Master Index of Archived Threads


National Disgrace (Split from Met-Lovin' Big Shots)

SteveJRogers Feb 11 2010 08:46 AM

[quote="Frayed Knot":10q0jz34][quote="metsguyinmichigan":10q0jz34][quote="Frayed Knot":10q0jz34][quote="SteveJRogers":10q0jz34]Speaking of morning shows, I can't quite confirm if Mike Greenberg of ESPN is a Met fan, big Jet fan but he never really shows his hand when talking baseball.[/quote:10q0jz34] They talk baseball on that show? He's a YLDB[/quote:10q0jz34] Good call! That show is all-football, all the time. I'll give them another four weeks to continue rehashing the Super Bowl before they start to go into withdrawl, drawn out of it for a month of "Will Favre retire" debates, followed by weeks of "is Favre/Manning/Montana the best quarterback of all time" before they grab Mel Kypier Jr. out of hibernation to start salivating over the NFL draft. They do occasionally get Jayson Stark on the "OnStar/Subway/this spot for rent" hotline to rip the Mets and praise the Phillies. Used to get Peter Gammons and Steve Phillips, but I suppose both are unavailable these days for contractual/therapy reasons. And Greenie is absolutely a YLDB.[/quote:10q0jz34] It's ESPN, whaddya expect. Greenberg & Golic as personalities are unobjectionable enough - but what can you say about the show other than that it contains all the strengths and weaknesses of being part of the 'World Wide Leader' machine. As with most espen shows, their hosts are expected to know and easily chat about football and basketball but then need to rely on one of the hired nerds when it comes to baseball. Having Stark, Olney, Kurkjian (and, until recently, Gammons & Phillips) [strikeout]in chains[/strikeout] I mean on retainer means that there's usually a scheduled baseball chat not too far away, but once those 12 minutes are up they act as if they've done their penance and can go back to the NFL draft or NCAA hoops which, after all, each provide their network with something like 1,467 hours per/week in programming. Then when it's summer and there's nothing else to talk about but baseball ... they all go on vacation. In short, I don't think Greeny cares that much about baseball except to the extent that his young son is a Jeter-worshipper and he often takes him to games. Golic acts as if he's a big Indians fan but that's mainly to maintain his 'Im a blue collar guy from Ohio' image and I suspect he hasn't watched an entire baseball game in at least a decade and attended one in maybe two - with the exception of those occasions when the show is done from a remote and even then I'd put $20 on him spending 7 of the 9 innings with the free food spread.[/quote:10q0jz34] Well I guess you don't subscribe to the theory that ESPN gives its listeners what they want, but then again it seems everyone here subscribes to the theory that somehow baseball is still reigning supreme on a national level and hasn't slipped in the rankings in terms of national pastime. To say nothing about the blinders everyone here has about the national disgrace that the franchise we root for has become. No, anyone that says that are either lazy reporters, YLDBs, or self-loathing Met fans.

Benjamin Grimm Feb 11 2010 08:50 AM Re: Met-Loving Big Shots 2010

Steve's becoming a salamander.

metsguyinmichigan Feb 11 2010 08:53 AM Re: Met-Loving Big Shots 2010

Steve opined: "Well I guess you don't subscribe to the theory that ESPN gives its listeners what they want, but then again it seems everyone here subscribes to the theory that somehow baseball is still reigning supreme on a national level and hasn't slipped in the rankings in terms of national pastime. To say nothing about the blinders everyone here has about the national disgrace that the franchise we root for has become. No, anyone that says that are either lazy reporters, YLDBs, or self-loathing Met fans." The Mets aren't a national disgrace. And that was kind of a self-loathing comment there, Steve.

Edgy DC Feb 11 2010 09:01 AM Re: Met-Loving Big Shots 2010

I like how he just puts words in our (unanimous) mouths and types out both sides of the argument. It saves everyone a lot of time.

Vic Sage Feb 11 2010 09:01 AM Re: Met-Loving Big Shots 2010

The Mets aren't a national disgrace. Too true. They're more of a local disgrace. Regional, at best.

metirish Feb 11 2010 09:07 AM Re: Met-Loving Big Shots 2010

Tri-State area disgrace....although Seo ,Mgim and DocTee might make them national.

SteveJRogers Feb 11 2010 09:33 AM Re: Met-Loving Big Shots 2010

So I'm imagining the shots taken by national sports radio and TV shows then huh? So I'm imagining the ten year old shots taken by people like Colin Cowherd on the fact that the Mets had the Baha Men and "Who Let The Dogs Out" in the 2000 WS? So I'm imagining all the shots from Leno, Letterman, O'Brien and the "self loathing" shots from Stewart and Colbert?

metsguyinmichigan Feb 11 2010 09:34 AM Re: Met-Loving Big Shots 2010

The Mets are a good team going through a tough stretch. They Royals and Pirates are a disgrace, with the Nationals not far behind. The Yankees are evil.

Edgy DC Feb 11 2010 09:38 AM Re: Met-Loving Big Shots 2010

Steve, cut it out.

metirish Feb 11 2010 09:40 AM Re: Met-Loving Big Shots 2010

Fear & self loathing in Flushing.

themetfairy Feb 11 2010 09:42 AM Re: Met-Loving Big Shots 2010

Could an administrator break this discussion away from the main thread?

Edgy DC Feb 11 2010 09:43 AM Re: Met-Loving Big Shots 2010

Sure, it's standard operating procedure with Steve.

SteveJRogers Feb 11 2010 10:19 AM Re: Met-Loving Big Shots 2010

[quote="metsguyinmichigan"]The Mets are a good team going through a tough stretch. They Royals and Pirates are a disgrace, with the Nationals not far behind. The Yankees are evil.

I'll counter that with the Mets have been a poorly run franchise since 1991 (Straw leaves, Johnson is fired and Cashen retires) with the exception of a few blips of success.

They are a bigger disgrace than the Pirates and Royals because there are no expectations for the Pirates and Royals and clearly their ownerships take no risks at all. The Mets should be run more like the Twins, Angels or Cardinals, hell even the Dodgers have sustained successes with blips of horrid seasons.

The Mets are more like the Tom Hicks Rangers or the Peter Angelos Orioles.

BTW, you think the Mets aren't a joke on a national level?

Bonds for Mets' Citi Field lowered to 'junk' status

If its not getting TARP money from the naming rights deal, its the owner getting caught in the middle of the biggest ponzi scheme in history. The franchise has taken several national hits in the financial world as well as the sports department and late night television.

MFS62 Feb 11 2010 10:25 AM Re: Natinoal Disgrace (Split from Met-Lovin' Big Shtos)

The pods have taken over poor Steve. Even Donald Sutherland couldn't save him. Later

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr Feb 11 2010 10:31 AM Re: Natinoal Disgrace (Split from Met-Lovin' Big Shtos)

Cabin fever?

Benjamin Grimm Feb 11 2010 10:33 AM Re: Natinoal Disgrace (Split from Met-Lovin' Big Shtos)

[quote="MFS62"]The pods have taken over poor Steve. Even Donald Sutherland couldn't save him. Later

Even Keifer Sutherland can't save him!

Kong76 Feb 11 2010 10:43 AM Re: Natinoal Disgrace (Split from Met-Lovin' Big Shtos)

irish: Tri-State area disgrace....although Seo ,Mgim and DocTee might make them national <<< Global disgrace if TripleDee would re-join us.

Edgy DC Feb 11 2010 10:44 AM Re: Natinoal Disgrace (Split from Met-Lovin' Big Shtos)

Well, HahnSolo gets us extra-terrestrial.

metirish Feb 11 2010 10:45 AM Re: Natinoal Disgrace (Split from Met-Lovin' Big Shtos)

[quote="Kong76"]irish: Tri-State area disgrace....although Seo ,Mgim and DocTee might make them national <<< Global disgrace if TripleDee would re-join us.

The very reason why we are sending Seo down to Australia, he needs to liaise with TripleDee so we won't go in to a global crises.

Frayed Knot Feb 11 2010 11:09 AM Re: Natinoal Disgrace (Split from Met-Lovin' Big Shtos)

Steve, If you're going to respond to what I write at least respond to what I write while you're responding to what I write otherwise don't respond to what I write. Alright?

smg58 Feb 11 2010 11:13 AM Re: Met-Loving Big Shots 2010

[quote="Benjamin Grimm":3uakbbim]Steve's becoming a salamander.[/quote:3uakbbim] So who turned him into a newt? And will he get better?

Kong76 Feb 11 2010 11:25 AM Re: Natinoal Disgrace (Split from Met-Lovin' Big Shtos)

[url]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zrzMhU_4m-g

SteveJRogers Feb 11 2010 11:37 AM Re: Natinoal Disgrace (Split from Met-Lovin' Big Shtos)

[quote="Frayed Knot":1aun2qjj]Steve, If you're going to respond to what I write at least respond to what I write while you're responding to what I write otherwise don't respond to what I write. Alright?[/quote:1aun2qjj] Fair enough. But ignoring the fact that the Mets and the Wilpons ARE a joke is just as bad as acting as if the national media caters to the NFL, NBA and the NCAA football and basketball solely on the amount of programing they put on their networks as opposed to national popularity.

Valadius Feb 11 2010 11:40 AM Re: Natinoal Disgrace (Split from Met-Lovin' Big Shtos)

Steve, one question: Why are you listening to Mike Francesa?

SteveJRogers Feb 11 2010 11:46 AM Re: Natinoal Disgrace (Split from Met-Lovin' Big Shtos)

[quote="Valadius":1s8yvpy9]Steve, one question: Why are you listening to Mike Francesa?[/quote:1s8yvpy9] I don't.

SteveJRogers Feb 11 2010 11:53 AM Re: Natinoal Disgrace (Split from Met-Lovin' Big Shtos)

And again, that's an classic example of the majority opinion around here. If you disagree with the message, blame the messenger for being, take ypur pick: Arrogant YLDB Lazy reporter Self-Hating Met fan As opposed to thinking Yeah he is a fat pompous jerk (Francesa example), but on this, this and this he is dead on accurate.

Edgy DC Feb 11 2010 11:57 AM Re: Natinoal Disgrace (Split from Met-Lovin' Big Shtos)

Steve, when are you going to stop making up what other people are writing?

Valadius Feb 11 2010 11:59 AM Re: Natinoal Disgrace (Split from Met-Lovin' Big Shtos)

But you are listening to the other talking heads on the air. Look, sports is like politics - everyone can go and make predictions, but predictions are frequently wrong, especially the farther out from the action you really are. My first rule of politics is this - don't listen to pundits. The talking heads on sports radio, TV, and print are the same thing for sports - pundits. And they're frequently wrong. There's no reason to listen to them.

SteveJRogers Feb 11 2010 12:03 PM Re: Natinoal Disgrace (Split from Met-Lovin' Big Shtos)

[quote="Valadius":2iyp3ps5]But you are listening to the other talking heads on the air. Look, sports is like politics - everyone can go and make predictions, but predictions are frequently wrong, especially the farther out from the action you really are. My first rule of politics is this - don't listen to pundits. The talking heads on sports radio, TV, and print are the same thing for sports - pundits. And they're frequently wrong. There's no reason to listen to them.[/quote:2iyp3ps5] Yes there are reasons to listen to them. For all bluster from say O'Reilly or Matthews, or Hannity or Olbermann, or Van Sustram or whomever Fox, CNN or MSNBC pundit you pick there is every now and then nuggets of news or a new way of looking at things that you didn't realize. To close your mind off is just as bad as you say their empty opinions are. So who do you get your news from?

Valadius Feb 11 2010 12:07 PM Re: Natinoal Disgrace (Split from Met-Lovin' Big Shtos)

[quote="SteveJRogers":20cmr5o8][quote="Valadius":20cmr5o8]But you are listening to the other talking heads on the air. Look, sports is like politics - everyone can go and make predictions, but predictions are frequently wrong, especially the farther out from the action you really are. My first rule of politics is this - don't listen to pundits. The talking heads on sports radio, TV, and print are the same thing for sports - pundits. And they're frequently wrong. There's no reason to listen to them.[/quote:20cmr5o8] Yes there are reasons to listen to them. For all bluster from say O'Reilly or Matthews, or Hannity or Olbermann, or Van Sustram or whomever Fox, CNN or MSNBC pundit you pick there is every now and then nuggets of news or a new way of looking at things that you didn't realize. To close your mind off is just as bad as you say their empty opinions are. So who do you get your news from?[/quote:20cmr5o8] Actual news, facts, and statistics, with opinion kept strictly out of the equation. AP, AFP, Reuters, etc. I can make my own judgments.

SteveJRogers Feb 11 2010 12:12 PM Re: Natinoal Disgrace (Split from Met-Lovin' Big Shtos)

[quote="Valadius":52hodu15][quote="SteveJRogers":52hodu15][quote="Valadius":52hodu15]But you are listening to the other talking heads on the air. Look, sports is like politics - everyone can go and make predictions, but predictions are frequently wrong, especially the farther out from the action you really are. My first rule of politics is this - don't listen to pundits. The talking heads on sports radio, TV, and print are the same thing for sports - pundits. And they're frequently wrong. There's no reason to listen to them.[/quote:52hodu15] Yes there are reasons to listen to them. For all bluster from say O'Reilly or Matthews, or Hannity or Olbermann, or Van Sustram or whomever Fox, CNN or MSNBC pundit you pick there is every now and then nuggets of news or a new way of looking at things that you didn't realize. To close your mind off is just as bad as you say their empty opinions are. So who do you get your news from?[/quote:52hodu15] Actual news, facts, and statistics, with opinion kept strictly out of the equation. AP, AFP, Reuters, etc. I can make my own judgments.[/quote:52hodu15] Then don't listen to my podcast then, since I'm sure I'm going to be shredding the Mets and the Wilpon's every so often, because I'm not a news gatherer, I'm an opinion guy. Oh sure I'll have facts and stats to back me up. But other than that, what is the difference between what I'm going to be recording this weekend, and what you can hear on your local sports talk radio program?

metsguyinmichigan Feb 11 2010 12:17 PM Re: Natinoal Disgrace (Split from Met-Lovin' Big Shtos)

Get your news from newspapers! :) Now, I call BS on the following: "I'll counter that with the Mets have been a poorly run franchise since 1991 (Straw leaves, Johnson is fired and Cashen retires) with the exception of a few blips of success. They are a bigger disgrace than the Pirates and Royals because there are no expectations for the Pirates and Royals and clearly their ownerships take no risks at all. The Mets should be run more like the Twins, Angels or Cardinals, hell even the Dodgers have sustained successes with blips of horrid seasons. The Mets are more like the Tom Hicks Rangers or the Peter Angelos Orioles. BTW, you think the Mets aren't a joke on a national level? Bonds for Mets' Citi Field lowered to 'junk' status If its not getting TARP money from the naming rights deal, its the owner getting caught in the middle of the biggest ponzi scheme in history. The franchise has taken several national hits in the financial world as well as the sports department and late night television." Wilpon getting caught in the ponzi scheme has nothing to do with the team, the naming rights came before the TARP money. Since 1991, they've reached the post-season in 1999, 2000 and 2006, which isn't bad in the grand view of things. Disgraceful owners are the one who charge Major-League prices for a product they have no intention of improving and pocket millions in revenue-sharing dollars. That's a big FY to the fans. I find that more insulting than two-thirds of the team getting hurt or not overpaying for some free agent pitcher who just happens to be the best one available in a shallow pool. Do the Mets do some stupid things? Of course. They're also in a bigger fishbowl that the other teams, whose missteps go pretty much unwatched. Wear your interlocking NY proudly, Steve. The ORANGE one. And don't give a rat's ass about what the columnists say.

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr Feb 11 2010 12:19 PM Re: Natinoal Disgrace (Split from Met-Lovin' Big Shtos)

[quote="SteveJRogers":2eadodl4] Yes there are reasons to listen to them. For all bluster from say O'Reilly or Matthews, or Hannity or Olbermann, or Van Sustram or whomever Fox, CNN or MSNBC pundit you pick there is every now and then nuggets of news or a new way of looking at things that you didn't realize. To close your mind off is just as bad as you say their empty opinions are.[/quote:2eadodl4] Are we really having a conversation here about the merits of open-mindedness? Leaving aside the merits of the 'news sources' you're ticking off-- and if you're shopping at late-night talk shows and the Beck-Olbermann-Hannity shop for your fact groceries, man, you're more often than not winding up malnourished-- I don't think there's a single person on this Forum who dismisses Met-critical voices out of hand. Now, knee-jerk skepticism regarding sources that tend toward dismissive blowhard-iness (Francesa, e.g.), lazy/awful writing (Matthews), faulty logic (Chass) or factual inaccuracy/bias (Heyman)... well, yeah, guilty as charged. I'm pretty sure that doesn't make me the sort of Pollyanna regarding Metsiana that you're describing. (Or, more accurately, seeing in fleeting, illusory glimpses in the figurative woodwork.)

Swan Swan H Feb 11 2010 12:21 PM Re: Natinoal Disgrace (Split from Met-Lovin' Big Shtos)

[quote="SteveJRogers":3b1bk001]Then don't listen to my podcast then, since I'm sure I'm going to be shredding the Mets and the Wilpon's every so often, because I'm not a news gatherer, I'm an opinion guy. Oh sure I'll have facts and stats to back me up. But other than that, what is the difference between what I'm going to be recording this weekend, and what you can hear on your local sports talk radio program?[/quote:3b1bk001] I thought I'd stay out of this, as Stevie Jeets has called me an asshole in the past and boyoboy did it sting, but this is the first thing I have read on the Internet in quite a while that has literally made me laugh out loud.

Edgy DC Feb 11 2010 12:23 PM Re: Natinoal Disgrace (Split from Met-Lovin' Big Shtos)

I know. I was thinking, "Worst. Plug. Ever."

metirish Feb 11 2010 12:25 PM Re: Natinoal Disgrace (Split from Met-Lovin' Big Shtos)

Hilarious Steve is on my 100 most influential list .

SteveJRogers Feb 11 2010 12:31 PM Re: Natinoal Disgrace (Split from Met-Lovin' Big Shtos)

[quote="Edgy DC":1kx8aut9]I know. I was thinking, "Worst. Plug. Ever."[/quote:1kx8aut9] Heh. Speaking of which, I need to get you on that show next month, make sure the bet is acknowledged on more than just here. I meant that more along the lines of, don't be so arrogant that your opinion is the only one that matters, even if you think someone blathering on TV or on the radio is a POS. I don't care if you disagree with an opinion or not, but to shut yourself from hearing opinions period, or as I said, kill the messenger because you have a problem with the message, is just as arrogant as say Mike Francesa acting as if his opinion is the absolute truth.

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr Feb 11 2010 12:46 PM Re: Natinoal Disgrace (Split from Met-Lovin' Big Shtos)

A couple of the folks at whom you're hurling turds are admins on the forum, no? So if they were prone to dismissing/shutting out/silencing dissenting views, they could do so a lot more easily and simply than explaining themselves or arguing with them, yes?

Edgy DC Feb 11 2010 12:54 PM Re: National Disgrace (Split from Met-Lovin' Big Shtos)

Steve, you can read my post on the bet in the "Predicitons Archives." It's a matter of record. You can also give folks the URL. Else, I will decline to appear, although I'm sure Rogers & Hoyt has HIT written all over it.

SteveJRogers Feb 11 2010 12:55 PM Re: Natinoal Disgrace (Split from Met-Lovin' Big Shtos)

[quote="LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr"]A couple of the folks at whom you're hurling turds are admins on the forum, no? So if they were prone to dismissing/shutting out/silencing dissenting views, they could do so a lot more easily and simply than explaining themselves or arguing with them, yes?

Clearly there is a difference between internet banter and stuff from people who do it for a living.

TransMonk Feb 11 2010 12:56 PM Re: National Disgrace (Split from Met-Lovin' Big Shtos)

There are too many BOCs in here to count...some of them unintentional and ironic. Definitely the most entertaining thread of 2010 so far.

Benjamin Grimm Feb 11 2010 12:56 PM Re: National Disgrace (Split from Met-Lovin' Big Shtos)

I think this is the first time I've ever seen anyone decline an invitation to a train wreck.

metirish Feb 11 2010 12:57 PM Re: National Disgrace (Split from Met-Lovin' Big Shtos)

[quote="Edgy DC":1mrexaap]Steve, you can read my post on the bet in the "Predicitons Archives." It's a matter of record. You can also give folks the URL. Else, I will decline to appear, although I'm sure Rogers & Hoyt has HIT written all over it.[/quote:1mrexaap] I'd even pay for that show......

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr Feb 11 2010 01:06 PM Re: National Disgrace (Split from Met-Lovin' Big Shtos)

[quote="Edgy DC":2n3kdtyx]Steve, you can read my post on the bet in the "Predicitons Archives." It's a matter of record. You can also give folks the URL. Else, I will decline to appear, although I'm sure Rogers & Hoyt has HIT written all over it.[/quote:2n3kdtyx] YOU STINKING COWARD!

Valadius Feb 11 2010 01:07 PM Re: National Disgrace (Split from Met-Lovin' Big Shtos)

[quote="Edgy DC":kezc3r4f]Steve, you can read my post on the bet in the "Predicitons Archives." It's a matter of record. You can also give folks the URL. Else, I will decline to appear, although I'm sure Rogers & Hoyt has HIT written all over it.[/quote:kezc3r4f] Sounds like an 80's detective series.

Willets Point Feb 11 2010 01:11 PM Re: National Disgrace (Split from Met-Lovin' Big Shtos)

I really want Edgy to appear on that podcast.

John Cougar Lunchbucket Feb 11 2010 01:16 PM Re: National Disgrace (Split from Met-Lovin' Big Shtos)

Never woulda happened had Rogers not counted talk-radio jocks as "big shots."

Valadius Feb 11 2010 01:17 PM Re: National Disgrace (Split from Met-Lovin' Big Shtos)

I'd like to hear a podcast with Edgy and Josh Fruhlinger.

metsguyinmichigan Feb 11 2010 02:12 PM Re: National Disgrace (Split from Met-Lovin' Big Shtos)

[quote="Valadius":1i0e1bud]I'd like to hear a podcast with Edgy and Josh Fruhlinger.[/quote:1i0e1bud] Or Josh and SeaWolf telling us about their Jeopardy experiences. "I'll take self-loathing fans for $200, Alex!"

batmagadanleadoff Feb 11 2010 02:22 PM Re: Natinoal Disgrace (Split from Met-Lovin' Big Shtos)

[quote="SteveJRogers"]Then don't listen to my podcast....?[/qu I'd prefer to wait for the transcript version.

Frayed Knot Feb 11 2010 02:25 PM Re: National Disgrace (Split from Met-Lovin' Big Shtos) Edited 1 time(s), most recently on Feb 11 2010 02:38 PM

...

Frayed Knot Feb 11 2010 02:38 PM Re: Natinoal Disgrace (Split from Met-Lovin' Big Shtos)

[quote="SteveJRogers"][quote="Frayed Knot"]Steve, If you're going to respond to what I write at least respond to what I write while you're responding to what I write otherwise don't respond to what I write. Alright?

Fair enough. But ignoring the fact that the Mets and the Wilpons ARE a joke

No, it's just that NO ONE WAS TALKING ABOUT the state of the Mets until YOU threw it into the conversation.
My points were:
- I suspect Greenberg is barely a baseball fan
- to the extent that he is a fan I suspect he's a Yanqui fan
- Who gives a shit

... is just as bad as acting as if the national media caters to the NFL, NBA and the NCAA football and basketball solely on the amount of programing they put on their networks as opposed to national popularity.

Is it as bad as acting as if virtually EVERYTHING that appears and is said on ESPN is NOT about what ELSE is on ESPN?





I swear sometimes I feel like these conversations that make me feel like Colin Farrell's character Ray?:

"Some day this turned out to be; I'm suicidal, me mate's trying to kill me, my gun gets nicked ... and I'm still in fuckin' Bruges"

Fman99 Feb 11 2010 07:40 PM Re: National Disgrace (Split from Met-Lovin' Big Shots)

SJR rules, the CPF wouldn't be the CPF without this kind of banter. As for news, I get mine from the trivia questions printed on the outside of my instant oatmeal packets, like all civilized human beings do.

Kong76 Feb 11 2010 08:24 PM Re: National Disgrace (Split from Met-Lovin' Big Shots)

Jeets is a good guy, as many of us can corroborate. When stuff like this flies off the deep end I figure he's either missed a day of meds or doubled up by accident. I think Edge should grant an interview on Steve's show in the coming months. G-Fafif would be a good guest, as well as J C Lunchgrabber. Almost forgot Ben Grimm ... the databaseman!!!

SteveJRogers Feb 11 2010 08:41 PM Re: National Disgrace (Split from Met-Lovin' Big Shots)

Heh, I do have Greg and LunchUniWatcher in mind down the road, but from my experience around here I'd have a better shot getting JSW52 out of seclusion than I do getting Ben on! Then again, I wouldn't mind just referring to someone as their Internet user name, I mean if I had Edge on I'd just call him Edgy the whole time.

Benjamin Grimm Feb 12 2010 07:20 AM Re: National Disgrace (Split from Met-Lovin' Big Shots)

[quote="SteveJRogers":knaaomo5]Heh, I do have Greg and LunchUniWatcher in mind down the road, but from my experience around here I'd have a better shot getting JSW52 out of seclusion than I do getting Ben on! [/quote:knaaomo5] Sometimes Steve can be quite perceptive. (JSW52???)

metirish Feb 12 2010 07:32 AM Re: National Disgrace (Split from Met-Lovin' Big Shots) Edited 1 time(s), most recently on Feb 12 2010 07:53 AM

I like Kase's idea , although now I'm thinking a round table type deal with Rogers in the Tavis Smiley/Charlie Rose role.

Edgy DC Feb 12 2010 07:43 AM Re: National Disgrace (Split from Met-Lovin' Big Shots)

[quote="Kong76":3t9861kv]I think Edge should grant an interview on Steve's show in the coming months. G-Fafif would be a good guest, as well as J C Lunchgrabber. Almost forgot Ben Grimm ... the databaseman!!![/quote:3t9861kv] You first, Peer-Pressure Man.

John Cougar Lunchbucket Feb 12 2010 07:51 AM Re: National Disgrace (Split from Met-Lovin' Big Shots)

[quote="Benjamin Grimm"][quote="SteveJRogers"]Heh, I do have Greg and LunchUniWatcher in mind down the road, but from my experience around here I'd have a better shot getting JSW52 out of seclusion than I do getting Ben on!

Sometimes Steve can be quite perceptive.

(JSW52???)

JSW 52 was like the original "Mets Blogger" and had a column that ran on the Mets Online website. He was, um, kind of peculiar, but refreshing in that there was absolutely nothing between his mind and the page. It was all about what he wore to the game, how he got the the stadium (often with his friend, Yacov Farbowitz), his great seats just behind the visiting dugout, his musical performances at the Staten Island Mall, Victory Slurpees, his Orthodoxy, etc... And he'd drop the names of the people he "chatted" with at the Diamond Club Exit ("I had my usual chat with Gary Cohen..."). He also seemed to have a dark side and at times the thing sorta careened out of control when he felt he wasn't afforded the proper respect for doing what he did. It was weird and funny.

Look what I found in the Wayback Machine!

[url]http://web.archive.org/web/20001018122859/http://www.metsonline.net/journal.html

The "Game Experience" links work too. Classick!

G-Fafif Feb 12 2010 11:21 AM Re: National Disgrace (Split from Met-Lovin' Big Shots)

I was fortunate enough to receive somebody's corporate third base Field Level tickets several times in 1999, including the night the Mets came back on David Wells and beat the Blue Jays in 14 innings. One of the touchstones for me and my friend who usually joined me in those seats was the sight of WEISSMAN 52. Game situation would come up and my buddy would say something to the effect of, "Yeah, but do you think Weissman would bunt here?" Something about the personalized jersey (maybe the number) amused us no end. Had no idea he was creating the template folks like me would go on to follow.

Edgy DC Feb 12 2010 11:30 AM Re: National Disgrace (Split from Met-Lovin' Big Shots)

Weissman also stars in Paragraph Six of The Air Strip.

Frayed Knot Feb 12 2010 11:32 AM Re: National Disgrace (Split from Met-Lovin' Big Shots)

Something about the personalized jersey (maybe the number) amused us no end A uniform number that was in tribute to his favorite ... stadium usher.