When I was a sophomore in high school, I went onto then-fledgling News 10 Now's website—now YNN, of course—on a night much like this. We hadn't had a snow day since the seventh grade, and the STORM OF THE CENTURY was rolling in on a Sunday night/Monday morning. I was up doing homework around 11:30 and checking all the local news sites relentlessly, hoping to see my school join the ever-growing group of schools closing for the day.
The hours passed and our school hadn't so much as announced a delay, so I took matters into my own hands. There was a "post an announcement" button at the bottom of the school closings page and I decided to press it. I filled in a whole bunch of VERY OBVIOUSLY FAKE information, listing the Superintendent's name, number and email as the reference, and said "[REDACTED] SCHOOLS - NO SCHOOL MONDAY." I honestly thought that they would call the Superintendent to confirm this posting, and he'd get woken up at 1:00 AM to have to say that we DO have school, and har har, funny prank.
Well, that didn't happen. Their system just straight-up posted my announcement. I could have posted that we were at war with Mars and it would have gone up. It stayed up for a good few hours, too, and even apparently popped up on a few other sites before someone at the school must have finally caught wind and debunked the rumor and the posts disappeared.
And we had school the next day, of course. Some people stopped doing homework and a bunch of seniors slept in and missed a test and I never really got in trouble but the Superintendent made some crack about snow days to my mom years later and winked at me so I think word got out somehow.
But whatever. The point of that story was my personal recollection that PEOPLE WILL BELIEVE ANY BIT OF BULLSHIT POSTED ANYWHERE ON THE INTERNET. PERIOD. There is no fact-checking and no verification anymore. That's dead. The YNN "reporter" was probably just eager to try to have his name attached to a huge story, so he decided to take ownership of it going on a post made on an online poker site's message board as a source. He's since taken the offending post down, but obviously the damage has been done.
(Also, kind of ironic that this irresponsible jackass works for YNN, and it was News 10 Now that I messed with back in the day.)
Showing posts with label OMG THE SKY IS FALLING. Show all posts
Showing posts with label OMG THE SKY IS FALLING. Show all posts
Dec 10, 2008
Girardi Party Playoff Party
I feel like I'm ready to talk college football playoffs. I've been holding out on this for a while, but a few things have happened to make me REALLY SUPER PISSED over the last few weeks...
Alright. I'm now going to lay out the rules for GIRARDI PARTY PLAYOFF PARTY. This is not anything earth-shattering, but I wanted to get my proposal out there before that Muslim terrorist we just elected president declares jihad on the BCS. Bear in mind, neither this nor any other playoff will happen under the current BCS contract, because according to many sources, language preventing a playoff is actually written into the BCS's contract with ESPN.
First Round - December 24/26
1. Oklahoma vs. 8. Utah at the Rose Bowl
2. Florida vs. 7. Virginia Tech at the Fiesta Bowl
3. USC vs. 6. Cincinnati at the Sugar Bowl
4. Texas vs. 5. Penn State at the Orange Bowl
We can project winners for these games pretty easily, except perhaps for the 4/5 game, and we'd be left with the Final Four on New Year's Day—that's a tradition I could get used to.
"Final Four" - January 1
1. Oklahoma vs. 4. Texas, at Oklahoma
2. Florida vs. 3. USC, at Florida
And finally, assuming higher seeds prevail...
Title Game - January 8
1. Oklahoma vs. 2. Florida, at the Orange Bowl
Now, this year, if all held to form, we'd have the same matchup that we do in the BCS Title Game. All questions, however, would be answered. This works because the Bowls still get to host their big games and make their money. The conferences are guaranteed their money. The fans get to plan their trips to Bowl games, watch on TV, or be rewarded with an extra home game. Everyone gets to see what they do with the very successful NCAA Basketball Tournament: one unquestioned champion, tons of exciting games, and lots of sponsorship exposure.
Look: A potential Oklahoma/Texas rematch on New Year's Day. JoePa gets his crack at a national championship, after all, as does Utah. You have the potential for a "Cinderella" if VaTech or Cincy could catch someone napping. ESPN gets a week between each round to build up anticipation and hype for the games. The season ends on the same day that it does with the current arrangement and the Bowls don't start any earlier.
People, however, like my drunk uncle, are still arguing against a playoff. They have dozens of excuses for why it's a bad idea and why the Bowls are the best system, etc. Let's debunk some of these arguments, right now, and put in a few more caveats while we're at it.
It would ruin the tradition of the Bowls
With this arrangement, the big Bowl games still get to host huge matchups—granted, not on New Year's Day—and make tons of money. Every four years, as happens now, each Bowl will also get to host the Title Game. And I'm sorry, but I can't even think of a viable argument against the Final Four teams being rewarded with an extra home game; these teams will almost always be the 1 and 2 seeds, and they have extremely difficult games. Giving them home-field advantage sufficiently rewards them for a great regular season.
And in terms of the other Bowls, go ahead, play 'em! They make money, and there would still be some lucrative matchups and big names out there to play for pride. I don't think that I would bemoan the loss of the grand tradition of the San Diego County Credit Union Poinsettia Bowl, but for those people who care, the sponsors who pony out the dough, and the teams who still want to travel and end their season on a high note, nobody would be stopping them.
The season is too long / The kids are students and have finals
First: no, they are not students. Most student-athletes, even at major NCAA powers, are students first and foremost, yes. But not Division 1A football players, and especially not at places like Oklahoma, Texas, Penn State, USC, and Florida. The vast majority of those kids are there to play football. And frankly, I don't care too much that they get extra help and get pushed through the system—they make so much money for these places that any extra attention they get is them getting paid back by their university.
Beside that, GPPP would start on Christmas Eve, long after finals are over. Even at an awful place like Michigan where finals go until the 23rd, alternate arrangements could be made, like you always see with NCAA hoops players taking exams at their hotels. So please, anyone who is standing on their soapbox rattling off reasons that this playoff is bad for academia, stop it. The BCS—and especially the addition of the fifth Title Game—is a blatant attempt to make as much money as possible. That's it. (Imagine how much money the BCS could make selling TV and sponsorship rights to its playoff...)
The regular season wouldn't mean as much
This is the argument I hear the most. I can see where people are coming from, too. In March Madness, you have 10 to 12 loss teams that are "on the bubble," teams getting in at-large who went .500 in-conference, and teams who can completely mail in their conference tournaments and still be confident in getting a bid.
That, however, would not be the case in a playoff with only eight teams—with only two at-large bids in a good year! Look at the field this year. How many two-loss teams do you see? That's right: none. A second loss would knock you completely out of the playoffs. While we're at it, look at the deserving one-loss and undefeated teams that were left out! Texas Tech suffered one late-season loss and was eliminated. The same goes for Alabama, who would be the team with the biggest beef this year. And then you have undefeated Boise State, who has proven its post-season mettle, still not getting in.
Also bear in mind that conference winners get automatic bids, and then you're REALLY looking at an extremely important regular season. One bad loss in conference could be all that's needed to knock you out of an autobid, leaving you praying for a scarce at-large bid or sending you to the Papajohns.com Bowl. Additionally, even with an playoff bid "locked up," you are still playing for seeding, as you want to be the team hosting that Final Four game, not going on the road!
(A side note about conference champions: I hate the conference championship games, but I understand that they're not going anywhere because of the money involved. That said, "divisions" are the stupidest idea in the history of mankind. The whole OU/Texas controversy this year could have been avoided if the conferences simply didn't have divisions, and the two highest-rated teams went to the conference title game every year, period. Oh, boo hoo, Kansas and Missouri; Oklahoma and Texas are always the best two teams? Too bad. Build a better program. We could have had a de facto playoff this year, with the Big XII and SEC winners being the "Final Four," but that was ruined by the Big XII intentionally loading its South division so that the crappy North teams have a chance, too.)
Teams will still get left out
This one really grinds my geahs. OF COURSE teams are still going to get left out. Unless you orchestrate a season-long playoff of all the Division 1 teams, somebody's not going to be invited to the party. You want the playoff to be exclusive and difficult to get into so that the regular season will still matter, remember? Think about the teams who would have the best arguments that they got screwed this year if there were a playoff. Texas Tech? Yes... but they got thumped by Oklahoma and barely squeaked by Baylor, and didn't win their conference. Sorry. Alabama? Perhaps, but when you compare Texas with Tech and 'Bama, Texas has the more impressive résumé; its wins hold up better now. Boise State? Yes, they have a legitimate complaint. They, however, play in a dog of a conference and would have been there if not getting shown up by Utah, who plays in a better conference and played a much tougher schedule as a result. Too bad.
Basically, you have to win your BCS conference, or be one of the one or two best teams outside of that to get in. Teams will get left out, but those left-out teams have much weaker arguments that they belong there than the teams who actually got in. Honestly, what would you be more upset about: the fact that questionable Alabama, Boise, and Tech teams didn't get a chance in the playoffs? Or that one-loss Texas, who beat one of the Title Game competitors head to head, doesn't get a chance to play for a national championship? If teams are going to be left out regardless, best to be more inclusive rather than less.
Note: I think that the weakest part of my proposal is the fact that the BCS Bowl games have to move to an earlier date, but it's a necessary evil to make sure that all four Bowls get an equal shot every year. One way to change this would be to make the 1 and 2 seeds play their home games in the first round instead, with the 3 and 4 seed first round games, the final four, and the title game all rotating amongst the BCS bowls to make them happy. I just figured that my way was a bit more egalitarian.
- Arguing last night alongside my cousin against my drunken Notre Dame-fan uncle, who, in addition to stating that there should never be a playoff, claimed that Notre Dame shouldn't even go to a bowl game "because they'll just be continuing their same bad practice habits."
- Just thinking about the Bowl games now... none of them matters except the Title game. At all. At this point, I'd rather see a return to the traditional Bowl alignments than the BCS! That way, you'd have one-loss Oklahoma, USC, Penn State, and Florida all playing for a share of the national championship, and all their respective oppontents trying their best to ruin their seasons! Isn't that more interesting than only one game anyone really cares about? Sure, I'll still watch the Rose Bowl, but knowing that it's not going to weigh into the national title discussion at all takes some excitement out of it... OK, a LOT of excitement.
- Arguing with "el Tomas Verde" on 4th and Fail about his stupid playoff proposal—simply taking the top 8 BCS teams—which would never, ever, ever, ever, ever happen.
- Reading Pat Forde's pathetic, self-righteous whining that Texas got screwed. You know what, Texas? Stop it. Texas apologists? Stop it. I'm not saying the system is right—far from it—but everyone who has watched any college football during the BCS era knows that timing is everything. If Oklahoma had gotten left out, you'd never hear the end of it from Sooner fans, either. Three Big XII South teams finished with only one loss. Yes, Texas beat Oklahoma head-to-head. But it was early enough in the season that voters had essentially forgotten about it when OU knocked off Texas Tech. If you're talking head-to-head matchups, why should Texas have gone to the Big XII title game over Oklahoma, when Texas was beaten by Texas Tech? Clearly, the only solution is for Mike Leach, Mack Brown, and Bob Stoops to play a game of Rock-Paper-Scissors.
Alright. I'm now going to lay out the rules for GIRARDI PARTY PLAYOFF PARTY. This is not anything earth-shattering, but I wanted to get my proposal out there before that Muslim terrorist we just elected president declares jihad on the BCS. Bear in mind, neither this nor any other playoff will happen under the current BCS contract, because according to many sources, language preventing a playoff is actually written into the BCS's contract with ESPN.
Girardi Party Playoff Party
- Following the regular season and conference championship games (more on those in a minute), a committee would select eight teams to move on to college football's Division IA playoff. These selections would mostly be a formality, and would happen a lot like the BCS Selection Show now: basically, a glorified revealing of the final poll of the season.
- The only way a playoff would ever be accepted by the major conferences and college presidents would be if everyone got their piece of the pie, like the BCS now. So, the winners of the six BCS conferences (ACC, Big East, Big Ten, Big XII, Pac-10, SEC) would get automatic berths into the playoffs. The same rules would also be in effect for non-BCS teams and Notre Dame that exist now—namely, that ND gets in automatically if it's in the top 12, and any non-BCS-conference team gets in automatically if it's in the top 8.
- If any spots remain after the auto-bids are taken care of, up to two at-large teams could be selected for the playoffs, as well.
- In order to keep the "tradition" alive, the four BCS sites would host the first round games of the playoffs, and much like the case today, the title game would rotate between the four sites.
- Second-round matchups (i.e., the "Final Four") would be home games for the higher-seeded remaining teams.
- In terms of seeding, there would be no preference for conference champions—that is, all eight teams are seeded by a committee in the order they believe to be 1 through 8. No intra-conference matchups in the first round.
First Round - December 24/26
1. Oklahoma vs. 8. Utah at the Rose Bowl
2. Florida vs. 7. Virginia Tech at the Fiesta Bowl
3. USC vs. 6. Cincinnati at the Sugar Bowl
4. Texas vs. 5. Penn State at the Orange Bowl
We can project winners for these games pretty easily, except perhaps for the 4/5 game, and we'd be left with the Final Four on New Year's Day—that's a tradition I could get used to.
"Final Four" - January 1
1. Oklahoma vs. 4. Texas, at Oklahoma
2. Florida vs. 3. USC, at Florida
And finally, assuming higher seeds prevail...
Title Game - January 8
1. Oklahoma vs. 2. Florida, at the Orange Bowl
Now, this year, if all held to form, we'd have the same matchup that we do in the BCS Title Game. All questions, however, would be answered. This works because the Bowls still get to host their big games and make their money. The conferences are guaranteed their money. The fans get to plan their trips to Bowl games, watch on TV, or be rewarded with an extra home game. Everyone gets to see what they do with the very successful NCAA Basketball Tournament: one unquestioned champion, tons of exciting games, and lots of sponsorship exposure.
Look: A potential Oklahoma/Texas rematch on New Year's Day. JoePa gets his crack at a national championship, after all, as does Utah. You have the potential for a "Cinderella" if VaTech or Cincy could catch someone napping. ESPN gets a week between each round to build up anticipation and hype for the games. The season ends on the same day that it does with the current arrangement and the Bowls don't start any earlier.
People, however, like my drunk uncle, are still arguing against a playoff. They have dozens of excuses for why it's a bad idea and why the Bowls are the best system, etc. Let's debunk some of these arguments, right now, and put in a few more caveats while we're at it.
It would ruin the tradition of the Bowls
With this arrangement, the big Bowl games still get to host huge matchups—granted, not on New Year's Day—and make tons of money. Every four years, as happens now, each Bowl will also get to host the Title Game. And I'm sorry, but I can't even think of a viable argument against the Final Four teams being rewarded with an extra home game; these teams will almost always be the 1 and 2 seeds, and they have extremely difficult games. Giving them home-field advantage sufficiently rewards them for a great regular season.
And in terms of the other Bowls, go ahead, play 'em! They make money, and there would still be some lucrative matchups and big names out there to play for pride. I don't think that I would bemoan the loss of the grand tradition of the San Diego County Credit Union Poinsettia Bowl, but for those people who care, the sponsors who pony out the dough, and the teams who still want to travel and end their season on a high note, nobody would be stopping them.
The season is too long / The kids are students and have finals
First: no, they are not students. Most student-athletes, even at major NCAA powers, are students first and foremost, yes. But not Division 1A football players, and especially not at places like Oklahoma, Texas, Penn State, USC, and Florida. The vast majority of those kids are there to play football. And frankly, I don't care too much that they get extra help and get pushed through the system—they make so much money for these places that any extra attention they get is them getting paid back by their university.
Beside that, GPPP would start on Christmas Eve, long after finals are over. Even at an awful place like Michigan where finals go until the 23rd, alternate arrangements could be made, like you always see with NCAA hoops players taking exams at their hotels. So please, anyone who is standing on their soapbox rattling off reasons that this playoff is bad for academia, stop it. The BCS—and especially the addition of the fifth Title Game—is a blatant attempt to make as much money as possible. That's it. (Imagine how much money the BCS could make selling TV and sponsorship rights to its playoff...)
The regular season wouldn't mean as much
This is the argument I hear the most. I can see where people are coming from, too. In March Madness, you have 10 to 12 loss teams that are "on the bubble," teams getting in at-large who went .500 in-conference, and teams who can completely mail in their conference tournaments and still be confident in getting a bid.
That, however, would not be the case in a playoff with only eight teams—with only two at-large bids in a good year! Look at the field this year. How many two-loss teams do you see? That's right: none. A second loss would knock you completely out of the playoffs. While we're at it, look at the deserving one-loss and undefeated teams that were left out! Texas Tech suffered one late-season loss and was eliminated. The same goes for Alabama, who would be the team with the biggest beef this year. And then you have undefeated Boise State, who has proven its post-season mettle, still not getting in.
Also bear in mind that conference winners get automatic bids, and then you're REALLY looking at an extremely important regular season. One bad loss in conference could be all that's needed to knock you out of an autobid, leaving you praying for a scarce at-large bid or sending you to the Papajohns.com Bowl. Additionally, even with an playoff bid "locked up," you are still playing for seeding, as you want to be the team hosting that Final Four game, not going on the road!
(A side note about conference champions: I hate the conference championship games, but I understand that they're not going anywhere because of the money involved. That said, "divisions" are the stupidest idea in the history of mankind. The whole OU/Texas controversy this year could have been avoided if the conferences simply didn't have divisions, and the two highest-rated teams went to the conference title game every year, period. Oh, boo hoo, Kansas and Missouri; Oklahoma and Texas are always the best two teams? Too bad. Build a better program. We could have had a de facto playoff this year, with the Big XII and SEC winners being the "Final Four," but that was ruined by the Big XII intentionally loading its South division so that the crappy North teams have a chance, too.)
Teams will still get left out
This one really grinds my geahs. OF COURSE teams are still going to get left out. Unless you orchestrate a season-long playoff of all the Division 1 teams, somebody's not going to be invited to the party. You want the playoff to be exclusive and difficult to get into so that the regular season will still matter, remember? Think about the teams who would have the best arguments that they got screwed this year if there were a playoff. Texas Tech? Yes... but they got thumped by Oklahoma and barely squeaked by Baylor, and didn't win their conference. Sorry. Alabama? Perhaps, but when you compare Texas with Tech and 'Bama, Texas has the more impressive résumé; its wins hold up better now. Boise State? Yes, they have a legitimate complaint. They, however, play in a dog of a conference and would have been there if not getting shown up by Utah, who plays in a better conference and played a much tougher schedule as a result. Too bad.
Basically, you have to win your BCS conference, or be one of the one or two best teams outside of that to get in. Teams will get left out, but those left-out teams have much weaker arguments that they belong there than the teams who actually got in. Honestly, what would you be more upset about: the fact that questionable Alabama, Boise, and Tech teams didn't get a chance in the playoffs? Or that one-loss Texas, who beat one of the Title Game competitors head to head, doesn't get a chance to play for a national championship? If teams are going to be left out regardless, best to be more inclusive rather than less.
Note: I think that the weakest part of my proposal is the fact that the BCS Bowl games have to move to an earlier date, but it's a necessary evil to make sure that all four Bowls get an equal shot every year. One way to change this would be to make the 1 and 2 seeds play their home games in the first round instead, with the 3 and 4 seed first round games, the final four, and the title game all rotating amongst the BCS bowls to make them happy. I just figured that my way was a bit more egalitarian.
May 22, 2008
THE SKY IS FALLING! (Hyperbolic Yankees Overreactions)
Tuesday night, during the Yankees-Orioles game, Yankees play-by-play man (and shameless Yankee homer) John Sterling pulled out his best Chicken Little impression and proclaimed, "the sky is falling! The sky is falling!" for nine straight innings on the radio. Tuesday night, the season was declared dead and buried when Derek Jeter took a Daniel Cabrera fastball on the wrist. And on Tuesday night, those claims seemed legitimate as the Yanks looked downright terrible en route to a 12-2 loss to the Orioles.
There was legitimate cause for alarm. Mike Mussina, who had pitched well as of late, lasted only through two outs of the top of the first before getting the old Vaudeville hook in favor of Ross Ohlendorf. The Yankee bats might as well have been those Noodle things you played with in the pool as a kid, because, as with the entire week before, nobody could find a hit and the Yanks mustered only two runs. There was also a report before the game that Chien-Ming Wang had an MRI done on his legs before the game.
So, was it really the end of the world Tuesday night?
You wouldn't think so if you listened to Sterling on Wednesday night, where Darrell Rasner once again pitched a gem, the Yankee offense got hot quickly, and it was morning in America again. Mark Feinsand joined the booth for the "Daily News Fifth" inning, and Sterling's only words were a sighing, almost fawning utterance: "Darrell Rasner."
Two nights, two games, two completely different moods on the Yankees radio broadcast. What gets me fired up here is the fact that nothing has really changed after one night. Even with last night's win, the Yanks are still four games under .500. This is terribly cliched, but it really is a long season. The Yankees are 46 games into a 162-game season. They've started terribly, and it shouldn't have been too much of a surprise. Phil Hughes and Ian Kennedy have been pretty disappointing. A-Rod and Jorge Posada have missed significant time. Robinson Cano still probably couldn't hit a beach ball with a 2x4 at this point.
In the end, however, things tend to regress toward the mean and unfold as they should. All told, A-Rod will probably end up hitting 40 HR and OBPing near .400 again. Cano will find his stroke. Hughes or Kennedy, or both, will likely pull a Stella and get his groove back and end up with a respectable year. And if Joba is nearly as effective in the rotation as he has been in the bullpen, the Yanks could make a playoff push after all -- or at least finish over .500.
Realistically speaking, is it a team of aging stars? Yes. Is it the best team in the AL East? No. But, given their lineup, will there likely be a stretch this season where the Yankees play out of their minds and win 18 of 21 or something? If the pitching settles down, sure. Could they make a playoff push? Yeah. The Yankees were in a bigger hole last year and still managed to win the Wild Card. In other words: John Sterling, Sal in Brooklyn on line two on Mike and the Maddog, and Yankee fans in general: relax. There are too many games to declare the season over after one game and then saved after the next. I'm as passionate a Yankee fan as there is, but restraint and order rule the day.
If the Yankees continue to play like garbage, well, people will be frustrated and disappointed, but save the apocalyptic tone for when Hank Steinbrenner, in a drunken stupor, orders that the Yankees trade their entire starting rotation and bullpen to the Cubs for reliever Carlos Marmol and a prospect to be named later. Or, maybe when the Yanks lose a few key games in September to another Wild Card contender. Or something seriously catastrophic. Until then, level a bit. As bad as things look when the score's 12-2, morning will indeed dawn in America again when the Yanks lead 8-0.
There was legitimate cause for alarm. Mike Mussina, who had pitched well as of late, lasted only through two outs of the top of the first before getting the old Vaudeville hook in favor of Ross Ohlendorf. The Yankee bats might as well have been those Noodle things you played with in the pool as a kid, because, as with the entire week before, nobody could find a hit and the Yanks mustered only two runs. There was also a report before the game that Chien-Ming Wang had an MRI done on his legs before the game.
So, was it really the end of the world Tuesday night?
You wouldn't think so if you listened to Sterling on Wednesday night, where Darrell Rasner once again pitched a gem, the Yankee offense got hot quickly, and it was morning in America again. Mark Feinsand joined the booth for the "Daily News Fifth" inning, and Sterling's only words were a sighing, almost fawning utterance: "Darrell Rasner."
Two nights, two games, two completely different moods on the Yankees radio broadcast. What gets me fired up here is the fact that nothing has really changed after one night. Even with last night's win, the Yanks are still four games under .500. This is terribly cliched, but it really is a long season. The Yankees are 46 games into a 162-game season. They've started terribly, and it shouldn't have been too much of a surprise. Phil Hughes and Ian Kennedy have been pretty disappointing. A-Rod and Jorge Posada have missed significant time. Robinson Cano still probably couldn't hit a beach ball with a 2x4 at this point.
In the end, however, things tend to regress toward the mean and unfold as they should. All told, A-Rod will probably end up hitting 40 HR and OBPing near .400 again. Cano will find his stroke. Hughes or Kennedy, or both, will likely pull a Stella and get his groove back and end up with a respectable year. And if Joba is nearly as effective in the rotation as he has been in the bullpen, the Yanks could make a playoff push after all -- or at least finish over .500.
Realistically speaking, is it a team of aging stars? Yes. Is it the best team in the AL East? No. But, given their lineup, will there likely be a stretch this season where the Yankees play out of their minds and win 18 of 21 or something? If the pitching settles down, sure. Could they make a playoff push? Yeah. The Yankees were in a bigger hole last year and still managed to win the Wild Card. In other words: John Sterling, Sal in Brooklyn on line two on Mike and the Maddog, and Yankee fans in general: relax. There are too many games to declare the season over after one game and then saved after the next. I'm as passionate a Yankee fan as there is, but restraint and order rule the day.
If the Yankees continue to play like garbage, well, people will be frustrated and disappointed, but save the apocalyptic tone for when Hank Steinbrenner, in a drunken stupor, orders that the Yankees trade their entire starting rotation and bullpen to the Cubs for reliever Carlos Marmol and a prospect to be named later. Or, maybe when the Yanks lose a few key games in September to another Wild Card contender. Or something seriously catastrophic. Until then, level a bit. As bad as things look when the score's 12-2, morning will indeed dawn in America again when the Yanks lead 8-0.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)