EVIL~! alkeiper 0 Report post Posted May 22, 2004 Baseball players and managers don't even think every game is important. If they did, players wouldn't get "days off." Aside from Cal Ripken, every baseball superstar will just not play in some games -- obviously because the manager feels that that particular game isn't very important. If it were important, you'd want you star player out there, right? But baseball stars will sit out regular season games even when they're not injured. Does that happen in football? VERY rarely. The only time non-injured football stars sit out is maybe in the last game of the season, if the team already has a playoff spot locked up. But if Sammy Sosa just randomly sits out a game here and there, obviously Dusty Baker didn't think that game was so important, so why should I? Fatigue. For most players, if you run them out every day, their performance will suffer. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest AndVen Report post Posted May 22, 2004 My team of choice living in Aalborg, Denmark is AaB. Our ice hockey team was in their first final of the national league since 1989, after knocking out the defending champions in the semi final. We had lost the chance to win the series 4-2 in our final home game of the series, but we had confidence that we could beat our opponents on their home ice, as we did in game 5. With two minutes left in the 3rd we were up 2-0, and were pretty sure we could keep them from scoring, as we were dominating. But with 80 seconds left they scored, and it was 2-1. They threw everything at us in the end, and then with 10 seconds left they scored again, because one of ours was pressed up against the board, and instead of blocking the puck, he tried to pass it on, but, and i despise that 'but' , our opponent intercepted it and scored the equaliser. In overtime we again dominated and got several shot on goal, but they stil got the win in the end. The whole thing pissed me off royally, as we had the game won with two fucking minutes left in the 3rd. Needless to say i was devastated. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Insane Bump Machine 0 Report post Posted May 22, 2004 The 1999 Champions League final for my club, FC Bayern Munich. We were in the lead 2-1 until Manchester scored two goals in injury time. Worst two minutes in my life as a football fan. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest MikeSC Report post Posted May 22, 2004 I just wanna say one thing to your reply: This attitude especially is awesome with the NFL playoffs, since it's REALLY win or go home, as opposed to all the 7 game series in the other sports. Thus making all the games far more dramatic, and homefield advantage mean that much more. In baseball, you have 5 starting pitchers. Those 5 starting pitchers gets you to the playoffs, not just one. In the NFL, you rely more on 1 QB. In baseball, you reply on 5 quarterbacks. Thus, in the playoffs, they have to be 7 game series for it to repersent the team play of baseball. If it was just our #1 vs. your #1, that isn't really what the whole season is about, and therefore, the playoffs would be badly repersenting the baseball. I love 7 game series. In baseball, the BEST teams still lose at least 50 games. Kinda kills that whole "every game matters" vibe. At the end of a month, I can name everybody a football team played. I can't even BEGIN to do that with baseball. -=Mike Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Kahran Ramsus 0 Report post Posted May 22, 2004 Baseball players and managers don't even think every game is important. If they did, players wouldn't get "days off." Aside from Cal Ripken, every baseball superstar will just not play in some games -- obviously because the manager feels that that particular game isn't very important. If it were important, you'd want you star player out there, right? But baseball stars will sit out regular season games even when they're not injured. Does that happen in football? VERY rarely. The only time non-injured football stars sit out is maybe in the last game of the season, if the team already has a playoff spot locked up. But if Sammy Sosa just randomly sits out a game here and there, obviously Dusty Baker didn't think that game was so important, so why should I? Fatigue. For most players, if you run them out every day, their performance will suffer. Many players do play every day, or damn well near it (like Delgado). Usually the guys who need breaks either aren't good enough to play every day, are aging players who no longer have the stamina to do it (like Sosa), or are catchers. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
EVIL~! alkeiper 0 Report post Posted May 22, 2004 Many players do play every day, or damn well near it (like Delgado). Usually the guys who need breaks either aren't good enough to play every day, are aging players who no longer have the stamina to do it (like Sosa), or are catchers. There's a famous story about young Don Kessinger playing every day for the Cubs in 1969. He faded badly down the stretch, contributing to the Cubs' collapse. Also, Delgado is helped by playing in a Canadian dome. When you play every day in a place like Houston or St. Louis, its more difficult. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
USC Wuz Robbed! 0 Report post Posted May 22, 2004 I'm surprised none of the Saints fans mentioned their anti-climatic exit from the playoffs a week after eliminating their enemy, the Rams. For me, Chicago Bears- In their near-miraculous run in 2000, edging the Packers (who I acknowledge deserved the NFC North title) for the number 2 seed, only to go out in a whimper in Soldier Field finale. Chicago White Sox- First round sweep by the Mariners in 200(0?) Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
sfaJack 0 Report post Posted May 22, 2004 Every game is important, and every game does count. Some people will go and say "Oh, it's just April" - because it is such a huge season. Baseball players and managers don't even think every game is important. If they did, players wouldn't get "days off." Aside from Cal Ripken, every baseball superstar will just not play in some games -- obviously because the manager feels that that particular game isn't very important. If it were important, you'd want you star player out there, right? But baseball stars will sit out regular season games even when they're not injured. Does that happen in football? VERY rarely. The only time non-injured football stars sit out is maybe in the last game of the season, if the team already has a playoff spot locked up. But if Sammy Sosa just randomly sits out a game here and there, obviously Dusty Baker didn't think that game was so important, so why should I? ... Uh, yeah, whatever. If the NFL played even TWO games a week (not six, as baseball teams often do), I guarantee you there'd be guys just "sitting out" for the hell of it. Would you say that those games don't matter? Try playing 6 days a week a week in a place like Atlanta, Houston, or Arizona and tell me if the occassional day off isn't a terrible thing. Have you ever played baseball? You might not take the physical pounding you do in football, but it's damn tough getting out there everyday in the heat for three or four hours at a time. Those guys aren't machines. EDIT: damn it...Al beat me to it. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
sfaJack 0 Report post Posted May 22, 2004 In baseball, the BEST teams still lose at least 50 games. Kinda kills that whole "every game matters" vibe. At the end of a month, I can name everybody a football team played. I can't even BEGIN to do that with baseball. -=Mike First off, it's two completely different games, so it's pointless to try and compare their schedules. Secondly, baseball is a much more random game than football and to play only 16-20 games to decide a pennant race (so you can remember who all they played, right?) would be both pointless and retarded. That's why the World Series is best-of-seven, for instance: the better team usually wins because you remove quite a bit of the pure luck and randomness that can decide a single baseball game. Luck can win you one game, but it's not likely to win you 4 of 7. Oh, and I must say that, as a baseball fan with a rooting interest (for or against) in several teams, I have no problem remembering who they've played, their upcoming schedule, and any key head-to-head dates. But maybe I'm a nut or something. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Vitamin X Report post Posted May 23, 2004 It's really the long season that kills it personally for me. I would love baseball if only I could be bothered to care about the games. At one point while I was playing baseball myself (I've done baseball, martial arts, football, and I guess you could call it "competitive streetball" basketball at one point or another so I watch games to watch the pros' technique and use it myself) I watched games for that reason, but after playing it, I really lost interest BECAUSE of that randomness and luck that goes into playing a ball game. Meh this thread had gone way off-topic. We can save the baseball vs. football threads for August/September... Chicago Bears- In their near-miraculous run in 2000, edging the Packers (who I acknowledge deserved the NFC North title) for the number 2 seed, only to go out in a whimper in Soldier Field finale. It was 2001, and the Packers played B+ football against a decent schedule for the whole year. Minnesota should have had a great year then but Culpepper and the defense decided to choke the whole year as opposed to just the end, and well Chicago and Green Bay ran away with it, but it was damn obvious the Rams were the creme of the NFC crop that year. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
USC Wuz Robbed! 0 Report post Posted May 23, 2004 Chicago Bears- In their near-miraculous run in 2000, edging the Packers (who I acknowledge deserved the NFC North title) for the number 2 seed, only to go out in a whimper in Soldier Field finale. It was 2001, and the Packers played B+ football against a decent schedule for the whole year. Minnesota should have had a great year then but Culpepper and the defense decided to choke the whole year as opposed to just the end, and well Chicago and Green Bay ran away with it, but it was damn obvious the Rams were the creme of the NFC crop that year. I stand corrected. But nevertheless, that 2001 was a great year for Bears and Packers. One of the few years both teams are equally competitive. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Redhawk Report post Posted May 23, 2004 Every game is important, and every game does count. Some people will go and say "Oh, it's just April" - because it is such a huge season. Baseball players and managers don't even think every game is important. If they did, players wouldn't get "days off." Aside from Cal Ripken, every baseball superstar will just not play in some games -- obviously because the manager feels that that particular game isn't very important. If it were important, you'd want you star player out there, right? But baseball stars will sit out regular season games even when they're not injured. Does that happen in football? VERY rarely. The only time non-injured football stars sit out is maybe in the last game of the season, if the team already has a playoff spot locked up. But if Sammy Sosa just randomly sits out a game here and there, obviously Dusty Baker didn't think that game was so important, so why should I? ... Uh, yeah, whatever. If the NFL played even TWO games a week (not six, as baseball teams often do), I guarantee you there'd be guys just "sitting out" for the hell of it. Would you say that those games don't matter? Try playing 6 days a week a week in a place like Atlanta, Houston, or Arizona and tell me if the occassional day off isn't a terrible thing. Have you ever played baseball? You might not take the physical pounding you do in football, but it's damn tough getting out there everyday in the heat for three or four hours at a time. Those guys aren't machines. EDIT: damn it...Al beat me to it. I only played Little League for a couple of years, but I don't remember ever being tired after a baseball game. And I have never seen a MLB player appear to be tired after a game. I guess I just don't see what's so physically demanding about baseball (aside from pitching) that requires days of rest. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
The Czech Republic 0 Report post Posted May 23, 2004 I only played Little League for a couple of years, but I don't remember ever being tired after a baseball game. And I have never seen a MLB player appear to be tired after a game. I guess I just don't see what's so physically demanding about baseball (aside from pitching) that requires days of rest. Like the prevailing opinion has been, it's no crime to take a day off after a stretch of games in mid-July Houston, Atlanta, St. Louis (a really freaking hot city in the summer), et al. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
EVIL~! alkeiper 0 Report post Posted May 23, 2004 I only played Little League for a couple of years, but I don't remember ever being tired after a baseball game. And I have never seen a MLB player appear to be tired after a game. I guess I just don't see what's so physically demanding about baseball (aside from pitching) that requires days of rest. Combine playing with odd travel times, long hours practicing and honing your skills, the hot summer sun, and that you play 162 games and get more than one day off at a time ONCE in six months. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Kaertos 0 Report post Posted May 25, 2004 Biggest heartbreakers for me? The aforementioned Montana Miracle from Super Bowl XXIII. As a lifelong Bengals fan, I could hardly sleep that night. Reds / Mets - Playoff game 1999. But the biggest heartbreaker ever? Listening to Bud Selig cancel the rest of the '94 season, including the playoffs and World Series. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Redhawk Report post Posted May 25, 2004 I only played Little League for a couple of years, but I don't remember ever being tired after a baseball game. And I have never seen a MLB player appear to be tired after a game. I guess I just don't see what's so physically demanding about baseball (aside from pitching) that requires days of rest. Combine playing with odd travel times, long hours practicing and honing your skills, the hot summer sun, and that you play 162 games and get more than one day off at a time ONCE in six months. And that I'm making at least $1 million if I'm somewhat talented, and that I spend a lot of time either sitting in the dugout or standing in the outfield, and that I have months off at a time after each season...still doesn't seem so grueling to me. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
EVIL~! alkeiper 0 Report post Posted May 26, 2004 First off, baseball is a highly competitive enterprise, in which you must maintain your skills in order to survive. Playing the game is NOT the only work athletes perform. They must constantly practice and train in order to succeed. Players travel for long periods, spending weeks at a time away from home. They sometimes grab only a few hours of sleep before hopping on a plane to catch the next flight. Besides, I think the fact that athletes DO get tired is some indication that the game requires a great deal of physical exertion. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Kahran Ramsus 0 Report post Posted May 26, 2004 First off, baseball is a highly competitive enterprise, in which you must maintain your skills in order to survive. Playing the game is NOT the only work athletes perform. They must constantly practice and train in order to succeed. Players travel for long periods, spending weeks at a time away from home. They sometimes grab only a few hours of sleep before hopping on a plane to catch the next flight. Besides, I think the fact that athletes DO get tired is some indication that the game requires a great deal of physical exertion. It depends somewhat on position too. Catcher is obviously a much tougher position to play than first base. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites