Jump to content

MarlinsFan253

Members
  • Posts

    2,308
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by MarlinsFan253

  1. It's funny that you mention whining when the movie is about the original trilogy's hero becoming a whiney quitter which is completely uncharacteristic of that character. Between Poe's tantrum and Kylo Ren's destructive tantrum (his second of the trilogy), this movie was all about developing emotionally unstable and insecure characters. It was just bad story telling: Subplots that didn't further the overall plot, instances deus ex machina, poor character development... Not to mention the plot of the movie was about running out of fuel while being pursued through hyperspace as if the original trilogy didn't set the precedent that this was already possible using one means or another. The biggest subplot's inciting incident was illegal parking. The movie did nothing to further the overall plot of this trilogy. By the end of act 2, we should know what to look forward to in act 3. This movie gave us nothing other than "Rey will have to go after Kylo Ren again." That part is a no-brainer. There were numerous scenes that I liked and some of the effects were great, but the direction this trilogy is going is actually damaging to the story telling of the original trilogy. This is evident just by looking at the titles alone. IV: A New Hope V: The Empire Strikes Back VI: Return of the Jedi VII: The Force Awakens VIII: The Last Jedi (We were kidding about ROTJ) IX: REAL Return of the Jedi? Yes, I am a HUGE Star Wars fan. Yes, I am disappointed—not just as a fan but as someone that gets writing.
  2. I'm more than just a little disappointed in how the first few games have gone. I'm just shaking my head.
  3. I'll be home in Michigan, wishing I could afford (or justify buying) a subscription to MLB.tv.
  4. i think I've been here since this was a geocities page and Admin scribbled updates in crayon. I recognize your screen name. In those days, I think some of the regulars were Moneyball and Hollyberry? Do those names sound familiar?
  5. I think the last season I regularly visited these forums was 2005 or 2006? Is there anyone from those days still around? Tough season so far this year.
  6. I've said it before and I'll say it again... Josh Johnson is the next Tim Spooneybarger. He has potential to have a great career but he just can't stay healthy. I still think the organization should let him go eventually. It's not too much to ask for pitchers that can keep themselves from falling apart every other season or so.
  7. I have to admit the Marlins had one of the worst showings on opening day. It worries me. It wasn't worse than the Nats losing 11-1 to the Phillies, or the Cubs losing 16-5 to Atlanta. Yeah, but that is expected from the Nats... expected by me anyway.
  8. I have to admit the Marlins had one of the worst showings on opening day. It worries me.
  9. i cant believe we are even talking about this. this is insane, if south florida cant support the marlins, NOONE else can... i wanna see one of these other "optional" cities like portland or vegas build them a half a billion dollar ballpark. portland is a cow town with a population less than hialeah and vegas is going bankrupt. I'd say Oklahoma City might be able to. The NBA never saw that as an option and then quickly changed their minds while New Orleans was playing there after Hurricane Katrina and now we have the OK City Thunder. I am surprised that Indianapolis never comes up. Sadly, I bet even California could support another team though I would hate to see that happen.
  10. If you were a real Marlins fan, you wouldnt want us to move I don't think the location of the organization should determine how much of a fan I am. I've been a fan since the beginning and I am sure that I can spend the next 70 years of my life getting excited about recycling the team every few years for some young and upcoming stars, but I'd really like to see some team development and a packed stadium when I watch the games online. It just gets sad when the fans get really excited about a player and just as soon as he has proven his worth, he is sent elsewhere because the Marlins can't afford to pay his relatively small salary. Even sadder is the fact that most of the games have tiny crowds. Our single-A team in Grand Rapids attracts more fans than the Marlins on many nights. That just shouldn't be happening. Everyone keeps looking to a new stadium to solve all the problems, but that just won't do it. I think a new stadium is just a bad investment. It just isn't easy being a Marlins fan.
  11. I found an article that does an accurate comparison between the Marlins organization and the American automobile industry. It sounds odd, but it kind of makes sense. See the link below. Hot Stove Daily: Florida Marlins The Marlins really should move to a location where the general population will support the organization. I used to be strongly opposed to this because I just couldn't stand the thought of my team changing its name, but now I support it because then maybe they can earn enough revenue to keep my favorite players around. The departure of Josh Willingham and Scott Olsen really struck a nerve with me this year and the possible departure of Dan Uggla is also upsetting. It just gets to be a little old when you see these great young players come up out of nowhere and leave before they really achieve superstar status. That has been the pattern for this team and I can't stand it anymore. As much as I love the concept of building a good team around talented young players versus purchasing superstars like the Yankees organization, I would still like to watch the team develop over a few years and make a run for the playoffs. It seems like just as the team starts to really come together, it gets split up. Being an out of market fan, my enjoyment really wouldn't change if the Marlins move... unless of course they move to Grand Rapids, Michigan which is where I live. Then my enjoyment would increase a lot! Of course, GR couldn't support a pro team though they would definitely get more fans in the stadium than the Marlins do right now. The evidence for this is the fact that we strongly support our single-A team here. And no, I am not seriously trying to make the case for the Marlins to move here, in case someone thinks that is what I am doing. It is simply wishful thinking.
  12. The sad thing is, I heard about the low attendance while listening to a local radio show in Grand Rapids, Michigan. The Florida Marlins fans living in South Florida are a joke all over the country. I think the team should follow the footsteps of the Seattle Supersonics and move to Oklahoma City... that or San Antonio. Heck, they'd get a larger attendance if they just moved up here to Grand Rapids. If they build the new stadium for the team in Florida, they are going to lose so much money. It is just a horrible business move. The team has been around since 1993 and they have won two World Series yet they can't get fans in the seats. It doesn't take a BBA to see that there is no gain by staying in South Florida.
  13. I can't believe the attendance could be that bad at a MLB game. I think the Marlins should move out of South Florida. The fans are too lame down there and they will never generate any money. Being an out of state fan that has only watched the Marlins when they are playing in Pittsburgh, Chicago or Milwaukee, I can honestly say that there are plenty of fans out there because there are always a lot of them showing up to the out of town games. If the organization has any brains, they will give up on this new stadium deal and move the franchise somewhere in the country where people actually appreciate good baseball.
  14. I hate to say it, but I think Josh Johnson is going to be the next Tim Spooneybarger. He is too young to be injured so often. These injuries will probably repeat until he eventually just falls off the face of the earth. Having said that, please prove me wrong because I think Josh Johnson COULD be one hell of a pitcher.
  15. We are in Milwaukee and we are about to head to the game. Go Marlins!
  16. I use MLB TV, but I think the video quality is worse this year because they want people to subscribe to their higher quality streams. I like it most of the time, but opening day sucked because I couldn't connect to the Marlins game until about the 5th inning. Since then, it has been easy to connect to and I enjoy watching games. I am also glad that they got rid of the annoying sounds and music that plays between innings. When I finally switch to high-def in the home and get myself a 100 inch screen for my projector, I will probably start watching the games on TV instead of over the internet.
  17. Here is something that Ron Paul had to say that I found very interesting and accurate. The senseless and horrific killings last week on the campus of Virginia Tech University reinforced an uneasy feeling many Americans experienced after September 11th: namely, that government cannot protect us. No matter how many laws we pass, no matter how many police or federal agents we put on the streets, a determined individual or group still can cause great harm. Perhaps the only good that can come from these terrible killings is a reinforced understanding that we as individuals are responsible for our safety and the safety of our families. Although Virginia does allow individuals to carry concealed weapons if they first obtain a permit, college campuses within the state are specifically exempted. Virginia Tech, like all Virginia colleges, is therefore a gun-free zone, at least for private individuals. And as we witnessed, it didn't matter how many guns the police had. Only private individuals on the scene could have prevented or lessened this tragedy. Prohibiting guns on campus made the Virginia Tech students less safe, not more. The Virginia Tech tragedy may not lead directly to more gun control, but I fear it will lead to more people control. Thanks to our media and many government officials, Americans have become conditioned to view the state as our protector and the solution to every problem. Whenever something terrible happens, especially when it becomes a national news story, people reflexively demand that government do something. This impulse almost always leads to bad laws and the loss of liberty. It is completely at odds with the best American traditions of self-reliance and rugged individualism. Do we really want to live in a world of police checkpoints, surveillance cameras, and metal detectors? Do we really believe government can provide total security? Do we want to involuntarily commit every disaffected, disturbed, or alienated person who fantasizes about violence? Or can we accept that liberty is more important than the illusion of state-provided security? I fear that Congress will use this terrible event to push for more government mandated mental health programs. The therapeutic nanny state only encourages individuals to view themselves as victims, and reject personal responsibility for their actions. Certainly there are legitimate organic mental illnesses, but it is the role of doctors and families, not the government, to diagnose and treat such illnesses. Freedom is not defined by safety. Freedom is defined by the ability of citizens to live without government interference. Government cannot create a world without risks, nor would we really wish to live in such a fictional place. Only a totalitarian society would even claim absolute safety as a worthy ideal, because it would require total state control over its citizens' lives. Liberty has meaning only if we still believe in it when terrible things happen and a false government security blanket beckons.
  18. There's no causality with your DC example. If anything, tougher gun restrictions means crime and murder are already out of control and, hence, the city enacted tougher restrictions. In other words, you could argue that the restrictions came out too late to keep the murder rate about the same. In addition, how do you know the murder rate wouldn't have gone up quicker if they had not enacted tougher restrictions? You don't. Gun control laws don't do anything. How many violent criminals will not feel guilty about murdering someone, but will feel guilty for obtaining a gun illegally? Most likely, zero. Citizens need a means to defend themselves from those criminals. Knowing that citizens can carry guns acts as a deterrent. It works in Texas and murder rates tend to be pretty low in places with fewer restrictions on where people can legally carry guns. I'm not saying gun control in general because then that would include places where it is easy for anyone to get a gun legally. Sorry if my thoughts seem choppy, I am distracted by the game right now. hehe.
  19. If he breaks it, you will be able to hear me booing from anywhere in the country. You might hear me too. I am hoping Barry gets injured and retires before he gets to the record.
  20. 1. Americans should pay for their own health care or find employers that will. 2. How has Michael Moore not eaten himself to death yet? 3. The heat emitted from Michael Moore's body is the real reason for global warming. 4. Vote Libertarian in 2008.
  21. Restrict who can legally carry them not where they can carry them. I love how people think banning guns from certain areas will make that area safer. Mass killings would be imposible if good people could carry guns anywhere. 33 people were killed at Virginia Tech and the best defense they had was hiding under a desk. That is ridiculous. In 1976, Washington, D.C., enacted one of the most restrictive gun control laws in the nation. Since then, the city's murder rate has risen 134 percent while the national murder rate has dropped 2 %. Luckily, the federal courts repealed that law and many states are moving in the right direction as well.
×
×
  • Create New...