Master Index of Archived Threads
The MFY's have changed forever.
Mex17 Nov 07 2009 06:07 PM |
I really think that the crazy/meddling/megomaniacal gene has passed over Hal. Hank was his father's son in all ways, but I think Hal is different. This represents a fundamental change for the future, in how they operate internally and also perhaps in how they are viewed externally.
|
metirish Nov 07 2009 06:18 PM Re: The MFY's have changed forever. |
Lonn Trost
|
Kong76 Nov 07 2009 07:05 PM Re: The MFY's have changed forever. |
Mex: I really think that the crazy/meddling/megomaniacal gene has passed over Hal. Hank was his father's son in all ways, but I think Hal is different. This represents a fundamental change for the future, in how they operate internally and also perhaps in how they are viewed externally.
|
Edgy DC Nov 07 2009 07:17 PM Re: The MFY's have changed forever. |
[quote="metirish":3ds0p1vs]Lonn Trost
|
metirish Nov 07 2009 07:21 PM Re: The MFY's have changed forever. |
|
OMFG
|
Frayed Knot Nov 07 2009 10:01 PM Re: The MFY's have changed forever. |
|
From what to what? And what is Hal doing to get the credit but not Hank? And which George Steinbrenner are we talking about anyway? - in the mid-'70s George was seen as the force behind their ascendancy. - but by the '80s his continued meddling was often cited as the reason for their NOT winning - or is he the bad guy again when his forced absence in the early '90s reputedly freed up others to re-build the team - then, of course, he was back on the white horse by the later '90s as his over-riding presence took them to a string of championships - but in the 2000s he was just buying players and seemed to forget the proper way to build a team - and then as he was fading away in the later 2000s it became almost reflex among Yanqui fans to say that if only George were still actively running things they'd be on top again - and now, at least in your theory, it's his absence and the opposite approach of one of his sons (but not the other) that brought them this latest victory In other words, you're not only waiting for the results first before praising the method but arguing the ends both justify the means and also somehow prove the means to be noble. This reminds me of Met fans who decided that the 1996 "drought breaking" MFY winning team was likable bunch too. Those who did either permanently jumped on that bandwagon or wound up getting run over by it.
|
Edgy DC Nov 08 2009 01:10 PM Re: The MFY's have changed forever. |
Has Hal been reading Dr. Sutton?
|
Ashie62 Nov 08 2009 06:11 PM Re: The MFY's have changed forever. |
I'm not sure what any of the above means but isn't hating the Yankees a primal correct thing to do regardless of owner?
|
soupcan Nov 09 2009 08:02 AM Re: The MFY's have changed forever. |
I have always hated the Yankees simply because they were the Yankees.
|
Centerfield Nov 09 2009 08:04 AM Re: The MFY's have changed forever. |
There will always be a reason to hate the Yankees. If Gandhi were the owner and Mother Theresa were the GM, they'd still be the most evil, vile and despicable team in all of sports. So let's put that to rest.
|
Edgy DC Nov 09 2009 08:19 AM Re: The MFY's have changed forever. |
Wait, what did I miss? They're without Hank Steinbrenner?
|