I never liked Joey Votto

[cincygrad]

Mark me down in the “not giving a fuck what you have to say” column.

And the correct answer to the black mans demise is WELFARE. “Free” shit. If you incentivize people to do or NOT to do something then that’s exactly what you’re gonna get.

You haven't given a fuck about anything I've had to say since 2001.

 

[kramer1]

You haven't given a fuck about anything I've had to say since 2001.

The fact checkers have deemed this comment to be TRUE.

carry on

 

[CrashDavisSports]

I agree. However,

For the love of god, we know Lincoln was a Republican...... But can we all just agree that the party platform in 1860 was a little different than the party platform now? Can we at least pretend that the whole southern strategy happened and was effective?

This whole talking point about how Republicans love black people because Lincoln fought slavery is utterly ridiculous and ignores all reality.

Are you 100% sure that the party platform has changed? Or are you just deeming that the case because of the lip service and curtain the left has drawn over our eyes about how they go about maintain control of the black community through low income programs, about building the INNER cities in these Democrat run communities so that they could segregate the blacks from the "whiter" communities, about planned parenthood, and nuking the nuclear family? Keep them all together and give them free stuff, make them lazy with no hope and then preach to them your party is what is protecting and giving them everything they need to survive. They then spout they are for blacks, when in reality they are segregating them best they can without coming out and saying it and maintaining control. It is how a child relies on mom and dad to take care of them, in this case, it is inner city poor folks relying on the government to take care of them. If you truly want to see equality, you need to defund these social programs to the minimum, and start reinvesting that money back into the communities that need help and to inspire folks to start businesses, go to trade schools, rebuild buildings, and fix the face of the community. Then you need to increase police funding in those areas, and inspire the children of that community to grow up and be police officers to help protect their neighborhoods. More revitalization and more police to make the communities safe for people to take these risks.

The Republicans are not any less for blacks since 1860, just the narrative that the LEFT keeps spinning keeps changing to villanize the RIGHT to earn votes.

Just uphold the current amendments. If you can justify something under those or you have to change one to accommodate some crazy ass left winged nuts feelings, then you shouldn't be doing it. All people should be given the chance for life, liberty and the PURSUIT of happiness. Pursuit being the key word. If you are pursuing your happiness by staying in the poor inner city, by collecting government checks, and not contributing to society then you are not pursuing happiness very well.

Here is another thing that most main stream news media will not tell you because it goes against their narrative:

Trump administration launches global effort to end criminalization of homosexuality

 

[DanBengalfan]

both democrats and republicans are bought and paid for by big money.

big banks, big corporations, big government. a huge circular vortex of money.
people are choosing between the devil, and his twin brother, who is also the devil. they ignore the small business small government candidates because they don't have flashy commercials or bought and paid for media.

 

[Cincyfan78]

Laws have clearly had an impact on inequality. Look at the foundations of the modern nuclear family. I think we could agree a big transition in American life occurred right after WW2.... The baby-boom. Look at property and real-estate laws at the time. They explicitly left black men, including black veterans, out of the housing market. At a time when suburbs were built, work opportunties and community building was at its highest. And you wonder what happened to family structures over those years?

Look at drug laws.... Look at possession offenses and sentences vs. usage across races. I think you can find a lot of examples if you care to look.

Anyway....I don't suspect you give a f about what I have to say, so I'll stop there.

Maybe we can argue about who we're going to draft or something.

I'll always enjoy civil discourse, even if we disagree. I think that is a major sticking point in today's society. Too many people have been taught to believe that either someone has to agree 100% with them/support them, or they that person must hate them. Nothing could be further from the truth, but it is happening and you see a ton of it on FB right now: If you voted for Trump, you hate gays, you hate women, and can just unfriend me. That type of "social warrior justice" approach is just limiting someone's viewpoint by removing anyone who may have a different opinion. The only way we can change someone's mind is to bring forth the evidence we have, have a civil discourse, and present our way of thinking in a rational setting. But, civil discourse leads to compromise and unity - something that many on one particular side of the spectrum does not want - and that is clear as day (at least to me).

As for the laws - it still does not hold water. In the 60's, with the fatherless figuring hovering in the 30% range - why did it double after all the laws were passed to protect the rights of the black community? How is it that we can go generations out from Slavery, in a time which blacks could not vote, own land, or have any of the same rights as whites - and yet the nuclear family structure remained within reason to other cultures. It wasn't until laws were passed in the 60's and 70's, that we saw a major spike in this area for the black community. We can't just continue to point to things that happened 100's of years ago as reasons why people fail to take responsibility for their actions. Slavery has nothing to do with deciding that you are going to not have kids at 16, 17, 18 years old. Slavery has nothing to do with deciding you are going to finish high school and get a degree. Slavery has nothing to do with being committed to your relationship, and deciding that you are going to stay with the person you raise your children. Even if you do split, slavery has nothing to do with ensuring that both parents stay involved in the upbringing of those children.

At what point in history did slavery suddenly start to move into the area where only blacks do not have to adhere to the scientific model of the nuclear family? Also, why is it that this so-called systemic racism is set up by whites, but yet the white culture doesn't even benefit the most out of the system? Asian Americans by far out earn, out wealth, out educate, etc..etc...white Americans. Again, if this system was set up so that whites could flourish while keeping minorities down, it has failed dramatically.

Lastly, the slavery perception doesn't work well when you start to consider ALL of the cultures that have been part of/enslaved throughout history. Why is it that ONLY blacks have failed to rise and succeed under the same normative as every other culture? Why is it that, in heavily democratic areas, with black mayors, and black representatives, and under 8 years of a black president did NOTHING get done to help subvert the issues that are prevalent in those inner city societies? Because, the target being used "blame whites" is badly misinformed and completely incorrect. Blacks represent 13% of the population, but are responsible for 55% of the homicides, and 65% of nearly all aggravated criminal activity - the target: Blame the police, is badly misinformed and incorrect. If the structure of the culture simply stood up and took stock of where they are headed and why, they would see that while 9 unarmed blacks being killed by cops is unfortunate (as are the 23 unarmed whites) from 2019 - the 95% of murders are black on black. The largest killing of any black is abortion, where in NY more women have abortions on a daily basis than are pregnant with the expectancy to carry to term. The fact that abortion clinic - planned parenthood - founder was an avid racist who founded the company as a way to cull the black community.

Slavery happened 100's of years ago - affected many more cultures than just the black culture - and statistics and studies show that many of the issues facing today's society in black inner cities are issues that have largely been created SINCE the 60's when laws and regulations went into affect, and are not closely related to slavery at all. So, if this country has moved further and further away from slavery - enacted more laws and protections to subvert these issues, if society is becoming more and more accepting of different cultures - why then are these issues mostly modern issues?

 

[cincygrad]

I'll always enjoy civil discourse, even if we disagree. I think that is a major sticking point in today's society. Too many people have been taught to believe that either someone has to agree 100% with them/support them, or they that person must hate them. Nothing could be further from the truth, but it is happening and you see a ton of it on FB right now: If you voted for Trump, you hate gays, you hate women, and can just unfriend me. That type of "social warrior justice" approach is just limiting someone's viewpoint by removing anyone who may have a different opinion. The only way we can change someone's mind is to bring forth the evidence we have, have a civil discourse, and present our way of thinking in a rational setting. But, civil discourse leads to compromise and unity - something that many on one particular side of the spectrum does not want - and that is clear as day (at least to me).

As for the laws - it still does not hold water. In the 60's, with the fatherless figuring hovering in the 30% range - why did it double after all the laws were passed to protect the rights of the black community? How is it that we can go generations out from Slavery, in a time which blacks could not vote, own land, or have any of the same rights as whites - and yet the nuclear family structure remained within reason to other cultures. It wasn't until laws were passed in the 60's and 70's, that we saw a major spike in this area for the black community. We can't just continue to point to things that happened 100's of years ago as reasons why people fail to take responsibility for their actions. Slavery has nothing to do with deciding that you are going to not have kids at 16, 17, 18 years old. Slavery has nothing to do with deciding you are going to finish high school and get a degree. Slavery has nothing to do with being committed to your relationship, and deciding that you are going to stay with the person you raise your children. Even if you do split, slavery has nothing to do with ensuring that both parents stay involved in the upbringing of those children.

At what point in history did slavery suddenly start to move into the area where only blacks do not have to adhere to the scientific model of the nuclear family? Also, why is it that this so-called systemic racism is set up by whites, but yet the white culture doesn't even benefit the most out of the system? Asian Americans by far out earn, out wealth, out educate, etc..etc...white Americans. Again, if this system was set up so that whites could flourish while keeping minorities down, it has failed dramatically.

Lastly, the slavery perception doesn't work well when you start to consider ALL of the cultures that have been part of/enslaved throughout history. Why is it that ONLY blacks have failed to rise and succeed under the same normative as every other culture? Why is it that, in heavily democratic areas, with black mayors, and black representatives, and under 8 years of a black president did NOTHING get done to help subvert the issues that are prevalent in those inner city societies? Because, the target being used "blame whites" is badly misinformed and completely incorrect. Blacks represent 13% of the population, but are responsible for 55% of the homicides, and 65% of nearly all aggravated criminal activity - the target: Blame the police, is badly misinformed and incorrect. If the structure of the culture simply stood up and took stock of where they are headed and why, they would see that while 9 unarmed blacks being killed by cops is unfortunate (as are the 23 unarmed whites) from 2019 - the 95% of murders are black on black. The largest killing of any black is abortion, where in NY more women have abortions on a daily basis than are pregnant with the expectancy to carry to term. The fact that abortion clinic - planned parenthood - founder was an avid racist who founded the company as a way to cull the black community.

Slavery happened 100's of years ago - affected many more cultures than just the black culture - and statistics and studies show that many of the issues facing today's society in black inner cities are issues that have largely been created SINCE the 60's when laws and regulations went into affect, and are not closely related to slavery at all. So, if this country has moved further and further away from slavery - enacted more laws and protections to subvert these issues, if society is becoming more and more accepting of different cultures - why then are these issues mostly modern issues?

I suspect we're too far apart on this, but I will offer a few points....
- I don't know what other cultures, races you are talking about with slavery. I'm speaking of slavery in this country - A country that is still relatively young. I never meant to imply that laws were created to make the White man succeed - But plenty of laws have existed to make the black man fail. You say these were all gone in teh 60s, but this isn't true.... In many southern towns these laws persisted or were slow to change.
- Culture is certainly influenced over many years. I'm sure your family has many habits, traditions, etc that have roots that go back more than 100 years. Families aren't just created from thin air. Slavery, Jim Crow, real-estate laws, inequities in the legal system have all led to the destruction of families. I can't say this with certainty, but I'm betting that kids that grow up in single parent homes are more likely to become single parents. This gets passed from generation to generation. You say slavery doesn't cause people to abandon a family.... That's true. White folks haven't been slaves in this country and there are plenty of multigenerational families with this issue. Unfortunately, whatever factors that originally led to these behaviors are often passed along to the next generation. The idea that people are just blank-slate choice machines seems naive to me.
-As for your ideas and birth control. If only there were an organization to promote safe practices. If only there were a way to educate our young people about safe sex and family planning. Maybe we could call it something like "planning to be a parent" or shorter than that.... I'm sure Republicans would sign up to support such an organization rather than trying to destroy it at every turn.

 

[cincygrad]

I agree. However,


Are you 100% sure that the party platform has changed? Or are you just deeming that the case because of the lip service and curtain the left has drawn over our eyes about how they go about maintain control of the black community through low income programs, about building the INNER cities in these Democrat run communities so that they could segregate the blacks from the "whiter" communities, about planned parenthood, and nuking the nuclear family? Keep them all together and give them free stuff, make them lazy with no hope and then preach to them your party is what is protecting and giving them everything they need to survive. They then spout they are for blacks, when in reality they are segregating them best they can without coming out and saying it and maintaining control. It is how a child relies on mom and dad to take care of them, in this case, it is inner city poor folks relying on the government to take care of them. If you truly want to see equality, you need to defund these social programs to the minimum, and start reinvesting that money back into the communities that need help and to inspire folks to start businesses, go to trade schools, rebuild buildings, and fix the face of the community. Then you need to increase police funding in those areas, and inspire the children of that community to grow up and be police officers to help protect their neighborhoods. More revitalization and more police to make the communities safe for people to take these risks.

The Republicans are not any less for blacks since 1860, just the narrative that the LEFT keeps spinning keeps changing to villanize the RIGHT to earn votes.

Just uphold the current amendments. If you can justify something under those or you have to change one to accommodate some crazy ass left winged nuts feelings, then you shouldn't be doing it. All people should be given the chance for life, liberty and the PURSUIT of happiness. Pursuit being the key word. If you are pursuing your happiness by staying in the poor inner city, by collecting government checks, and not contributing to society then you are not pursuing happiness very well.

Here is another thing that most main stream news media will not tell you because it goes against their narrative:

Trump administration launches global effort to end criminalization of homosexuality

Crash- I'm going to post a wikipedia article.... Not because I think it's a great source, but I think it will give you the basics. Again, there have been volumes of factual information written about the Republican platform in the late 20th century. Yes, I'm 100% sure there platform has changed. I'm also sure the Democratic platform has changed (used to be much more pro-union and pro-worker than they currently are). Anyway, here you go.

Southern strategy - Wikipedia

PS Great news about Trump and the global efforts to end criminalization of homosexuality. But you sent an article from NBC News and said that mainstream media will not cover it. Isn't NBC News part of the MSM? What about NYtimes? They covered it? I don't understand when people post articles saying the media won't cover it and a simple google search finds that media did cover it. What gives?

 

[kramer1]

I voted for Trump and I’m not a huge fan of the gays or women. I’m fine with some, but not many.

 

[Cincyfan78]

I suspect we're too far apart on this, but I will offer a few points....
- I don't know what other cultures, races you are talking about with slavery. I'm speaking of slavery in this country - A country that is still relatively young. I never meant to imply that laws were created to make the White man succeed - But plenty of laws have existed to make the black man fail. You say these were all gone in teh 60s, but this isn't true.... In many southern towns these laws persisted or were slow to change.
- Culture is certainly influenced over many years. I'm sure your family has many habits, traditions, etc that have roots that go back more than 100 years. Families aren't just created from thin air. Slavery, Jim Crow, real-estate laws, inequities in the legal system have all led to the destruction of families. I can't say this with certainty, but I'm betting that kids that grow up in single parent homes are more likely to become single parents. This gets passed from generation to generation. You say slavery doesn't cause people to abandon a family.... That's true. White folks haven't been slaves in this country and there are plenty of multigenerational families with this issue. Unfortunately, whatever factors that originally led to these behaviors are often passed along to the next generation. The idea that people are just blank-slate choice machines seems naive to me.
-As for your ideas and birth control. If only there were an organization to promote safe practices. If only there were a way to educate our young people about safe sex and family planning. Maybe we could call it something like "planning to be a parent" or shorter than that.... I'm sure Republicans would sign up to support such an organization rather than trying to destroy it at every turn.

We probably are, I mean, I don't expect to change your overall opinion and I'm sure you know you are likely not to change mine, but again - I do enjoy the discourse.

Slavery within this country utilized whites, blacks, Indians; European colonies used all kinds of people from all cultures. In fact, in the early 1600's the English were shown to have as many as 69% of their slavery population to be Irish in the many of their colonies. To think that only blacks were slaves in America is incorrect. Especially considering that a large majority of white slaves were Scottish and Irish/Celtic.

Your second point is still not correct by the stats. If those laws were to inhibit the family, why then did the % not crash until AFTER all of these racist laws were abolished? It wasn't until after the 70's when society started to see drastic measures from the nuclear family of black people and exploded through the 80's and 90's and into today. Again, by the 60's only about 30% of families were of single parenthood. This is hundreds of years after slavery, and still within the margin for whites, which was in the 20% area. So, if after all the bad laws were abolished, after all the revolutions, after all the generations of more kids being more tolerant and so on so forth - why did the single parent rate double from in the 30% range to nearing 75% in just 60 years after hundreds of years of staying within range of other cultures in the United States - even factoring in all the racist laws and views of people who did not want to see blacks as equals? It would make sense, from what you are saying, if the rate had exploded after slavery and continued until the 60's and then at worst plateau if not start to shrink. That's not what happened, it happened the exact opposite way.

If planned parenthood were actually spending the majority of their time and money educating people on the needs of safe sex and abstinence - I would agree with you, but they don't. Follow the money and you'll see that the vast majority of planned parenthood is exactly what it is - a place to abort babies - founded by a racist leader. I find it ironic in this day and age where we are cancelling out the past because of racist founders of colleges and companies that this one company has remained untouched. The fact still remains, that more black babies are aborted in some states than mothers will carry to term - and that is an issue.

Good convo - always nice to have a back and forth without the name calling and derogatory connotations.

 

[Cincyfan78]

Crash- I'm going to post a wikipedia article.... Not because I think it's a great source, but I think it will give you the basics. Again, there have been volumes of factual information written about the Republican platform in the late 20th century. Yes, I'm 100% sure there platform has changed. I'm also sure the Democratic platform has changed (used to be much more pro-union and pro-worker than they currently are). Anyway, here you go.

Southern strategy - Wikipedia

PS Great news about Trump and the global efforts to end criminalization of homosexuality. But you sent an article from NBC News and said that mainstream media will not cover it. Isn't NBC News part of the MSM? What about NYtimes? They covered it? I don't understand when people post articles saying the media won't cover it and a simple google search finds that media did cover it. What gives?

I know this was for Crash, but wanted to chime in - the southern strategy has been debunked time and time again by people like Shaun Trendy in realclear politics to professors at UPenn and even a follow-up some time ago in the NY Times. Several factors play into this such as the south did not switch to Republican in Congress until 1994. Did it take nearly 30 years for the state racist to catch on to the strategy? Dan Mclaughlin shows that as late as 2010 some states like Alabama and North Carolina were still voting in their first Republican legislative majorities since the reconstruction. The south really started leaning more towards Republican in the 50's when industry started to increase. Even then while the wealthy showed a large increase from the 1950's to the 1980's in turning to the Republican vote (from 55% to 77%) the poorer whites did not reciprocate, remaining largely democratic (43% to 51%). Hell, Ronald Reagan who won nearly every single state still struggled in the south, only winning by narrow margins. So, this "strategy" doesn't mesh with actual stats and the history do not back this line of thinking. It sounds great in theory (like systemic racism) but in practice it doesn't really hold a lot of water.

As for the MSM issue - I think maybe Crash is referring to the AMOUNT of coverage that things receive. If Trump looked more orange today than yesterday, you would find no less than 10 articles just about anywhere. Yet anything positive is glanced over with a one-off article in the best case scenario, and relegated to back-page news or nothing at all, at worst. Just from my own browsing experience through Yahoo, Google, FB and twitter - it sure seems like a lot of silly issues get plenty of articles and coverage, while mostly good things get drowned out.

 

[CrashDavisSports]

I know this was for Crash, but wanted to chime in - the southern strategy has been debunked time and time again by people like Shaun Trendy in realclear politics to professors at UPenn and even a follow-up some time ago in the NY Times. Several factors play into this such as the south did not switch to Republican in Congress until 1994. Did it take nearly 30 years for the state racist to catch on to the strategy? Dan Mclaughlin shows that as late as 2010 some states like Alabama and North Carolina were still voting in their first Republican legislative majorities since the reconstruction. The south really started leaning more towards Republican in the 50's when industry started to increase. Even then while the wealthy showed a large increase from the 1950's to the 1980's in turning to the Republican vote (from 55% to 77%) the poorer whites did not reciprocate, remaining largely democratic (43% to 51%). Hell, Ronald Reagan who won nearly every single state still struggled in the south, only winning by narrow margins. So, this "strategy" doesn't mesh with actual stats and the history do not back this line of thinking. It sounds great in theory (like systemic racism) but in practice it doesn't really hold a lot of water.

As for the MSM issue - I think maybe Crash is referring to the AMOUNT of coverage that things receive. If Trump looked more orange today than yesterday, you would find no less than 10 articles just about anywhere. Yet anything positive is glanced over with a one-off article in the best case scenario, and relegated to back-page news or nothing at all, at worst. Just from my own browsing experience through Yahoo, Google, FB and twitter - it sure seems like a lot of silly issues get plenty of articles and coverage, while mostly good things get drowned out.

You said all that very well, so I will just stand on your post as you presented a lot more in depth fact than I am sure I would have. But yes, I was referring to the quantity of coverage, not that it was mentioned.

 

[cincygrad]

I know this was for Crash, but wanted to chime in - the southern strategy has been debunked time and time again by people like Shaun Trendy in realclear politics to professors at UPenn
As for the MSM issue - I think maybe Crash is referring to the AMOUNT of coverage that things receive. If Trump looked more orange today than yesterday, you would find no less than 10 articles just about anywhere. Yet anything positive is glanced over with a one-off article in the best case scenario, and relegated to back-page news or nothing at all, at worst. Just from my own browsing experience through Yahoo, Google, FB and twitter - it sure seems like a lot of silly issues get plenty of articles and coverage, while mostly good things get drowned out.

Dude.... Obama wore a tan suit and Fox News reported on it for 3 weeks.

We also used to have daily outrage about Obama using a teleprompter.... Now we somehow don't care that Trump not only uses the teleprompter, but apparently can't read or pronounce words correctly?

My issue with the right is that they spend a lot of time talking about "snowflakes" and people being "triggered." But honestly turn on Tucker Carlson or the other right wing heros.... Those guys spend an hour or two whining every damn night.

 

[cincygrad]

I didn't mean for a simple post to the "Southern Strategy" to be difinitive.... I've also read a bunch about various interpretations. But, I put it out there as a simple idea about how politics have changed over time. The idea that Republicans in the era of Lincoln were somehow the same Republicans in the era of Trump is just not true. Both party platforms continue to evolve. I think they've even evolved a lot in the past 30 years (for example, Dems are moving further and further from workers rights).

I enjoy your reading your thoughts and would consider having you on my team in the rumble against Kramer and his thugs at the Dayton Mall.

 

[Cincyfan78]

Dude.... Obama wore a tan suit and Fox News reported on it for 3 weeks.

We also used to have daily outrage about Obama using a teleprompter.... Now we somehow don't care that Trump not only uses the teleprompter, but apparently can't read or pronounce words correctly?

My issue with the right is that they spend a lot of time talking about "snowflakes" and people being "triggered." But honestly turn on Tucker Carlson or the other right wing heros.... Those guys spend an hour or two whining every damn night.

True story there. I think, maybe, some of the difference here is the constant negative, even from some on the right. Trump's an ass. I don't think you'll find many people who disagree. He's pompous, he's an ass, he's arrogant. He's not a politician, which is why he was probably elected. He's also gotten a shit ton of things done, including the lowest unemployment rate in decades, including record low black unemployment, removed the US from several TERRIBLE financial deals in NAFTA and others - and enacted some really good legislation, such as the one that helps free blacks from petty offenses. He was the first to talk about suspending travel, and international travel some 10 days after the Virus - and was called Racist by Pelosi and Schurmer for wanting to ban travel from/to China.

Is he perfect, nope. Should he stay off twitter, without a doubt. Is he racist - eh, I don't think so. Has he been a terrible President - no, not from a policy standpoint. Even if there are disagreements with the policy, he's not done a bad job from this standpoint at all. The problem is - no one can control him, and in a "business" where everyone is bought and controlled - he's an enigma and a real problem to the status quo. There's also a large movement to put social issues at the forefront of this country as core policies are eroding away at the core. Trump seems more focused on these core policies (NAFTA, jobs, infastructure, etc) than the trend today with social agendas. It's my personal belief that we need more of a focus on these core policies to strengthen our country in these times otherwise no matter which side of the fence you are one with social agendas, it won't matter - there won't be a country left for it to matter.

Just some of my thoughts.

 

[Cincyfan78]

I didn't mean for a simple post to the "Southern Strategy" to be difinitive.... I've also read a bunch about various interpretations. But, I put it out there as a simple idea about how politics have changed over time. The idea that Republicans in the era of Lincoln were somehow the same Republicans in the era of Trump is just not true. Both party platforms continue to evolve. I think they've even evolved a lot in the past 30 years (for example, Dems are moving further and further from workers rights).

I enjoy your reading your thoughts and would consider having you on my team in the rumble against Kramer and his thugs at the Dayton Mall.

Dayton Mall, baby!

Like you said, we won't change our opinions, but this kind of discourse used to be common - that has changed over the past 10-20 years where having opposing views was OK. We can disagree and still be civil to one another. I wish more people would realize that.

Cheers!

 

[alf8478]

I guess this isn't a thread about baseball.

 

[Cincyfan78]

I guess this isn't a thread about baseball.

The Reds suck and this was far more interesting...lol

Don't like it? Dayton mall, buddy!

 

[cincygrad]

Someone told me the Reds were going to be good this season.... Like that they were going to win their division.... I don't know anything about baseball these days, but I knew this couldn't be correct. 2020 has been a weird year - But it's not THAT weird.

 

[CrashDavisSports]

Someone told me the Reds were going to be good this season.... Like that they were going to win their division.... I don't know anything about baseball these days, but I knew this couldn't be correct. 2020 has been a weird year - But it's not THAT weird.

LMAO. Yeah. Asteroids potentially hitting the earth and wiping out mankind, terrifying but possible, Reds winning their division....don't be freaking crazy!

The bullpen is so bad, and the offense outside a few players are so wildly inconsistent. Our starting pitching is really good, but Castillo is a bit inconsistent also.

Difference this year, they are allowing 8 of the 15 teams per conference into the playoffs. So 16 playoff teams this year. I think they can make it if they become more consistent with their starting pitching.

Bauer, Grey and Castellanos have been lights out.

 

[Cincyfan78]

David Bell is in way over his head. He is way too far into the analytical side of the game. I believe that you should use those numbers for any advantage you can get, but he goes overboard and it has cost them several games already this season.

Last night was another example - with 1B open, 1out in the bottom of the 9th, instead of walking and setting up the DP and facing a lesser hitter - he chose to pitch to Wong. Ballgame.

You have to have a feel for the game and use the numbers to help that feel - you can't ignore that side of managing and simply focus on the numbers - just like you can't just always manage by feel. He's way too analytical - and I think he is not a good fit for managing at this time.