Just Give Me A World Series Worth Watching
THIS IS THE BEST MLB HAS TO OFFER?
After two straight World Series sweeps who could not be happy with a
series somewhat up for grabs as this Fall Classic presumably is?
Little solace, though, can be taken when despite a 3-1 series lead by
the Cardinals; this series has not shown the best baseball has to offer
by a long shot.
How can one pitching staff commit four errors in one series-anytime of
the year? Are the Tigers tight? Tight like a tiger? You bet.
What happened to the rampaging locomotive that was the Detroit Tigers?
They performed phenomenally through two playoff series that scared the
pants off the mighty Yankees and rendered the swingin' A's a
manager-less mess.
What are the Cardinals eating? Were they just messing with all of
baseball by limping to the regular season's finish line like the
tortoise to the Houston Astros hare?
The problem is this World Series has been devoid of stars and riveting
performances. A Fall Classic doesn't need brand name stars to be
exciting, just clutch performances will create stars on its own. Did
anybody know much about Josh Beckett outside of Dade County before his
fastball tore into the Yankees leading Florida to a six game victory in
2003? Where's a 20-year-old Bret Saberhagen or a Billy Hatcher wrecking
opponents single-handedly?
The point is what has happened to baseball's mighty champions? The 1986
Mets were baseball's best. I personally knew the 1989 A's were going to
win the Series and many others concurred. The Yankees, despite the
hatred they produce in many, were undoubtedly powerful and deserving
champs.
Detroit may have fit the bill if they had continued to run roughshod
over the postseason. Instead, they've become paper tigers to a Cardinals
team pitching just well enough and hitting quite pedestrian next to
Detroit's hitless wonders of Ivan Rodriguez and Placido Polanco.
The Cardinals as 2006 World Champions might be akin to the 83-win squad
that won the National League Central-pathetic and undeserving.
Is this the product of some sort of Pete Rozelle-esque parity in Major
League Baseball or a wildcard playoff system that is predisposed to
giving second-tier clubs the chance to get hot at the right time?
Conjecture that wildcard teams gain an edge by "fighting it out" to the
very end of the season as opposed to division winners who "coast" to the
end of the season is ridiculous. The Tigers, Cardinals, A's and Mets
show this is faulty logic. All four were relatively unscathed by game
162. The Tigers lost out on the division on the final day of the season
to the Twins, but both the American League Central and the wildcard
trophies had nameplates ready to be affixed to either team.
The culprit is a best-of-five Division Series that can produce an upset
by an inferior team with a two starting pitchers mixed with some clutch
hitting. Whether the wildcard winner has two home games or one as
Commissioner Bud Selig has suggested for next season, the possibility of
dethroning a division champion is way too high price for a squad that
wins the regular season battle of 162 games.
Commissioner Bud continues to state that he doesn't want a Series game
spilling into November, which may or may not happen with a Best-of-seven
Division Series and shortening the season to 154 games is heretical.
Then, why did Selig agree to begin the World Series on a Tuesday rather
than its traditional Saturday opening to appease the Fox Network's new
TV deal starting in 2007?
Is low rating in a time of overall tiny Nielsen's on network TV the
reason for dubious World Series matchups or is this just another example
of Selig trading the hallowed game of baseball for another notch on his
so-called "legacy".
This, of course, would all be moot if Pujols would smack a couple of
homers in Game 5 or Justin Verlander mowed down 18 Cardinal hitters in
tonight. When your team isn't playing in the big game, the series is
about entertaining and good baseball not four game sweeps and
seven-pitch innings
After two straight World Series sweeps who could not be happy with a
series somewhat up for grabs as this Fall Classic presumably is?
Little solace, though, can be taken when despite a 3-1 series lead by
the Cardinals; this series has not shown the best baseball has to offer
by a long shot.
How can one pitching staff commit four errors in one series-anytime of
the year? Are the Tigers tight? Tight like a tiger? You bet.
What happened to the rampaging locomotive that was the Detroit Tigers?
They performed phenomenally through two playoff series that scared the
pants off the mighty Yankees and rendered the swingin' A's a
manager-less mess.
What are the Cardinals eating? Were they just messing with all of
baseball by limping to the regular season's finish line like the
tortoise to the Houston Astros hare?
The problem is this World Series has been devoid of stars and riveting
performances. A Fall Classic doesn't need brand name stars to be
exciting, just clutch performances will create stars on its own. Did
anybody know much about Josh Beckett outside of Dade County before his
fastball tore into the Yankees leading Florida to a six game victory in
2003? Where's a 20-year-old Bret Saberhagen or a Billy Hatcher wrecking
opponents single-handedly?
The point is what has happened to baseball's mighty champions? The 1986
Mets were baseball's best. I personally knew the 1989 A's were going to
win the Series and many others concurred. The Yankees, despite the
hatred they produce in many, were undoubtedly powerful and deserving
champs.
Detroit may have fit the bill if they had continued to run roughshod
over the postseason. Instead, they've become paper tigers to a Cardinals
team pitching just well enough and hitting quite pedestrian next to
Detroit's hitless wonders of Ivan Rodriguez and Placido Polanco.
The Cardinals as 2006 World Champions might be akin to the 83-win squad
that won the National League Central-pathetic and undeserving.
Is this the product of some sort of Pete Rozelle-esque parity in Major
League Baseball or a wildcard playoff system that is predisposed to
giving second-tier clubs the chance to get hot at the right time?
Conjecture that wildcard teams gain an edge by "fighting it out" to the
very end of the season as opposed to division winners who "coast" to the
end of the season is ridiculous. The Tigers, Cardinals, A's and Mets
show this is faulty logic. All four were relatively unscathed by game
162. The Tigers lost out on the division on the final day of the season
to the Twins, but both the American League Central and the wildcard
trophies had nameplates ready to be affixed to either team.
The culprit is a best-of-five Division Series that can produce an upset
by an inferior team with a two starting pitchers mixed with some clutch
hitting. Whether the wildcard winner has two home games or one as
Commissioner Bud Selig has suggested for next season, the possibility of
dethroning a division champion is way too high price for a squad that
wins the regular season battle of 162 games.
Commissioner Bud continues to state that he doesn't want a Series game
spilling into November, which may or may not happen with a Best-of-seven
Division Series and shortening the season to 154 games is heretical.
Then, why did Selig agree to begin the World Series on a Tuesday rather
than its traditional Saturday opening to appease the Fox Network's new
TV deal starting in 2007?
Is low rating in a time of overall tiny Nielsen's on network TV the
reason for dubious World Series matchups or is this just another example
of Selig trading the hallowed game of baseball for another notch on his
so-called "legacy".
This, of course, would all be moot if Pujols would smack a couple of
homers in Game 5 or Justin Verlander mowed down 18 Cardinal hitters in
tonight. When your team isn't playing in the big game, the series is
about entertaining and good baseball not four game sweeps and
seven-pitch innings
