Jump to content

MC Horoscope

Members
  • Posts

    775
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    6

Posts posted by MC Horoscope

  1. For the ratings to be high, TV needs national interest, not just regional. Some teams have national appeal and others do not. The interest in the 2004 games between Boston and the Yankees was national, not just regional. And this year there is a lot of national interest in the Cubs because of their history. Not just the midwest. But it's strange that the White Sox in 2005 did not generate much national interest. I don't know why. They have a compelling story, and a curse of their own! Houston Astros don't generate much national interest, but it's not because they're from Texas. There has long been national interest in the Dallas Cowboys. It's just strange.

    The Post coverage of the Cubs is amazing in that there were multiple stories but I could hardly find any news about LA beating NY last night! Forget about coverage of the American League teams!

  2. 2005 was remarkable in that TV saw no way to market the World Series. Viewership was way down from 2004.  Chicago White Sox v Houston Astros (their ONLY WS appearance in franchise history!)

    2004 saw the Red Sox break "the curse" and beat the Yankees and win it all. TV should have been able to market the 2005 World Series much better since this year, maybe this year, the White Sox would break the curse of the Black Sox scandal. And that is just what they did, sweeping the Houston Astros in 4 games! Sure the Go Go Sox had been to the World Series in 1959, but the Dodgers took that Series. 2005 was historic but you wouldn't know it from the amount of coverage it got.

    From 2004 to the present NY and Boston have absolutely dominated TV. You almost can't get away from seeing them on TV. (I go out of my way to AVOID seeing any Yankee or Red Sox games! And I have done so since 2004!) No such thing happened for the White Sox. This year I am afraid that if the Cubs win TV will show almost nothing else but games from NY, Boston, LA, and Chicago! I mean the national games on ESPN, Fox, and NBC, NOT MASN). This might mean short term success for TV ratings but I think in the long run it would be very damaging to the sport. I think it would kill interest in baseball in small market cities like KC, Minneapolis, Milwaukee, Dallas, Pittsburgh, Cincinnati, etc.

    • Like 1
  3. From the Brennan family's statement about the passing of Paul Prudhomme.  Cajun v Creole cooking:

    "Paul was a joy to work with and he's been an inspiration to all of us in the food world. Cajun and Creole cuisines crashed in the kitchen of Commander's Palace in the 1970s with Paul Prudhomme and Ella Brennan and the Brennan family. Prior to that, Cajun food had not been a part of New Orleans cooking. The result was an explosion of spectacular flavors and wonderful cooking that influenced the city, state, country and the world. There's been no better ambassador for New Orleans and Louisiana than Paul Prudhomme and he will be greatly missed," the family said.

    "Superstar Chef Paul Prudhomme Dies at 75" by Dominic Massa on theadvertiser.com

    Except in the homes of prairie Cajuns and bayou Cajuns who migrated to New Orleans, many of whom went for  jobs in shipbuilding (Higgins boats in WW II).

    • Like 1
  4. WashPost game-time discussion thread among us die hard fans:

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/nationals-journal/wp/2015/10/03/nationals-mets-discussion-thread-game-161/

    Beat writer's take:

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/matt-williams-says-uncertainty-is-not-going-to-be-a-distraction-anymore/2015/10/03/194b503c-6a09-11e5-9223-70cb36460919_story.html

    Sports writers. You've been rubbing it in gleefully and saying these games since we lost the pennant are meaningless. Don't agree. If YOU can't find meaning, do what we fans do: Create Meaning!

  5. On this topic I usually come down on the side of "the mentally ill." There's usually a cry to restrict gun ownership by "the mentally ill," as though that's a homogeneous group.

    Well, just who ARE they, the mentally ill? If everyone has a right to own a gun because our duly elected president might any day now invade Texas and the entire Southwest proper and establish tyranny, why can't a person with obsessive-compulsive disorder, dysthymia, or fear of spiders own a gun too!

    No, it's not "mental illness"  per se that should be the limiter, in my opinion. It's a history of acting out violently, whether you've been treated for mental illness or not. Like the Navy Yard guy. Or which one was it who had a history of shooting out neighbors' tires? There are so many of these mass shooting incidents that I can't even keep track anymore.

  6. On 9/27/2015 at 10:00 PM, DonRocks said:

    I remember seeing "Do The Right Thing" (1989) when it came out in the theaters and really liking it; this, after *detesting* Spike Lee's first major film,   

    This film is cutting-edge, even today, and it's hard to believe it's over a quarter-century old - it has easily stood the test of time, and is not dated in the slightest. It converted me from being a Spike Lee detractor to being a Spike Lee fan, and if you haven't seen it, I encourage you to do so.

    Note that this is also the debut film of Martin Lawrence and Rosie Perez.

    "Do The Right Thing" was completely shut out in the 1990 Academy Awards. This is a better movie than "Dances With Wolves" (which was one of the first Best Picture Winners that made me realize the Academy Awards are a travesty - how could this not have been nominated for *anything*?

    Why are critics afraid to go against the status quo and use their own minds? What good are they if they don't?

    I thought Spike Lee did a great job with When the Levees Broke: A Requiem in 4 Acts.

  7. When I moved here in 1985 there was no hometown MLB team. I never considered Baltimore my home town team, though I rooted for them, but not as much as my first love, Houston, which was my home team in SW Louisiana. I was a Houston Colt .45/Astros fan from 1962-2005, the year DC got the Nationals. I switched allegiance in 2005 completely. When Houston came to town, I was rooting for DC!

    The Houston baseball franchise did not reach a single World Series until, you guessed it, 2005! And I had totally switched allegiances by then. Wished them well, but it was not my team anymore.

    Hope I won't be waiting from 2005- 2048 before DC goes to the World Series! I will be starting to get old by then!

    It's going to continue to be bad with "transplants" who live here for years and years, even decades, yet come to our ballpark and root and boo against our home team. Come to the games and cheer your "used to be" city if you must, but don't boo our home team, YOUR home team since you've lived here so long, is all I say.

    (I don't know what the cut-off point for this is. I rooted for Houston over Baltimore for 20 years here, 43 years in all, then I totally switched. I guess it will differ for everyone).

    • Like 1
  8. "How Mets Stole NL East from Nationals" by Adam Rubin and Eddie Matz on espn.go.com

    It's more like "How the Nationals Gave Away the NL East." At least in the print edition the headline about the Tuesday night loss was "Giveaway Night."

    See Barry Svrluga's WaPo piece on Sept. 8:

    "In One Inning, Nationals' Bullpen Delivers a Tough Truth and Tougher Consequences"

    If not for the bullpen I believe we would have swept the Cardinals last week and the Mets this week. We would probably be only one or two games behind in the standings, imo.

  9. I find it totally appropriate to discuss the constitution this way on a food board given that it was a beverage tax that "broke the camel's back" and initiated the American Revolution!

    Man does not live by bread alone, there must also be beverage. --Woody Allen

    ---

    [The *camel's* back! Maybe we should have a thread about cigarettes in modern culture as well! :)

    Seriously, MC, thanks for bringing some always-welcome, often-needed humor into such a serious thread. Humor, especially good humor, is *always* welcome here - it's a soft spot of mine, and I have a bias towards it, which is one reason I cherish Al Dente's posts so much.

    It should also make us *all* step back, take a deep breath, and realize that we're friends here, and there are a *lot* of smart people on this website on both sides of any given issue. Thanks for posting this. Cheers, DR]

  10. I would like to see a study of how the Supreme Court has a long history of disregarding plain passages that seem to spell out the intent of certain laws or their reason for being.

    "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

    The part about the militia gets overtaken by the natural right to defend oneself, period.

    Works this way with the clause about copyright:

    "To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries."

    The part about the progress of science and technology gets overtaken by some kind of presumed right to a practically perpetual monopoly for things well beyond science and technology.

    I wonder how many areas this pertains to?

    SCOTUS performs amazing feats of "stunt logic" from their own dubious premises that ignore the language there in the very Constitution, imo.

×
×
  • Create New...