Apr 25 2007 01:24 PM
Not real Mets.
Master Index of Archived Threads
True Mets
| Centerfield Apr 25 2007 01:01 PM |
|
Twice last night, Met announcers came close to wandering into "True Yankee" crap. The first one was not so bad...after Easley's HR, Gary Cohen was saying how it might be the first time Easley felt like a New Yorker. I guess that's ok, since it addresses a player's state of mind...or at least how comfortable he feels on his new team. The second was more egregious. In the post-game interview, Kevin Burkhardt said to Easley: "Do you feel like you're really a Met now?" What a load of crap. Since we dish it out to Yankee fans, I think we have to call out our guys when they start spewing the same kind of garbage. I loved Easley's response though: "Well, I'm wearing the uniform."
|
| metirish Apr 25 2007 01:03 PM |
|
Didn't Gary say something like "well he's a true Met now"?.....horrible stuff...
|
| iramets Apr 25 2007 01:11 PM |
|
To validate this as a subject of discussion, you need to define what a false Met is. "Juan Samuel, you really never became a Met, despite wearing the uni several times and cashing the paychecks. Why was that, do you think?"
|
| soupcan Apr 25 2007 01:22 PM |
|
'Cuz he sucked and the guy we traded for him was a True Met.
|
| Edgy DC Apr 25 2007 01:23 PM |
|
I think the point was to invalidate it.
|
| Centerfield Apr 25 2007 01:24 PM |
|
|
| Frayed Knot Apr 25 2007 03:08 PM |
|
You ever hear a Yanqui fan try to define "true Yankee"? They can't limit it to only organization guys because that would eliminate the likes of O'Neill, Tino, Brosius, et al --- and they can't limit it to only those from WS teams (much as they want to) because that would bar Mattingly from the club So they usually come up with an either/or definition which allows both groups in but creates comical outcomes like Chad Curtis is, but Dave Winfield and his 10 years of HoF-caliber play isn't.
|
| iramets Apr 25 2007 03:58 PM |
|
|
Well, of course those aren't real Mets. For Chrissake, CF, they look like little kids. And those uniforms look very cheesy to me. And either their manager is a giant of some kind, or else theyre much shorter than real Mets would be. I think someone is trying to pull a fast one here.
|
| G-Fafif Apr 25 2007 04:06 PM Re: True Mets |
|
|
I took that more as you've been sitting on the bench, you haven't had much of an opportunity to contribute, it must be hard to feel like you're part of the team when you haven't done much and haven't been here long. Didn't sound like True Met crapola...which indeed would be crapola. Since the other team was mentioned, last Friday Michael Kay appraised the result of the game he broacast as the Red Sox "stealing" a win. How is a win stolen? Is each Yankee game technically Yankee property unless otherwise specified? We're still in first. They're still in last. I'm going to go enjoy that for a few more hours, Blue Jays and Marlins willing.
|
| Elster88 Apr 25 2007 07:47 PM Re: True Mets Edited 1 time(s), most recently on Apr 25 2007 08:41 PM |
|
|
I laugh at Kay's douchebaggery as much as the next guy, actually probably more, but I think he's referring to the Sox being down by 6 in the eighth (or whatever it was). Come on you know that.
|
| Elster88 Apr 25 2007 08:40 PM Re: True Mets |
|
oops dooped
|
| Johnny Dickshot Apr 25 2007 08:49 PM |
|
douchebaggery. Just wanted to say it myself.
|
| RealityChuck Apr 26 2007 09:56 AM |
|
True Yankee = [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_true_Scotsman]True Scotsman.[/url] And no true Scotsman would play for the Yankees.
|
| G-Fafif Apr 26 2007 10:26 AM Re: True Mets |
||
|
Sure, but I've never been fond of that phrase. Both teams have nine (or more) innings with the same chance to outscore the other. That the Red Sox chose to score their runs in the latter portion of the game doesn't it make their victory any more thieved than if they had built a lead early and held it. Douchebaggery is indeed apropos vis-a-vis Michael Kay.
|
| soupcan Apr 26 2007 11:04 AM |
|
Douchebaggery is skullduggery's weak sister.
|