The thing I don't get is why many Sox fans and Mets fans for that matter, seem to be more interested in how the Yankees are doing and badmouthing the Yankees than rooting for their own teams. You don't hear "Red Sox suck" at Yankee stadium. Why? Because the Yankees don't have the "inferiority complex" that these other two teams do. They aren't worried about how the Red Sox or the Mets are doing and they also don't need to make themselves feel better by making ignorant comments about someone else- the Yankees.
PresHabib wrote:I don't think Boone's homer really proves/proved anything. Sometimes its not that the BETTER team wins, just that somebody has to win eventually. I'm not saying the Red Sox were better, how could I? but I can't say the Yankees were better either just because they won the LCS last year. I think its unfair for one pitch to allow either side to say their squad is better...
Though I understand Boone's homer is not a major sticking point in this debate, so whatever, we can dismiss that...i just wanted to add an opinion while I had one to give.
I don't understand the Millar argument either. personally I think he's over rated and I wouldn't even have him playing if I were the manager once Trot comes back...D-O and Trot will outproduce any other 1b/RF combo the Sox can throw...maybe J.C. you coud explain that better, cuz I'm missin the boat on it.
Personally I think 1918 is a lame argument because it has no influence on the present. Even if the sox hadn't sold Ruth to the Yanks, these two teams would be goin after each other like crazy. Fisk and munson still would have fought, too. The squads just go after each other like crazy, right now, today. They are the two best teams in the East, have been, statistically, for what 6 years now? You think Babe Ruth or the curse had anything to do with a ball goin behind Karim Garcia's head or Manny freaking about a pitch (that still wasn't even that close) or Don Zimmer rushin Pedro? Nahhhh....its the heat of 2 great teams colliding that does it...the rivalry wouldn't be as storied without Ruth and all that stuff, but the games today would be just as intense. That's whats so great about the rivalry...the great game intensity.
Thats why I think 1918 is a lame argument. Until convinced otherwise, I will think this way.
I agree with alot of your points. Personally I thought Boston probably had the better team going into the ALCS. I'm also not saying the Yankees were better because they won it either. I'm just saying it's idiotic to say the RedSox would have definately beat the Marlins.
1918 to me, is just a comeback to Red Sox fans that get in your face in April and May and basically says to them...you know what you haven't won since 1918 so don't talk until you do win it. That's all I'm saying. JC is just confusing the hell out of me.
ajgnydc722 wrote:Now if you wouldn't mind telling me what the hell that has to do with Boston DEFINATELY beating the Marlins in the World Series?
To be fair, there's no such thing in the game of baseball as a definite. Florida in 6 over the Bombers serves as living proof of that.
My point is that the Red Sox had a proven on-field advantage over the Marlins during the 2003 season, and having a clubhouse leader who knew the team like the back of his own hand couldn't have hurt.
Okay, so 352 might be an exaggeration, but we friggin' owned them, and the back end of their bullpen all once called Fenway home and failed.
Hypothetical, sure, but who in their right mind would have bet against Boston in that series?
Who the hell bet against the Yankees? I'd like to know that. Every single team in the playoffs had an advantage over the Marlins. Marlins are a small market team with no big stud players. They were underdogs to EVERYONE not just the Redsox.
And I'd like to hear your response to the Millar argument if possible.
Jose Contreras is 72 wrote:Hypothetical, sure, but who in their right mind would have bet against Boston in that series?
Who in their right mind would have bet against NY in that series? (other maybe some Sox fans with wishful thinking)
You're trying to make a point that is just stupid. You can have all the advantages over another team in the world, but YOU STILL HAVE TO PLAY THE GAMES. No matter what you say, you CANNOT prove that Boston would have won IF they had reached the WS. The whole idea of this arguement is stupid anyway because the fact remains that Boston didn't make it to the series.
ajgnydc722 wrote:1918 to me, is just a comeback to Red Sox fans that get in your face in April and May and basically says to them...you know what you haven't won since 1918 so don't talk until you do win it. That's all I'm saying. JC is just confusing the hell out of me.
Its just another word for "shut up." When a Sox fan starts saying that they are going to win, like they say every year, its a way of saying "shut up and win for once before you talk." or Win one first and then you can talk.