|
|
Post by Ziggy/Franzen Troll on Aug 15, 2008 11:36:25 GMT -5
lol you are actually bragging about being ahead of the marlins? they had a decent run, but it has come to an end. the phillies were predicted to finish 1st and ahead of everyone, and the marlins were picked to have 100 losses. i wouldnt be surprised if they packed it in to have everyone healthy for next season. but thats what i would do. As for the mets dont get too excited sports.espn.go.com/mlb/stats/rpi?season=2008&sortColumn=sosyou are who you beat (bad pun i know) |
|
|
|
Post by diehardmetsfan on Aug 16, 2008 7:26:39 GMT -5
lol you are actually bragging about being ahead of the marlins? they had a decent run, but it has come to an end. the phillies were predicted to finish 1st and ahead of everyone, and the marlins were picked to have 100 losses. i wouldnt be surprised if they packed it in to have everyone healthy for next season. but thats what i would do. As for the mets dont get too excited sports.espn.go.com/mlb/stats/rpi?season=2008&sortColumn=sosyou are who you beat (bad pun i know) strength of schedule doesnt mean shit when you play 162 games |
|
|
|
Post by Fish Troll on Aug 16, 2008 9:00:15 GMT -5
Umm yes it does.
|
|
|
|
Post by Josh on Aug 16, 2008 10:16:11 GMT -5
lol you are actually bragging about being ahead of the marlins? they had a decent run, but it has come to an end. the phillies were predicted to finish 1st and ahead of everyone, and the marlins were picked to have 100 losses. i wouldnt be surprised if they packed it in to have everyone healthy for next season. but thats what i would do. As for the mets dont get too excited sports.espn.go.com/mlb/stats/rpi?season=2008&sortColumn=sosyou are who you beat (bad pun i know) strength of schedule doesnt mean shit when you play 162 games ...why not? |
|
|
|
Post by Ziggy/Franzen Troll on Aug 16, 2008 13:02:31 GMT -5
lol you are actually bragging about being ahead of the marlins? they had a decent run, but it has come to an end. the phillies were predicted to finish 1st and ahead of everyone, and the marlins were picked to have 100 losses. i wouldnt be surprised if they packed it in to have everyone healthy for next season. but thats what i would do. As for the mets dont get too excited sports.espn.go.com/mlb/stats/rpi?season=2008&sortColumn=sosyou are who you beat (bad pun i know) strength of schedule doesnt mean shit when you play 162 games It does when you record pad |
|
|
|
Post by diehardmetsfan on Aug 16, 2008 13:30:22 GMT -5
strength of schedule doesnt mean shit when you play 162 games ...why not? because it changes...strength of schedule is baised on the record of the teams that 1 team plays...so, teams can be bad at the begginning of the year but do good at the end...what i'm saying is that strength of schedule doesnt mean anything in the middle of the season, only at the end, when everything's finished...here's an example last year, up until the 2nd week of september, the rockies would hav lowered a teams' S.O.S, but by the end of the season, the rockies would have raised a teams' S.O.S |
|
|
|
Post by Josh on Aug 17, 2008 9:33:14 GMT -5
because it changes...strength of schedule is baised on the record of the teams that 1 team plays...so, teams can be bad at the begginning of the year but do good at the end...what i'm saying is that strength of schedule doesnt mean anything in the middle of the season, only at the end, when everything's finished...here's an example last year, up until the 2nd week of september, the rockies would hav lowered a teams' S.O.S, but by the end of the season, the rockies would have raised a teams' S.O.S I'm pretty sure that list is updated daily. |
|
|
|
Post by seaver41 on Aug 17, 2008 10:03:30 GMT -5
lol you are actually bragging about being ahead of the marlins? they had a decent run, but it has come to an end. the phillies were predicted to finish 1st and ahead of everyone, and the marlins were picked to have 100 losses. i wouldnt be surprised if they packed it in to have everyone healthy for next season. but thats what i would do. As for the mets dont get too excited sports.espn.go.com/mlb/stats/rpi?season=2008&sortColumn=sosyou are who you beat (bad pun i know) That ESPN stuff is bullshit in case you didn't know. |
|
|
|
Post by Ziggy/Franzen Troll on Aug 17, 2008 15:14:18 GMT -5
lol you are actually bragging about being ahead of the marlins? they had a decent run, but it has come to an end. the phillies were predicted to finish 1st and ahead of everyone, and the marlins were picked to have 100 losses. i wouldnt be surprised if they packed it in to have everyone healthy for next season. but thats what i would do. As for the mets dont get too excited sports.espn.go.com/mlb/stats/rpi?season=2008&sortColumn=sosyou are who you beat (bad pun i know) That ESPN stuff is bullshit in case you didn't know. Didnt the mets have a SOS like that last year too? ESPN may be bullshit but blowing a 7 game lead isnt. |
|
|
|
Post by Ziggy/Franzen Troll on Aug 17, 2008 15:16:06 GMT -5
because it changes...strength of schedule is baised on the record of the teams that 1 team plays...so, teams can be bad at the begginning of the year but do good at the end...what i'm saying is that strength of schedule doesnt mean anything in the middle of the season, only at the end, when everything's finished...here's an example last year, up until the 2nd week of september, the rockies would hav lowered a teams' S.O.S, but by the end of the season, the rockies would have raised a teams' S.O.S I'm pretty sure that list is updated daily. whats this, do my eyes decieve me? the mets are now tied for last and are barely leading their division? hate to say it but... first round exit |
|
|
|
Post by kalasfan on Aug 17, 2008 15:26:30 GMT -5
He won't care about the Phillies in a month like the rest of Philly. That is about the most ridiculous statement I've seen on this board. Wait, I take that back, it isn't anywhere near ridiculous for this board, but it is still ridiculous. You don't know me from Adam, so you have no idea if I'll care in a month. One can be a solid fan of a baseball team and still have a life outside of baseball. And if you are saying that because you assume I'll be interested in the Eagles, guess again. I am from Northern Virginia originally, and I am still a Redskins' fan. However I don't have near the passion about football as I have for baseball. |
|
|
|
Post by Ziggy/Franzen Troll on Aug 17, 2008 15:35:10 GMT -5
He won't care about the Phillies in a month like the rest of Philly. That is about the most ridiculous statement I've seen on this board. Wait, I take that back, it isn't anywhere near ridiculous for this board, but it is still ridiculous. You don't know me from Adam, so you have no idea if I'll care in a month. One can be a solid fan of a baseball team and still have a life outside of baseball. And if you are saying that because you assume I'll be interested in the Eagles, guess again. I am from Northern Virginia originally, and I am still a Redskins' fan. However I don't have near the passion about football as I have for baseball. Youre Welcome |
|
|
|
Post by kalasfan on Aug 17, 2008 15:46:15 GMT -5
Rays, you've toned your act down a little bit, but that other Marlins fan is just unreadable, especially during a game thread. Yes, I stand by what I said. There are ridiculous statements made on this message board, but it is not unique in that regard.
|
|
|
|
Post by kalasfan on Aug 17, 2008 16:01:18 GMT -5
To answer the question, I grew up an American League fan in NOVA. I followed the Senators until I moved out of the country in 1966. By the time I got back two years later I was more into music than sports and it was another five years and a move to Eastern PA before I started following baseball again. When I was a kid, my favorite team was, of course, The Washington Senators,and my least favorite was probably the Orioles, since they were also somewhat local, and always better than the Senators. Since I have been a Phillies' fan, I have not really had a least favorite team. I liked guys from all the other teams the Phils played, especially guys like Willie Mays, Tom Seaver, Tony Gwynn, Nolan Ryan, Ozzie Smith - many opposing players were very good and likable guys. In the last 5-6 years or so, I have come to dislike the New York Mets, especially since the divisional rivalry has heated up. I still recognize a quality player and a good guy when I see one, and there have been some Mets' players I have liked and there still are, but I think, due to the growing internet message board phenomenon and the influx of trolls from that team's fan base to the message board designated as being for MY team's fan base I have come to keenly dislike that team. The personification of the Mets right now to me is Jose Reyes. 35 years ago it was Tom Seaver, and I admired him greatly. Reyes is an immature punk, and although I recognize his baseball talent, I want no part of watching him play baseball. And I'm not too crazy over Jimmy Rollins' finger-kissing and sky pointing, or Ryan Howard's home run watching either, so don't bother coming back and telling me if Reyes was doing his nonsense for the Phillies I'd love him.
|
|
|
|
Post by seaver41 on Aug 17, 2008 17:12:38 GMT -5
That ESPN stuff is bullshit in case you didn't know. Didnt the mets have a SOS like that last year too? ESPN may be bullshit but blowing a 7 game lead isnt. 1st place isn't bullshit either |
|
