The Closer

We may not be that interested in the game tomorrow night, but we're definitely tuning into the pre-game show.

29 comments… add one

  • Wow. Not sure I’m crazy about a political campaign advertisement pre-empting the World Series, and pushing back it’s already-too-late start time.

    YF October 28, 2008, 2:49 pm
  • Not sure I’m crazy about a political campaign advertisement pre-empting the World Series
    The advertisement was purchased already, the Series game postponed two days. This isn’t the case of a political ad pre-empting the Series but rather the opposite: this is the case of a World Series game twice-delayed running into the real world.

    SF October 28, 2008, 3:17 pm
  • But without the postponement, this ad would have run on (and slightly delayed) Game 6.

    Ron Newman October 28, 2008, 3:29 pm
  • Yes and no. The ad was already purchased, but that doesn’t mean it can’t be rescheduled or must be run, or that the game can’t be started “on time” with Fox airing either the game or the ad on one of its affiliated networks. It’s not a great situation. If it was an ad for Tampax (or McCain) I think you might be less than thrilled. Just because we both happen to like the product being sold doesn’t mean I have to be happy about what’s going on. These are the public airwaves, and it’d be nice for the national pastime to be played at an appropriate time, unhindered. Yeah, I know….Unicorns and fairies. What can I say. I’m a dreamer.

    YF October 28, 2008, 3:31 pm
  • Awesome.
    I consider this to be the huge rotten cherry on top of an already bad sundae.

    Brad October 28, 2008, 3:33 pm
  • I agree entirely, YF.
    Save the political rhetoric (or at least 95% of it) for some other, less cared about event. It’s kind of like smearing poop on an expensive painting. No matter what you believe, it shouldn’t be a part of baseball, and especially the World Series.

    Brad October 28, 2008, 3:37 pm
  • “The advertisement was purchased already, the Series game postponed two days. This isn’t the case of a political ad pre-empting the Series but rather the opposite: this is the case of a World Series game twice-delayed running into the real world.”
    Are you saying this was due to the rain? Obama had received permission for this well before the WS even began. I hate to bring my political views to a Baseball site, but this is yet another reason…I am a Democrat that has never voted Republican until this year. After this man chastised McCain for spending too much on his campaign he buys a THIRTY minute ad on how many channels? I am done, sorry. Back to baseball.

    John - YF October 28, 2008, 4:48 pm
  • “After this man chastised McCain for spending too much on his campaign”
    You mean it’s the hypocricy and not the endless spew of crap that flows from his mouth?
    Just kidding, John, and now, I too am done. It was just too good to pass up.

    Brad October 28, 2008, 4:59 pm
  • Tomorrow’s scenario wasn’t due to the rain. The ad would have postponed an if-necessary Game 6, or it would have pre-empted Fox programming. The rain-out rescheduling is incidental. And really, I don’t see it being related to Baseball at all; the World Series and the last week before elections just happen to coincide. I’m not terribly bothered by this, and I’d still think that if it was a McCain ad.
    Besides, Fox, CBS and NBC weren’t beholden to accept the ad buy in the first place. It was Fox (of all companies) who thought the game should play second-fiddle to a political message.

    FenSheaParkway October 28, 2008, 5:06 pm
  • The postseason schedule for next year has the World Series ending after Election Day if it runs the full 7 games. This is madness.

    Ron Newman October 28, 2008, 5:45 pm
  • John. I understand that frustration but I think it’s misplaced. Neither of these candidates is free from contradiction, and on any number of issues. Obama, certainly, has been transformed by some of his supporters into a messianic figure. I think that’s unfortunate, but a sign of how truly terrible the last 8 years have been, and how potentially damaging 4 more years of republican leadership could be. Put the rhetoric aside, and you find in Obama a stone-cold political killer. He won his first election by having his opponents struck from the ballot on registration technicalities. But being a gimlet eyed calculator is actually imperative for a politician, if they are to accomplish anything. And let me bring this back to baseball. Sox ownership dubbed the Yanks the Evil Empire, and oft lamented the high-spending ways of the Bronx team. Fine. That didn’t stop them dropping $100 million on an import, or cutting ties to a longtime favorite (Nomar) when it was expedient and necessary for the greater cause. Theo Epstein is one shrew mf’er and Sox fans should be thankful for that fact everyday.
    But let’s end political talk there and begin again with baseball.

    YF October 28, 2008, 5:54 pm
  • World Series = every year.
    Election = every four years.
    Election with black major-party candidate = Once in a lifetime.
    I’m not bothered either.

    Paul SF October 28, 2008, 5:59 pm
  • Once in a lifetime? I hope progress doesn’t call it a career when I’m only 30.

    FenSheaParkway October 28, 2008, 7:13 pm
  • After this man chastised McCain for spending too much on his campaign
    When? Where? Care to substantiate?

    SF October 28, 2008, 7:34 pm
  • I have an idea – why doesn’t the ever-so-ethical FOX network just *give back* the generous amount of ad revenue they receieved to play the ad in the first place, and let game go on as scheduled.
    What? You say they won’t?? Sheesh… No respect for baseball at FOX, I tell you.

    ToddSF October 28, 2008, 8:09 pm
  • I hope progress doesn’t call it a career when I’m only 30
    Haha, I thought something similar after I posted it. Once in a lifetime to date, I suppose, is more accurate. I, too, hope it does not turn out to be a true once-in-a-lifetime event from here on.

    Paul SF October 28, 2008, 10:09 pm
  • Election with black major-party candidate = Once in a lifetime.
    Let’s hope not. Hey, the Red Sox broke the drought.

    I'mBillMcNeal October 28, 2008, 10:14 pm
  • well, i’m late to the party as usual…my ramblings for what they’re worth:
    i’m with those of you who’d rather leave politics out of our discussions…we have enough heated debates without serving up that red herring…
    however, having said that, i can’t help myself from adding that in my mind, neither candidate is ‘evil’ or ‘stupid’, as each other’s side would have us believe…as it has always been, there are just [surprise, surprise] inherently basic philosophical differences between the 2 major parties about how to run the country the “right” way…and as usual, each candidate has a body of experience, accomplishments, statements, and associations, that beg scrutiny and spice up the rhetoric…
    …at the end of the day, the pres. gets way too much credit/blame for what goes on if you ask me [i know you didn’t ask me]…of course neither of them is evil, depending on your definition i guess…you want evil, check out this guy:
    http://www.sports-agent-directory.com/sports-agents/scottboras.asp

    dc October 29, 2008, 8:24 am
  • And that, DC, is the perfect way to end this discussion.

    YF October 29, 2008, 10:03 am
  • “Election with black major-party candidate = Once in a lifetime.
    I’m not bothered either.”
    Don’t make this a racial issue. I am not bothered by this infomercial because Obama is African American, so please don’t make it sound that way.

    John - YF October 29, 2008, 1:31 pm
  • Couldn’t agree with DC more. I’m an adamant fan of one of the candidates (not gonna say who) — hope he wins — will bring my son into the voting booth with me — etc. But I really start RANTING when someone brings up the name Scott Boras….. Cripes, DC, now you’ve got me muttering to myself at my desk. Dammit.

    rootbeerfloat October 29, 2008, 3:32 pm
  • Funny, I have a tremendous amount of respect for Scott Boras, unlike a lot of other fans. I don’t know if I love him as a person. But does that even matter? Is he appointing Supreme Court justices? Is he knowingly creating an atmosphere of race-baiting? Does he impact my life in any substantive way other than altering the entertainment quotient of the team for which I root, potentially? I understand the standard emotional response to Boras, but I also think it is hyperbolic in its vitriol. Those who make him into a symbol of “all that is wrong” miss the fact that at the end of everything what he is trying to do is to help (admittedly stratospherically high) wage-earners maximize their earnings.

    SF October 29, 2008, 4:26 pm
  • Respect and admiration are separate things, no. I’d say Boras sometimes operates with his own best interests at heart, rather than those of his clients. And certainly without interest for the fan, or the greater good of the game, despite his enormous power. He’s a significant player in a corrupt and broken system. He’s figured out how to capitalize on it with ruthless efficiency. The system no longer exploits the player; it exploits the fan and the taxpayer. I don’t really think that’s an improvement, and to the extent that he’s an active participant in making that system ever more exploitative, I don’t think he’s a particularly appealing figure.

    YF October 29, 2008, 7:03 pm
  • “…hyperbolic in its vitriol…”
    geez, extreme much sf?…now your comments are hyperbolic…look, my reference to boras was an obvious attempt at humor, and to diffuse a potentially pointless political debate, which i humbly submit does not belong in this forum…i guess i understand your “respect” for his ability to leverage a broken system for his own substantial personal gain, but i don’t happen to find him an admirable or likeable character frankly…i suppose if i were a player i’d want him negotiating my deal, but i’m not buying into the notion that he has anyone’s interests in mind other than his own…yf’s right on in his assessment of the impact of greedy guys like scott [he’s not alone, toss in the players and owners]…but if you’re ok paying 100 bucks for a ticket [assuming you can get one], 10 bucks for a beer, and 8 bucks for a hot dog, have at it…

    dc October 29, 2008, 10:08 pm
  • or the greater good of the game
    I don’t even know what this means, in terms of Boras. Care to offer what Boras himself might offer as a remedy for the game’s ills? As if it is even his reponsibility.
    And I don’t think I ever referred to him as an appealing figure, either, I simply offered a perspective of respect for his effectiveness and abilities, which are amazing.
    dc: my quote was meant as a generalization – Boras is REVILED, it is fair to say.

    SF October 29, 2008, 10:28 pm
  • It’s not a great situation. If it was an ad for Tampax (or McCain) I think you might be less than thrilled.
    Best comment of the thread.

    Atheose October 29, 2008, 10:36 pm
  • “Care to offer what Boras himself might offer as a remedy for the game’s ills? As if it is even his reponsibility.”
    That’s a bit cynical, isn’t it? Isn’t it his responsibility, as one of the leading figures in the sport, to take an active interest in making it better? I’m not sure what the remedy is and I’m guessing DC has no idea either. But that doesn’t absolve Boras from trying. There are lots of problems the game needs to address, from the loss of its african-american talent base, to rising fan costs, continued ped abuse, the list is long.
    baseballs problems have always festered because players and management have been unable or unwilling to sit at a table across from eachother and deal reasonably. for a long time, it was easy to point a finger at the owners for this, but that’s no longer reasonable. to the extent that boras poisons the player/management relationship, he’s making the sport worse for everyone. throw in the fact that fans are a third party to this relationship who are the real victims, and you have a less than appealing picture. i’m not here to villify boras. but let’s not be naive either.

    YF October 29, 2008, 10:59 pm
  • no, i realize sf, you did not refer to him as “admirable”…i didn’t say you did…i used that word in my comment to reinforce my own personal opinion that he is neither likeable nor admirable…no, i don’t know him personally, so i have no way of knowing if he is good-hearted, well-meaning, and generous, or a puppy-kicking miser…but i do have a feel for how he operates professionally, and it doesn’t fit within the scope of what i respect…he may not have had much of an impact on your life, but the system he represents [i included players and teams in that indictment as well] has had an effect on some folks who can’t afford to go to games at all anymore…is that his fault per se?…probably not, but as you noted, he is a symbol, and an instrument, of how the game has evolved…and that’s not for the better in my opinion…oh, for sure he’s shrewd enough to know that the golden goose is not on the endangered species list, certainly not as long as teams like ours have endless resources and high demand for the product…he has every right to make a living by milking the system, and he’s doing a darn good job of it, but i guess i see him as nothing more than a huckster, and his snake-oil pitches on behalf of players he represents are insulting…

    dc October 30, 2008, 12:11 am
  • Breaking into this Boras discussion to tell John that I in no way was insinuating anything about your thoughts about Obama’s race. His race is a reason why this election is historic, and because this election is so historic, it doesn’t bother me that the speech might have delayed the game (even though it didn’t).

    Paul SF October 30, 2008, 1:04 am

Leave a Comment

Next post:

Previous post: