By irishguy

November 6, 2009 6:06 PM | Link to this

Thanks Alice, that explains why, back in the day, all the cute young things I approached were all cowboy fans. Which was a total turn off for me, being that I root for the Bengals and whoever is playing dallas.

By Alice

November 6, 2009 3:00 PM | Link to this

Not at all - just saying that we ladies that only pretend to like sports (we were too tough to like Home Ec but not tough enough to like phys ed or anything that includes a competitive, sweat-inducing activity) are attracted to the uniforms of the Yankees and of the Cowboys because of their super cute colors and logos. For example, I would never wear an Astros jersey no matter what their stats are because they have tacky team colors and they would completely wash out my skin. Who doesn’t look good in classic navy blue and who doesn’t like a nice pinstripe? And the iconic NY logo is at least as timeless and recognizable as the “CC” Chanel logo. At least the Yanks look good when they lose…

By irishguy

November 6, 2009 2:10 PM | Link to this

Alice, are you saying the yankees are girlie?

By Alice

November 6, 2009 12:19 PM | Link to this

I agree with all the comments on here plus I like their pinstripes. We need the Yankees because Yankee blue is a classic as sports team colors go and it goes with everything. It’s what I wear when I want to make a statement about beings a guy’s kinda girl but I can still look cute and not all butchy.

By vick

November 5, 2009 10:47 PM | Link to this

Funny how it never came up? When were the Red Sox outbidding every other team for all the best free agents? Never happened. Your point, if you have one, makes no sense when comparing Steinbrenner’s fiscal excesses with any other team.

By Mark from St Paul

November 5, 2009 10:31 PM | Link to this

Funny how this never came up when the Red Sox were winning…. I’ve been a Yankees fan since the late ’50s but I’d love to see the ownership of pro teams abolished. The teams should belong to the communities they play in, and the players’ pay should be a cut of the gate and merchandising. They’d still be rich, but it would bring some balance back into the equation. Professional sports are an object lesson in how “capitalism” destroys that which it does not understand, and if there is one thing about pro sports that’s obvious, it’s that the money people keep making bad decisions. Yes, Steinbrenner has done what Cuban hasn’t been able to, but Mark Cuban doesn’t have the legend of the Yankees helping him out with recruiting. Public ownership would also put an end to wealthy owners with interests in cable and other media using sports broadcasts to leverage their other businesses. Every pro and college game in this country should be broadcast, cablecast, dishcast, and on the internet and radio. It’s a crime they’re not.

By nyc

November 5, 2009 10:04 PM | Link to this

yanks r the best team ever in mlb…win some lose some…dont hate…they play within the established rules…they r the champs..

By Raoul

November 5, 2009 7:10 PM | Link to this

No, Vick. Leave the Damn Yankees alone. We have to destroy this notion that successful enterprises must be broken up simply because we don’t like them. For one thing, nothing beats the enjoyment of beating them on the field of battle. My dear, late Dad grinned from ear to ear when his beloved Reds swept them in 1976, and I don’t think any victory ever tasted so sweet for him. Remember Pete Rose playing halfway in from 3rd base when Mickey Rivers was batting? He was useless in that Series. Ah, sweet memories……!

By TRS

November 5, 2009 4:21 PM | Link to this

Used to love baseball, particularly the Big Red Machine; but, like Irish, the ‘94 strike did me in. I went to a Reds game this year, the 2nd one in about ten, only to see the stadium. Been there, done that! I enjoy a Dragons game now and again which seems to be the purest form of professional baseball nowadays. I tend to believe baseball will continue to stagnate because its not a national pastime anymore. To be national, all teams would need to be able to compete. The NFL addressed that and look at its popularity. College Football and basketball also thrive because even though you have the perennials, any number of teams can come out of the woodwork, ie UC or Boise State. I’d prefer to see a meaningful luxury tax which really bites those that goes over payroll and allows the other markets to compete.

By lmj

November 5, 2009 2:04 PM | Link to this

This is an honest question. Who built the new Yankee stadium? The team or the taxpayers?

By prose

November 5, 2009 12:50 PM | Link to this

An attractive proposition, the salary cap. They already have one. But, with baseball being exempt from anti-trust laws it simply will not work. The “Bankees” are a great example of our society. Bloomberg spends $90 million to remain mayor of New York. The MLB Players union loves these guys making Wall Street salaries. You really think we’ll ever see much more than the current, “penalty tax”? Wasn’t the old Yankee Stadium on the list of National Historic Places? Tear it down and build a $1.5 billion amusement park? No problem. All this while the city’s finances are literally (sewers) in the crapper. Nothing gets in the way of the fat cats with all the dough. Nothing. By the way, who has the second highest payroll in baseball? The team in Boston right? The Cubs have a healthy payroll too but……..well, they’re the Cubs. Small market teams like Minnesota or Kansas City are more like farm teams for the rich big market guys. I used to think that baseball would price themselves out of business with their $6 hotdogs and $12 dollar beers. Or, $2,000 tickets!? The fact their biggest showcase is too late for kids to watch etc.. Did you see the zombie kids in the N.Y. crowd around midnight? Mostly, the crowds consist of wealthy drunks, and entertainers wearing $250 jerseys, $500 jackets and such, behaving like the kids who SHOULD be in the stands. No, salary caps won’t do the trick. The loss of future fans will/may do it. Why do you never see kids playing catch anymore? Little League’s are nearly gone. They’re usually playing soccer or some video game. The owners’ mindset is all short term profit. Much like American corporations who ship our jobs overseas and pay their CEO’s and managers exhorbitant sums to produce ever increasing profits at any cost. That will be their demise. And, for a large part, ours. There is a terrific video series about baseball named, “When it was a Game’. I remember when it was. Now, it’s just an extension of the American Corporate Complex of squeeze the suckers dry. Having grown up playing and watching the game, I’m hopelessly hooked on it. But, I can’t even afford to see a minor league game more than a couple times a summer. If it wasn’t for the quiet desperation of people trying to identify with something, anything that is remotely recognizable to their past, I doubt most teams would draw more than the tickets corporations buy. Bottom line: Bankees will continue to win and fans will continue to lose. On a footnote; will someone please pull the plug on Tim McCarver! Aaarrrggh.

By irishguy

November 5, 2009 12:24 PM | Link to this

I’m still upset about the ‘94 strike. I didn’t attend a game for years after. I’ve only been to handful since and that’s just so my little guy gets to see some games. I gotta admit, teaching him how to keep score of a ball game is one of the greatest Father/Son activities ever!

By d

November 5, 2009 12:16 PM | Link to this

So now we want to spread the wealth (players) in sports now too? Baseball has a luxury tax. If a team wants to spend a lot of money, they’ll have to pay a tax. That doesn’t stop them, but that’s the way it’s set up. Life isn’t fair, sports isn’t fair. Besides, there are other things to worry about in life besides if your team does well. I’m a die-hard Bengals fan, but it doesn’t break my heart that they do relatively bad every single year, sans 2005 and potentially this year. It’s the way it is in baseball. It’s a private organization, they can run it how they want. We have a choice to put money into the organization if we want. We can debate all we want…it’s not going to change a thing because it’s a private org. You have a problem with it? Speak with your wallet.

By No Yankee Fan

November 5, 2009 12:08 PM | Link to this

Not a Yankee fan. Never have been. If you want parody in baseball, you would have to put limits on player salary spending from owners. Most owners of small market teams never have been able to compete for the top talent. The question is- is it right to put spending constraints on the rich/large market owners to allow the smaller owners to compete? If things stay the same, the Steinbrenners of the baseball world will always have a talent purchasing advantage and will be able to buy their World Series championship.

By Marc R

November 5, 2009 12:07 PM | Link to this

It’s time to put the blame where it belongs, on the owners. There will NEVER be a salary cap until the owners agree on a more strict revenue sharing system. It is easier to get the Player’s Association (they are not a true union as they cross picket lines) to agree on something than it is to get the thirty owners to agree.

By vick

November 5, 2009 11:08 AM | Link to this

Thanks, Todd. After all, it is Guy Fawkes Day. A perfect day to plot the overthrow of the evil empire…

By Todd

November 5, 2009 10:51 AM | Link to this

A salary cap in baseball is long overdue. The strike in 94 ruined baseball. The Yankees do not win because of their great farm system or ability to develop talent. They win because they can afford to pilfer talent from other teams and assemble All-Star teams every year. It’s not fair, but then not much in life really is anymore!