I admit it...

[Richard Chuggar]

...I believe that it is not permissible to begin a new thread without using the word "splooge" or some variation thereof.

That's because vague homoeroticism is usually the most effective way to express appreciation for a sports person.

INTREPID READER ELI:

So, so above it.

Desipio is very chippy todaySKO's time to post is all day b/c he has no sbox.

In reality'd

[SKO]

...I believe that it is not permissible to begin a new thread without using the word "splooge" or some variation thereof.

That's because vague homoeroticism is usually the most effective way to express appreciation for a sports person.

INTREPID READER ELI:

So, so above it.

Desipio is very chippy todaySKO's time to post is all day b/c he has no sbox.

In reality'd

And all of your "time to posts" are about me or at me, and it's still a little creepy, Todd.

[CBStew]

...I believe that it is not permissible to begin a new thread without using the word "splooge" or some variation thereof.

That's because vague homoeroticism is usually the most effective way to express appreciation for a sports person.

INTREPID READER ELI:

So, so above it.

Desipio is very chippy today.

Oh this me just gently ribbing you over what you yourself called the "carefully detached internet persona" you've created. We're still buds.

Point made, Eli!

[CT III]

...I believe that it is not permissible to begin a new thread without using the word "splooge" or some variation thereof.

That's because vague homoeroticism is usually the most effective way to express appreciation for a sports person.

Vague?

[Eli]

...I believe that it is not permissible to begin a new thread without using the word "splooge" or some variation thereof.

That's because vague homoeroticism is usually the most effective way to express appreciation for a sports person.

Vague?

I did regret that word choice after I posted, since I basically meant the opposite.

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

[Tonker]

... Tony Randazzo is fast becoming one of my least favourite umpires.  Blowing calls I can cope with: everybody makes mistakes.  Ejecting guys for their bullshit is also fair enough, but when the game's over you need to be able to fucking let it go.  Lloyd McClendon and Randazzo have a history but it's clear that Randazzo can't let it lie and is actively and aggressively looking for trouble when the two meet.  That's no fucking good.  As an ump, you can't do that.

[World's #1 Astros Fan]

I don't understand the "joke" behind Gay Hooters.

[Tinker to Evers to Chance]

I get butthurt when people shorten Beefcastle's name to "Beef".

[Saul Goodman]

Even when he's pitching well I don't buy the Kyle Hendricks Professor act and I kind of want him traded.

[Slaky]

I will be following the women's world cup intently because if you can't root with every fiber of your being against Canada what the fuck good are you?

[flannj]

I will be following the women's world cup intently because if you can't root with every fiber of your being against Canada what the fuck good are you?

Got it here on DVR if you want to watch the replays.

[R-V]

This article brought to mind my one gripe with Pat Hughes - other than his lazy-ass abdication of his duties for one inning a game: he still cites stats like batting average, RBIs, and pitcher wins as primary measures of a player's ability. Granted this is a minor gripe because (a) not everyone has Len's ability to incorporate newer stats without boring the listener to death (b) I would imagine Pat's demographic is a bit older than Len's and even less likely to give a flying shit about OPS+ than an average slack-jawed TV viewer and (c) the onus for more enlightening analysis really shouldn't be placed on the play-by-play guy, if his analyst is worth a shit.

So TL;DR, I love Pat, and will be more than happy to tolerate this bullshit because he does an otherwise fantastic job, but you're on notice, pal.

[World's #1 Astros Fan]

This article brought to mind my one gripe with Pat Hughes - other than his lazy-ass abdication of his duties for one inning a game: he still cites stats like batting average, RBIs, and pitcher wins as primary measures of a player's ability. Granted this is a minor gripe because (a) not everyone has Len's ability to incorporate newer stats without boring the listener to death (b) I would imagine Pat's demographic is a bit older than Len's and even less likely to give a flying shit about OPS+ than an average slack-jawed TV viewer and (c) the onus for more enlightening analysis really shouldn't be placed on the play-by-play guy, if his analyst is worth a shit.

So TL;DR, I love Pat, and will be more than happy to tolerate this bullshit because he does an otherwise fantastic job, but you're on notice, pal.

His partner is even less likely to do so, which leads me to think if Pat was paired with jim Deshaies rather than the giggling moronic mascot with whom he's actually sadly yolked, he might be more inclined to break out of that shell.

[Chuck to Chuck]

This article brought to mind my one gripe with Pat Hughes - other than his lazy-ass abdication of his duties for one inning a game: he still cites stats like batting average, RBIs, and pitcher wins as primary measures of a player's ability. Granted this is a minor gripe because (a) not everyone has Len's ability to incorporate newer stats without boring the listener to death (b) I would imagine Pat's demographic is a bit older than Len's and even less likely to give a flying shit about OPS+ than an average slack-jawed TV viewer and (c) the onus for more enlightening analysis really shouldn't be placed on the play-by-play guy, if his analyst is worth a shit.

So TL;DR, I love Pat, and will be more than happy to tolerate this bullshit because he does an otherwise fantastic job, but you're on notice, pal.

His partner is even less likely to do so, which leads me to think if Pat was paired with jim Deshaies rather than the giggling moronic mascot with whom he's actually sadly yolked, he might be more inclined to break out of that shell.

Pat is still looking for the fax machine. What do you expect?

[World's #1 Astros Fan]

This article brought to mind my one gripe with Pat Hughes - other than his lazy-ass abdication of his duties for one inning a game: he still cites stats like batting average, RBIs, and pitcher wins as primary measures of a player's ability. Granted this is a minor gripe because (a) not everyone has Len's ability to incorporate newer stats without boring the listener to death (b) I would imagine Pat's demographic is a bit older than Len's and even less likely to give a flying shit about OPS+ than an average slack-jawed TV viewer and (c) the onus for more enlightening analysis really shouldn't be placed on the play-by-play guy, if his analyst is worth a shit.

So TL;DR, I love Pat, and will be more than happy to tolerate this bullshit because he does an otherwise fantastic job, but you're on notice, pal.

His partner is even less likely to do so, which leads me to think if Pat was paired with jim Deshaies rather than the giggling moronic mascot with whom he's actually sadly yolked, he might be more inclined to break out of that shell.

Pat is still looking for the fax machine. What do you expect?

That's an old bit.  They actually don't take faxes anymore.