No it was 1964. Bunning & Short, Bunning & Short! -- Fordham Rams Basketball Message Board

[ Show ]

Support VoyForums

[ Shrink ]

VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

[ Login ] [ Contact Forum Admin ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, [2], 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 ]

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Date Posted: Sun April 17, 2005 11:14:42
Author: Richie Allen
Subject: No it was 1964. Bunning & Short, Bunning & Short!
In reply to: JoltinJoe 's message, "1978: the greatest choke job ever." on Sat April 16, 2005 21:56:16

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Replies:

Hey Joltin' Joe, if you recall the Red Sox won 13 of 15 to end the season in '78 to force the play-off in what indeed was the best penant race ever. That situation doesn't even deserve to be mentioned in the same sentence as the spectacular collapse of the Bombers last fall. As for this year, J2, my prediction is that Torre is out of his pinstripes by July 4th. Too bad, because he is a class act. Beyond that its quite a collection of overpaid, underachieving, selfish, pampered, pill popping, multi-millionaires you've got over there on 161st Street. (NT) -- BostonRam, Sun April 17, 2005 22:39:54

Prior to that, the Sox painfully and slowly choked away a 14-game lead over the course of several weeks -- a choke so bad that even winning 13 of their last 15 couldn't save them. Now that's a choke job. A four-game swoon hardly compares. Anyway, you talk big after 12 games. Typical Sox fan. Maybe you might want to try to win a division title this year, because real winners don't count wild-card years as "championship seasons." (NT) -- JoltinJoe, Mon April 18, 2005 05:45:05

You know the Empire has fallen when you start counting divisional titles as accomplishments. Furthermore, your logic belies your Jesuit training. Real winners, Joe, come up big when its all on the line - something the Yankees used to be good at. Anyway, J2, just take your lumps and call us the Champs. (NT) -- BostonRAM, Mon April 18, 2005 11:30:24
- Now, BostonRam, I didn't say I count the divisional title as a "championship season." I only said that real winners don't call it a "championship season" unless they win the division. "Winning it all" means winning the division, the league pennant, and then the World Series. The Sox didn't "win it all" last year. (NT) -- JoltinJoe, Mon April 18, 2005 12:00:19
  - Once again, JJ, interesting logic. I think the the term "championship season" rightfully belongs to the team that indeed won said championship. We need not bicker that the Red Sox are in fact the 2004 World Series Champs now. Are you sure you didn't go to Hofstra? (NT) -- BostonRam, Mon April 18, 2005 12:40:37
    - Lame, BostonRam. Look, if my team won the World Series as a wild card, I'd be happy. But I wouldn't go taunting fans of the team that performed better over a 162-game season. If you want to call it a "championship season," go ahead. You won the World Series. That makes you "World Series Champions." But you didn't win it all. Yankee fans have higher expectations, though. We like to win it all. That's what we mean by a "championship season" -- a champion in every conceivable way. (NT) -- JoltinJoe, Mon April 18, 2005 13:05:23
      - BTW, BR, when your team does "win it all" and achieves a "championship season" by being a "champion in every conceivable way," there is such an immense satisfaction in the accomplishment, that you don't feel the need to emphasize that your championship came at someone else's expense. I know you'll have to trust me on this one. ;) (NT) -- JoltinJoe, Mon April 18, 2005 13:31:42
        joltin joe.. you can't be serious. How many 1918 chants and pictures of babe ruth were heard and seen at the home of the yankees over the course of the last few decades. Humulity in victory has never been something yankee fans have been known for. Just bite the pillow and take the pain like a man and stop crying when someone talks about the bombers collapse last year. I thought NYers were tougher than that! By the way, trying to discount the Red Sox championship because they were a wild card is stretching it big time. They beat the Yanks straight up in the playoffs... it doesn't get any cleaner than that. (NT) -- bulldog, Mon April 18, 2005 13:57:17
        I know they beat the Yanks in the playoffs. Great for them. I wanted to win. But when you win the World Series title as a wild card, it is discounted. Period. It's not as if you need me to do the discounting. Many fans, most I'd suspect, believe baseball tainted its purity when it allowed second-place teams to call themselves "champions." And we said this long before the Sox won it in 2004. Some here will recall how I dismissed the 1997 Yanks' playoff chances, because they were not division champions. Now, as for the 1918 chants, that's something the Sox fans brought upon themselves. The chant would never start on its own. It would only start after the Sox fans started chanting something that I can't repeat here. (NT) -- JoltinJoe, Mon April 18, 2005 14:19:37
        Your lack of logic and history JJ in this particular matter is astounding! If the regular season is all that counts, why have playoffs? The Steelers had the best record last year, so does that mean the Pats are not Super Bowl champs?!!? Why play the A-10 Championships? And I can assure you, the "1918" chants have been hurled sans provocation except for the sight of a Sox cap. C'mon, suck it up big guy! (NT) -- RC74, Mon April 18, 2005 17:10:59
        There's no lack of logic here. Don't bring up what other sports did or do. That's the poor logic. Baseball was for the longest time pure, because you had to be a regular-season champion to get to the playoffs. Now it's just like the other sports, where a second-place team can win the title. I don't like that, and I think most baseball fans really don't like it either. (NT) -- JoltinJoe, Mon April 18, 2005 17:20:33
        I guess we should take the rings away from Villanova because they didn't win the big east the year they beat Georgetown in the title game. (NT) -- bulldog, Mon April 18, 2005 14:12:36
        Not an apt comparison. The NCAA tournament has long taken second and third place teams, and sometimes deeper, from major conferences. But those are the rules. Just as the rules now allow a second-place team into the baseball playoffs. Now do you think Villanova would have felt a greater sense of accomplishment in 1985 had they won the Big East too? The answer suggests itself. (NT) -- JoltinJoe, Mon April 18, 2005 14:34:01
        It sounds to me that you think the St. Louis Cardinals should have been MLB champs last year given that they won the most games in the regular season. And also, shouldn't Ben Roethlisberger, and not Tom Brady, hosted SNL on Saturday, because after all, the Steelers went 15-1 in the regular season, and the Patriots went 14-2. As a Yankees fan, you should know that its all about championships. (NT) -- BostonRam, Mon April 18, 2005 17:15:56
        That doesn't flow from what I said at all. If you want to debate, stay on point, and don't distort what someone is saying. (NT) -- JoltinJoe, Mon April 18, 2005 17:23:17

[ Contact Forum Admin ]

Forum timezone: GMT-5
VF Version: 3.00b, ConfDB:
Before posting please read our privacy policy.
VoyForums^(tm) is a Free Service from Voyager Info-Systems.
Copyright © 1998-2019 Voyager Info-Systems. All Rights Reserved.