Monday, September 29, 2008

DIFFERENT, YET THE SAME

Any Met fan should really be hanging their heads. Not only did their team blow it,
but they have to sit and listen to the gleeful Mike Francesa piss all over their team. Hey Mike, we didn't get our pound of flesh when the Yankees were eliminated. They didn't collapse. They just stunk.

Anyway, here is a compare/contrast on today's show with both takes from Abbott and Costello:

ON THE METS DOWN THE STRETCH
Francesa - "Those guys gagged again. They don't know how to win!"
Russo - "The Mets lack a quotient of courage."

ON JERRY MANUEL
Francesa - He likes Jerry and thinks he should come back. "I will smile at him if he comes back."
Russo - He likes Jerry and thinks he should come back.

ON THE SHEA POST-GAME CEREMONY:
Francesa - "Part of the Mets' charm is that they could screw up a one-car funeral.
The post-game Shea ceremony was one of the most surrealistic celebrations of mankind."
Russo - They did a better job than the Yankees. It wasn't pretentious. He was glad that Mr. Met was involved.

ON THE CORE
Francesa - There are 3 untouchables(Pelfrey, Santana and Beltran). The rest of the team can go.
Russo - Mets in a tricky spot. How can you break up the core? "They have to keep Delgado. Wright's too good. Reyes is too good. You have to bring back Beltran."

ON JOHAN SANTANA
Francesa - Santana did his job. The rest of the team? Not so much.
Russo - Santana pitched wonderfully. But this isn't about him.

23 comments:

Anonymous said...

Pelfrey -- spelling counts

Anonymous said...

thanks for the correction

gman26 said...

Are you Mike Pelfrey?

wtsherman said...

Mike just said, "the idea that those four guys [Jose, Carlos, Carlos and David], all batted 600 times and didn't miss a game...." and then he didn't finish it. He didn't say the idea that X is Y. Yes, he implied that "the idea that the core position players could play everyday of the season and they could still not make the playoffs is remarkable." But all he ACTUALLY did was dote on the concept that they played so much, presumably too satisfied at his observation to actually explain it or its relevance.

Then, while we waited for him to contextualize "this idea" that's apparently floating around, he abruptly said "We're back." And we were left holding the bag.

You just can't get anything by this guy. You attempt to impose your will on him, but he's just to wily to let you.

KBilly said...

Damn, If I'da known it was gonna be this kind of party, I'd have put my dick in the potato salad.
-Jerry Manuel

loki said...

Kbilly, just put your dick in my mouth.

wtsherman said...

As bad/boring/untolerable as the Diet Coke Diva may often be at his day job, I often find myself wondering about other situations where he'd been even more unbearable.

For example, can you imagine going on a road trip with Fatcesa in charge of the wheel? ("Daddy, can we put something else to drink in the cooler besides Diet Coke?" or "Daddy can we eat somewhere else besides McDonald's next stop?" or "Daddy, why do you always take so long in the bathroom?")

Or, consider Mike directing some big time motion picture. You're acting in it and make a certain choice in a scene, say pause over a certain line, and Boom! Mike immediately "weighs in", fulminating about what this choice somehow signifies. "The idea that this scene needs a pause..." And you're like dude, I'm just acting...I'm sorry my body and gestures are not a seamless expression of your ego...Leave me alone, guy.

Let's look at the bright side, there are probably a million scenarios that would make you loathe Fatcesa more than what which we currently have to contend with.

KBilly said...

Loki, did the elementary schools let out already? Shouldn't you be watching the boys soccor practice?

wtsherman said...

For example, Mike as pontificating stock broker.

loki said...

No practice on Mondays...

Shouldn't you be focused on the 700+ point drop on Wall Street instead of blogging about a radio show?

Anonymous said...

wtsherman,

I also took notice of Mikes point/no point in regards to their "core" players and the idea that they played unhurt this past year. Was he saying bad job--- they should have done better? Or was he saying that they were'nt well rested at the end? He could have made a point either way but choose to leave us hanging.

As a obvious Met fan and a person who is all over the place during the day and does'nt get to watch/listen everyday all the time I throw out a serious question?

Has Mike ever taken a 2 week onslaught of his beloved Yankees the way he has embraced doing so to the Mets? Of course the Mets are the obvious story today-- but I'm curious to hear if Mike did the same when the Yanks were still in the chase this year or when they were eliminated from the playoffs in "06/07". I know he's been critical--- but was it ever such a prolonged discussion.

I look forward to your replies!

JD

KBilly said...

Loki, you couldn't spell DJIA even if I spotted you the D and the A.

wtsherman said...

Mike just told us that Howard is the M-V-P, because he hit .225 for eighty percent of the year and had noisy September.

Nary 100 seconds elapsed before Mike chided a caller for cherry-picking Manuel's performance and not looking at the totality of the season in order to make a fair assessment.

loki said...

Dowe Jonees Industriall Averrage.

Damn your right, I can't spell it.

wtsherman said...

Okay, this is probably my last MVP point, and hey, its offered in the service of Fatcesa-bashing, so its not totally unwarranted....

DCD (Diet Coke Diva, i love it) just brought up the fact that HR totals hit a 15 year low because of drug testing. Fair enough. He instructed that NL slugging rates were much higher than AL ones, because of the small "bandbox" stadiums now common in the National League. He cited Philadelphia as having such a stadium. Fair enough.

But be consistent, big guy. He correctly did not cite Busch Stadium as an overly hitter-friendly park. So, if slugging percentage is generally linked to ballparks, how can Howard be more valuable if he slugs 109 points lower than Pujols in a much more conducive environment, as you acknowledge?

wtsherman said...

I'm not trying to open up another MVP debate...please consider the above comment as rhetorical, aimed only at Mike and as such, captious for captiousness' sake.

Anonymous said...

Has Mike discussed Football today?

College games? Pro games?

I've been all over the channels today so I'm curious how much time he may have spent on it.

What has the "DOG" been talking about today?

Updates would be appreciated!

JD

wtsherman said...

JD,

It's been pretty much all Mets and a little NL since I tuned in around 3 o'clock. At one point, he teased NFL, declaring an idle but "ever-improving" NY Football Giants team as the class of the league. Its 6:22 and he has yet to return to the topic

As for your other query, I have never heard DCD offer so sustained an attack on the Yankees. His criticisms of the Yankees seem always sugar-coated in history and misty memories and are bloated with excuses.

Anonymous said...

Thanks for the reply wtsherman!

I was watching/listening to Mike throughout the day while keeping an eye on my now basically gone life savings.

Naturally the Mets deserved the headlines today(not in a good way), but how does Mike not go to his "Strong Points" and discuss football?

Some quality college games were played Saturday followed by some Great Pro games on Sunday including a nice game by the Jets and Favre!!!

I also thought that I've been a listener long enough to know that Mike has'nt attacked his Yankees with the "Vigor" that he has displayed over the past two weeks regarding the Mets.

All in All--- an awful/unprofessional/ and extremely biased job by Mike.

I expected nothing less from him!

JD

KBilly said...

Dog tied Mike in the poll.

wtsherman said...

You know how most people eschew the idiosyncrasies of the spoken word in formal writing? Well, Chris Russo is bound by no such convention. Ever the iconoclast, Mad Dog "unleashes" the full force of his personality on the pages of New York Magazine, delivering his thoughts on the ten best New York athletes of the past four decades:

http://nymag.com/anniversary/40th/50662/index1.html

Here's Dog on Derek Jeter: "Never made a mistake in a big spot."

On Mike Piazza: "Brought the Mets back to credibility. They were pretty good in ’97, but didn’t have a lot of juice."

This is all well and good, but we are left to wonder: how will the legions of truck drivers in Lincoln, Nebraska react to this arrant affront to a catholic view of the national sports scene.

Johnny said...

I don't understand criticizing the Shea Goodbye Ceremony. You had to do it after the game. First of all, this was a pressure game. You don't want Met players sitting around waiting for the game to start while Bud Harrelson---who couldn't hit a lick (.236) stomping on home plate. You want the Met players getting tighter than they already were waitng to take the field.

Then, there was the rain delay. You're not going to have Willie Mays---who they probably had to pay five figures just to get him there---walking over the tar, are you?

The Mets ceremony was nice, much nicer than the bloated Yankee ceremony, but it had to be done at the end. Personally, I think these stadium farewells are awful. Once you get into the New Yankee Stadium, and Citi Field, you won't ever think about She and Yankee Stadium II again.

cookie said...

The Mets did what that Eagles receiver did against Dallas -- don't spike the ball until you reach the end zone.