago is crazy about their sports teams. I would run all around the neighboring areas while continuing to expand my syndication package, meanwhile I would continue to build my stars the best way I possibly could. When my storylines were at their apex I would try to procure a one time only special on some cable network, any cable network, even if I had to buy the time. I would do an advertising blitz myself, as I do not feel I could trust the network to properly advertise my special, see TNN ECW. I would use creative forms of advertising that cost little, I am an advertising major in college so this would be my strong point. During the advertising I would make the ad either eye or ear catching, making the viewer think about what he or she just saw. After the special, which hopefully would do a decent rating, I would continue to expand my syndication package while expanding my touring schedule.

I understand what you are saying, but much like how you still have hope that TNA will turn things around I still have hope that a new promotion would form at the grave of TNA. Therefore after all of point counter-points I am right back where I started, with most of the board thinking I am an idiot.

But under that logic are you saying that there will never be any competition for the WWE again. These are very sad times to be a wrestling fan if that is true.

That I can agree with, so are you saying we are both illogical then?

But my point is it is not logical to believe that TNA will ever be a success under their current format.