MovieChat Forums > Baseball (1994) Discussion > Disgusted Over Bottom of 10th Topic Choi...

Disgusted Over Bottom of 10th Topic Choices

posted 14 years ago by Yodaboss
13 replies | jump to latest

I enjoyed the first part, but I literally just finished the second part and am infuriated over the choices of topics to cover.

First off, I think it needs to be retitled "The Yankees and The Red Sox and, um, uh, a few other guys that nobody outside of New York and New England really cares about so we'll breeze through them in hopes of satisfying their passionate, yet not as important as those in New York and New England fans."

I mean, seriously. In 2002 the Oakland A's won more consecutive games than any team in the HISTORY of the game. As a baseball fan and an A's fan it was one of the most exciting sports accomplishments I've ever witnessed. Does it get even a mention? Nope. Instead, they every so briefly breeze over how the A's revolutionized how teams evaluate players then when right back to the Yanks and Sox.

How about the Cubs in '03? I mean, come on. You spend 20 minutes talking about the '03 Red Sox, switch to the '03 Cubs for maybe 5 minutes then go right back to the Yanks and Sox crap. The '03 Cubs and the Bartman incident may be the single most compelling Baseball story of the last ten years. How one moment, one inning, one man can embody the pain and suffering of an entire franchise and fan base for now over 100 years. No, that's not worth going in depth over. Instead, let's get some Red Sox fan who's apparently a writer and just have him talk about his kids and the Red Sox all night, people really wanna see that.

Then there's the '05 White Sox who had a longer drought than the Red Sox under the cloud of the 1919 Black Sox scandal but that's not important because they're the wrong color of Sox.

The '08 Rays are one of the most compelling teams maybe ever. They came from nowhere with nothing (payroll wise) and figured out a way to topple both the mighty Red Sox and Yankees yet that's not worth covering.

I've seen all the other installments of the Baseball Documentary series and I remember feeling the same way when I watched it, but it wasn't as in your face.

There's more than two teams. And believe it or not, despite espn and Joe Buck constantly shoving them in our faces, us Baseball fans outside of the East Coast couldn't give a good god damn about the Red Sox and Yankees. There's more to baseball than those two teams. Much more.

[–] montyburns79 14 years ago

The Cubs and the A's didn't make it to the world series, that's why they didn't get much air time.

While the White Sox did have a slightly longer drought than the Red Sox, they were never percieved as having a "curse', hence way less drama that the Red Sox winning it.

The Yankees get the most air time because..c'mon they the greatest team ever! and not by a little bit but by a lot! If any other team had won 5 world series' in such a short amount of time I guarantee they would've been all the documenatry talked about.

[–] Yodaboss 14 years ago

Actually, the White Sox were considered "cursed" by many because they threw the '19 World Series.

The series covered lots of things that didn't center around the world series. Including steroids and home run chases. The home run chase was a big record that was broken, so was the consecutive games streak.

The '03 Red Sox didn't win the world series either, yet we had to sit through 20 minutes explaining that they didn't. The Cubs collapse that year is far more of an interesting story than that of the Red Sox. Period.

Your logic is flawed.

The film is titled "Baseball." It is supposed to cover important Baseball stories from the time period, but it clearly is focused on the Sox and Yanks.

And seriously, does anybody care about that writer guy talking incessantly about his kids over and over? That was the most ridiculous thing.

[–] skyrissian 14 years ago

Totally agree with this post. I was actually pretty impressed with the top, and it made me really anticipate seeing the bottom. But yeah.. WAAAYYY too much Yank$ and Red Sox! Even the coverage of the Dbacks winning 2001 WS pretty much only showed it from the Yanks perspective.

I understand they have to devote a little bit of time to the Red Sox winning the WS for the first time since 1918. Of course it was a bit overlong, but OK, I get it. But just when you think it's finally over, they go into a 3 minute Red Sox montage over the tune of Glory Days! I was seriously getting ill at this point. And yes that writer guy/Red Sox fanatic was annoying and offered nothing! Edit him out please!

[–] montyburns79 14 years ago

I don't see how the Cubs collapse can be considered more interesting than the Red Sox story. The only drama came with the fan interfering with that fly ball.
The Red Sox drama was so incredible that you couldn't possibly make it up.

You have the whole history between the Sox and Yanks that came before it, which you could easily have a two hour documentary on alone. Then the 2004 ALCS where you have the so many things come into play:

1- They're playing their arch rivals the Yankees
2- They're down 3 games to 0
3- It's the bottom of the ninth in game 4 with the Yankees winning
4- The Red Sox are facing the most dominant and clutch closer in history
5- The Sox manage to win the series from that point!

I don't think the most die hard Boston fan could have dreamt up a more incredible scenario. I'm a rabid Yankee fan and I was sick to my stomach at the time,but I have to say now looking back with a clear head that that was a truly incredible feat the Red Sox pulled off. I still hate the Sox but I and most other Yankee fans respect the hell out of them. No One outside of Chicago respects the Cubs.

[–] arnis12 14 years ago

I agree with the original post. Too much Yanks/Red Sox. Don't we already have ESPN for that? Syrupy Boston fans stories about kids and their dads, where's the barf bag?

[–] SEAL412 14 years ago

Athletics, Cubs... and hell even the Philles! Phils have won the NLE title four years in a row, not to mention 2 world series, one title!

[–] rfeinberg-2 14 years ago

It's hard to argue against the 2004 Red Sox being the most compelling baseball story of the last ten years...even if it has been overexposed in numerous documentaries and specials already...

Though I agree, WAY too much of Mike Barnicle talking about his family.

PS, for the record - the 2002 A's did set an AL record, but not the most consecutive wins of ANY team.

[–] Rockhound6165 10 years ago

I don't see how the Cubs collapse can be considered more interesting than the Red Sox story. The only drama came with the fan interfering with that fly ball.

Wow, you're a special kind of clueless aren't you. Do me a favor and take off your Yankees cap and jersey for a moment. Done? good, let's move on. The Cubs' collapse in 2003 wasn't just the Bartman play. You really have to remember the context of what was happening. At the time, the Cubs were 5 outs away from going to their first World Series in 58 years. Now, you can talk about a Red Sox curse or whatever but at least since 1918 and before 2004 they've been to the World Series 4 times and been to the players several times. The Cubs, since 1945 had made the playoffs only 3 times including choking away a 2-0 series lead to the Padres. But I digress. 5 outs from winning the pennant. 3-0 and Prior was 3 hitting the Marlins. Even after the Bartman play, the Marlins had runners on 1st and 2nd with 1 out. Then all hell broke loose. Alex Gonzalez who was as fine a SS as any, boots a double play ball. That opened the floodgates. 8 runs later the inning was over and the series was tied. And let's not forget that the late Bernie Mac black catted the Cubs while singing Take Me Out To The Ballgame by instead of singing "let's root, root, root for the Cubbies" he sang, "let's root, root, root, for the CHAMPS!" Hollywood couldn't have written a better script. That series was far more interesting than the Yanks/Sox LCS by a ratio of 1000:1. C'mon man. Any real objective baseball fan could see that.

[–] junderbr 13 years ago

seems odd not to mention that the Mariners won 116 games, tying a record.

[–] kag2-1 11 years ago

Burns retains his idiotic Red Sox & Yankee biases. Covering 2003 and 2004 was fine, but ignoring the other occurrences was very wrong.

[–] nutsberryfarm 10 years ago

agree.

Season's Greetings!

[–] Rockhound6165 10 years ago

seems odd not to mention that the Mariners won 116 games, tying a record.

Maybe, like the '54 Indians, it didn't amount to a hill of beans.

[–] SnapCrackledThePop 8 years ago

Well said!!!