Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

BOSS TELLS SOX: CORK RED WHINE (Sour Grapes Response)
NY Post ^ | 02/19/04 | GEORGE KING and MICHAEL MORRISSEY

Posted on 02/19/2004 11:16:20 AM PST by playball0

Edited on 05/26/2004 5:19:37 PM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]

February 19, 2004 -- TAMPA - Before the first pitcher popped a catcher's leather, the Red Sox and Yankees have their hands exactly where they belong: around each other's throats. With Aaron Boone's ALCS-winning extra-inning home run in October still fresh in the Red Sox Nation's memory, Boston owner John Henry yesterday started a verbal brawl and George Steinbrenner buried his former partner with a pair of vicious rebuttals in which he called Henry a "failure" and accused him of having a belly full of "sour grapes."


(Excerpt) Read more at nypost.com ...


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Culture/Society; Front Page News; News/Current Events; US: Massachusetts; US: New York
KEYWORDS: arod; benafflekdisciples; bostonsux; henry; redsox; steinbrenner; yankees
"We understand that John Henry must be embarrassed, frustrated and disappointed by his failure in this transaction," The Boss said in the statement. "Unlike the Yankees, he chose not to go the extra distance for his fans in Boston. It is understandable, but wrong that he would try to deflect the accountability for his mistakes on to others and to a system for which he voted in favor. It is time to get on with life and forget the sour grapes."

This must have been a hellova lot of fun to draft.

1 posted on 02/19/2004 11:16:20 AM PST by playball0
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: playball0
This year, we're gonna kill dem bums!
2 posted on 02/19/2004 11:19:21 AM PST by Ol' Sox
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: playball0
It's kind of funny for John Henry to whine about wanting a salary cap when his team is paying $20.5 million to Manny, and $17.5 million to Pedro.
3 posted on 02/19/2004 11:38:23 AM PST by NYCVirago
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: playball0
Ah, good old George Steinbrenner, convicted felon and a all-around class act.
4 posted on 02/19/2004 11:42:23 AM PST by jpl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jpl
Yes, but of what was George convicted? Illegal campaign contributions to a Republican!
5 posted on 02/19/2004 12:18:41 PM PST by BushMeister
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: playball0
I can't believe the Red Sox are unable to compete financially with the Yankees. NYC has two teams and Boston has one. I'd say they are poorly run if they can't afford more than 1 or 2 superstars on their team.
6 posted on 02/19/2004 12:22:53 PM PST by 1Old Pro
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NYCVirago
It's equally outrageous for blowhard Steinbrenner to try to buy championships by spending three times as much as the average team. This bully couldn't care less about having championships decided by a team's ability draft, trade and develop players.
7 posted on 02/19/2004 12:23:11 PM PST by Ol' Sparky
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Ol' Sparky
Steinbrenner is only playing by the rules ~ stop whining!

PS I dislike both cities and both teams. :)
8 posted on 02/19/2004 12:30:36 PM PST by blackie (Be Well~Be Armed~Be Safe~Molon Labe!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Ol' Sparky
"This bully couldn't care less about having championships decided by a team's ability draft, trade and develop players."

Spoken like somebody tired of watching their team make bad decisions and screw things up. If Steinbrenner ran the Bosox, he'd be the toast of Boston.

It's the system, and all of the owners have a chance to vote on it. If the Yanks are breaking the rules, they'll be punished.

And I'm a Phillies fan.

9 posted on 02/19/2004 12:34:00 PM PST by Bambino
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Ol' Sparky
It's equally outrageous for blowhard Steinbrenner to try to buy championships by spending three times as much as the average team. This bully couldn't care less about having championships decided by a team's ability draft, trade and develop players.

John Henry isn't Billy Beane, since there are exactly three homegrown players on the Red Sox, and a $120+ million payroll. Plus, the Red Sx have the highest ticket prices in baseball. George Steinbrenner is not only playing by the rules, but he also ends up funding other teams via luxury tax and revenue sharing to the tune of $60+ million a year, money which most small-market owners simply put in their pockets instead of investing in good players.

10 posted on 02/19/2004 12:47:30 PM PST by NYCVirago
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: 1Old Pro
I can't believe the Red Sox are unable to compete financially with the Yankees. NYC has two teams and Boston has one. I'd say they are poorly run if they can't afford more than 1 or 2 superstars on their team.

I was reading the comments on a Red Sox fan site about this deal. Believe it or not, close to half of the comments were critical of John Henry, saying that his comments were sour grapes, and made the team look bad. But some fans were suggesting that MLB allow another team to move into the New York area, to take away the Yankees' fan base. As if the Mets have done anything in the past four years to make inroads into the Yankees' fan base!

11 posted on 02/19/2004 12:50:36 PM PST by NYCVirago
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: NYCVirago
Red Sox fans are equally enthusiastic as NY fans. The cities are big ansd tv rights should be similar. If the Red Sox can't compete they should fire their GM.
12 posted on 02/19/2004 12:54:56 PM PST by 1Old Pro
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: playball0
There are owners and teams that can complain about Steinbrenner's spending...Henry and the Sox are not one of them.
13 posted on 02/19/2004 12:58:39 PM PST by PBRSTREETGANG
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NYCVirago
Henry's got more money than Steinbrenner. He could match George $ for $ if he wanted. The Sox tried to get A-Rod themselves earlier in the season, and lost out when they correctly observed that there were no other realistic participants in the market and tried to nickel and dime the Rangers. When news of this deal emerged this weekend, Hery called the Rangers and tried to outbid Steinbrenner. Only after he was rebuffed did he begin complaining about the Yanks and their salary. Unfortunately, when the subtraction of Boone, Henson, Soriano, and the $67mm from the Rangers is factored in, the roster move ends up being revenue-neutral. Since Soriano is about to hit arbitration, the Yankees may in fact save money with this deal.

The difference between Yankees fans and Red Sox fans is that we are neither naive nor dishonest about the business of baseball. We recognize Steinbrenner for who he is, and we acknowledge it. How often do Red Sox fans need to be reminded that John Henry is at least as a big a scum bag as Steinbrenner if not worse?

14 posted on 02/19/2004 12:59:56 PM PST by presidio9 (FREE MARTHA)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: presidio9
What John Henry should have said is what Curt Schilling did say -- that they've improved the team and are looking forward to the season. Even the Boston sports columnists concede that Steinbrenner won this war of words between the owners.
15 posted on 02/19/2004 3:37:31 PM PST by NYCVirago
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: NYCVirago
George Steinbrenner is not only playing by the rules, but he also ends up funding other teams via luxury tax and revenue sharing to the tune of $60+ million a year, money which most small-market owners simply put in their pockets instead of investing in good players.

*This* is what I try to explain to my dad when he (longtime, diehard Brooklyn Dodgers fan) gripes about Steinbrenner buying up all the best players from teams that can't afford to keep them. He says they've been doing that for decades, with no end in sight.

16 posted on 02/19/2004 4:02:18 PM PST by NYC GOP Chick
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: NYCVirago
Even the Boston sports columnists concede that Steinbrenner won this war of words between the owners.

You know, some of THE worst sportswriters -- in terms of being homers -- are the vaunted NY writers (columnists and reporters).

17 posted on 02/19/2004 4:03:56 PM PST by NYC GOP Chick
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: NYC GOP Chick
You know, some of THE worst sportswriters -- in terms of being homers -- are the vaunted NY writers (columnists and reporters).

I think it depends on the writer, and the paper. The New York Times openly wanted Boston to make it to the World Series, because they're part-owners of the team. Of course, they didn't mention the ownership tidbit in their editorial wanting this; they just claimed it would be good for baseball. That, to me, was much more offensive than New York tabloid writers who have a pro-New York bias.

Besides, a certain big name NYC tabloid columnist hates Steinbrenner, and will take any opportunity to lambast him. And pretty much all the New York sportswriters thought not re-signing Pettitte was a bad move, so it's not like they deem every Yankee move as good. Every city, not just New York, has writers who are "homers". I really don't have a problem with that -- after all, they are writing to appeal to fans of that team who read that paper. I much prefer "homer" announcers, too, even if they're for the other team, as opposed to Tim McCarver et al, who claim to have no bias.

18 posted on 02/19/2004 4:18:36 PM PST by NYCVirago
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: NYC GOP Chick
You know, some of THE worst sportswriters -- in terms of being homers -- are the vaunted NY writers (columnists and reporters).

I think it depends on the writer, and the paper. The New York Times openly wanted Boston to make it to the World Series, because they're part-owners of the team. Of course, they didn't mention the ownership tidbit in their editorial wanting this; they just claimed it would be good for baseball. That, to me, was much more offensive than New York tabloid writers who have a pro-New York bias.

Besides, a certain big name NYC tabloid columnist hates Steinbrenner, and will take any opportunity to lambast him. And pretty much all the New York sportswriters thought not re-signing Pettitte was a bad move, so it's not like they deem every Yankee move as good. Every city, not just New York, has writers who are "homers". I really don't have a problem with that -- after all, they are writing to appeal to fans of that team who read that paper. I much prefer "homer" announcers, too, even if they're for the other team, as opposed to Tim McCarver et al, who claim to have no bias.

19 posted on 02/19/2004 4:18:38 PM PST by NYCVirago
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: NYCVirago
I think it depends on the writer, and the paper. The New York Times openly wanted Boston to make it to the World Series, because they're part-owners of the team. Of course, they didn't mention the ownership tidbit in their editorial wanting this; they just claimed it would be good for baseball. That, to me, was much more offensive than New York tabloid writers who have a pro-New York bias.

The one good thing I can say about the Times is that the gentleman who was sports editor a few years ago was better than that. (Full disclosure: I always liked him because he used to take the time to send me personal letters, encouraging me to keep writing, how to get more experience and that he'd *then* be interested in talking to me about working there.)

Besides, a certain big name NYC tabloid columnist hates Steinbrenner, and will take any opportunity to lambast him.

Lil'Lupica? :D

And pretty much all the New York sportswriters thought not re-signing Pettitte was a bad move, so it's not like they deem every Yankee move as good.

Yeah, but many seem to overtly root for the home teams. While that's not a real problem w.r.t. columnists, it's bad when it shows up in what's supposed to be straight reporting.

Every city, not just New York, has writers who are "homers".

Yes, but we're the city whose sportswriters pride themselves on being *so* sophisticated and above it all. Then again, I could tell some stories that a former Miami Herald sportswriter told me about how they behaved during Spring Training... ;)

I really don't have a problem with that -- after all, they are writing to appeal to fans of that team who read that paper. I much prefer "homer" announcers, too, even if they're for the other team, as opposed to Tim McCarver et al, who claim to have no bias.

I prefer knowledgeable reporters and (play-by-play) announcers. If they want homers for columnists and color commentary, fine. But give me the news without a bias.

20 posted on 02/19/2004 4:35:02 PM PST by NYC GOP Chick
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson