Giants are lighting the world on fire this year. I think I'll take my 3 SBs since 2000 and say, enjoy snow tubing on Sundays in January.
So are you saying that you have gotten over 18-1
Giants are lighting the world on fire this year. I think I'll take my 3 SBs since 2000 and say, enjoy snow tubing on Sundays in January.
So we get a high pick this year![]()
So are you saying that you have gotten over 18-1
dont worry the Giants have 4 superbowls the Pats won't be playing deep into January so relax and oh yeah the Giants own the Pats.
The Giants do own the Pats, but it's 2 games. And, the Patriots WILL be playing deep into January. Just watch. This year's defense is something else even without Wilfork and Mayo.
I never get over the losses, but as long as you have more wins than losses, what is there to complain about? As a sports fan, I have nothing to complain about. honestly, I never imagined the Patriots, Sox and UConn would be this good. And I'm talking individually. The fact that they have all been this good over the same 10 to 15 year period is absolutely mind blowing. It's going to end because that's what happens in sports, but it's been 15 years already.
.The Sox hatred has warped your brain.

Where exactly did I dismiss titles before 1946? The Celtics are charter members of the NBA. The NBA formed in 1946. The Celtics have won 25% of the total possible NBA titles. 1. Read, 2. Comprehend, 3. Think, 4. Respond. You clearly jumped over steps 2 and 3.if your gonna dismiss titles before 1946 then lets dismiss the Sox titles from 1918 and prior to that then, so lets just say the Sox have 3 titles and not 8.
Celts fan?
I'm shocked anyone is arguing against the Yankees being the best organization is sports. Besides winning at an alarming rate the Yankees are just iconic from the pinstripes to the NY hat, they've made movies about them, a disease was named after one of their players and they have the some of the most legendary players in the history of sports. The Celtics are no doubt a great organization but the Lakers are on equal footing with them and have had better players throughout their history than the Celtics have. As for the Canadiens, nobody cares about hockey.Where exactly did I dismiss titles before 1946? The Celtics are charter members of the NBA. The NBA formed in 1946. The Celtics have won 25% of the total possible NBA titles. 1. Read, 2. Comprehend, 3. Think, 4. Respond. You clearly jumped over steps 2 and 3.
Agreed, I like the Celtics more than the Lakers but the Lakers are the better franchise.Putting the Celtics on par with the Yankees is laughable. They've won one title in the last 27 years. They aren't even the best franchise in their own sport.
I'm shocked anyone is arguing against the Yankees being the best organization is sports. Besides winning at an alarming rate the Yankees are just iconic from the pinstripes to the NY hat, they've made movies about them, a disease was named after one of their players and they have the some of the most legendary players in the history of sports. The Celtics are no doubt a great organization but the Lakers are on equal footing with them and have had better players throughout their history than the Celtics have. As for the Canadiens, nobody cares about hockey.
Well, I guess you're right, they did name a disease after one of their players. Christ, can there be a thread that doesn't become some sort of "I got sand in my vagina" whining?
I'm geeked about the Red Sox. Three rings in my lifetime when I thought maybe I'd never see one. I don't really give a about the '27 Yankees right now. The Red Sox are the 2013 champs of baseball. All the "if only Detroit was healthy" and "this other team is better on paper" means squadoosh and is just sour grapes. On to basketball season.
Your premises were faulty and you dared someone to argue them. I did and succeeded.
ALS was named after Lou Gehrig, the man, not the Yankee because it was so rare. It's like Parkinsons or Hodgkins. Given the situation, I'm pretty sure he would have foregone the notoriety in order t o lived 30 more years.
............You missed the point.Putting the Celtics on par with the Yankees is laughable. They've won one title in the last 27 years. They aren't even the best franchise in their own sport.
My premise wasn't faulty and all you succeeded at was proving you are clueless. ALS was renamed Lou Gehrig's disease, because it's Lou Gehrig. That's precisely the point the guy was "The Iron Horse" a Yankee legend and one of the biggest legends of the timeperiod. Shows how big the Yankees are when he wasn't even the most legendary player on his own team. Your last sentence I'm not even going to comment on, it's too stupid.Your premises were faulty and you dared someone to argue them. I did and succeeded.
ALS was named after Lou Gehrig, the man, not the Yankee because it was so rare. It's like Parkinsons or Hodgkins. Given the situation, I'm pretty sure he would have foregone the notoriety in order t o lived 30 more years.
That's hilarious coming from a Boston fan. It's almost as if one of the biggest cheaters in the history of the sport (right up there with A-Rod) didn't hit cleanup for you during your 2004 and 2007 championships. The beloved David Ortiz isn't exactly a model of honor, either - enjoy your championship, but dismissing the accomplishments of the 90's Yankees is ignorant.
Good lord this is ridiculous and completely disingenuous. You do realize that cheating was rampant throughout baseball in the 90's and still is. The Red Sox best player for their first two championships was a cheater and their MVP of this World Series is a cheater.Dismissing it is not ignorant. It just so happens that in the mid to late 90s when PED use was rampant in certain club houses that the yankees win 4 out of 5 championships. it is not about singling out one person it is about looking at an organization. the yankees had a chemical competitive advantage unseen before that time and unlikely to be seen again.
It is impossible to dismiss what the Yankees did on the field in the mid-late 90'sGood lord this is ridiculous and completely disingenuous. You do realize that cheating was rampant throughout baseball in the 90's and still is. The Red Sox best player for their first two championships was a cheater and their MVP of this World Series is a cheater.
Good lord this is ridiculous and completely disingenuous. You do realize that cheating was rampant throughout baseball in the 90's and still is. The Red Sox best player for their first two championships was a cheater and their MVP of this World Series is a cheater.
There is no arguing who the best team was this year. I kept waiting for this band of beards to fall apart and run into a stretch I thought was more like their potential. Instead they started pitching and hitting a little better at years end and despite not hitting too well in the playoffs, pitched their butts off and proved to be the best from start to finish. No argument here........
Now the GG's and the potential HOF enshrinement of Papster that's yet another story.......but that is one for later. The Huskies are NOW....ten toes in, no Sox/Yanks BS (unless I see something I need to respond to LOL)
Okay so you're not saying the Yankees World Series teams of the 90's had an advantage over the other teams they were playing during that timeperiod? I just want to get this straight, you don't think the Yankees had a chemical competitive advantage over the other teams in the league at that time?you didn't read my post. I blatantly said that it is not about an individual player, but about an organization during a certain time period in comparison to other entire organizations during that same time period. look at the 15 years before and after that time period in comparison to the mid to late 90s. A lot of organizations across baseball and lot of different world series winners from year to year. then look at the mid to late 90s. The original poster I responded to disregarded the redsox win this year saying that the late 90s yankees teams were so dominant that they would have crushed this years redsox team. just explaining to him why they appeared so dominant.
Okay so you're not saying the Yankees World Series teams of the 90's had an advantage over the other teams they were playing during that timeperiod? I just want to get this straight, you don't think the Yankees had a chemical competitive advantage over the other teams in the league at that time?
i have been extremely clear about what I am saying. Only a diehard Yankees fan would disagree with me. It is as much of a factor as the fact that the celtics won a ton of championships when there were like 8 teams in the NBA. clearly it is a factor. No way a team wins like the celtics with 30 teams in the league.

How dare you make an argument against a Yankee fan's "logic?"
Congratulations to the 2013 Red Sox and Good Luck to the 2013-2014 UConn Huskies.