My brother in law has good friends who work in the Marlins front office. I will not reveal who as I never give up my sources. But the Marlins offered the same as the Mets and Phillies did, but Sheff didn't want to return to the Marlins, or even go to Philly, he wanted to sign with the Mets, and only the Mets. He's always wanted to play for them. THIS is an FYI so people can stop saying why the Marlins don't pull the trigger on such moves, they tried.

i rather have Brett Carroll

Not that it matters now, but I dont believe that one bit

I have a friend who work in the Marlin Back Office and he told me they didn't try. not giving up my source.

heh

I don't believe it either. Not to say you are lying, but you are 3 connections away from the actual source; and we have no idea how much the actual source knows. It's like the game of telephone, by the time this info gets passed on to us it's distorted. Samson straight up said no interest in Shef on the LeBatard show the other day. He could have given the typical 'we are evaluating all options to make the team better blah blah blah' instead he straight up said No, no interest at all.

Considering Sheffield is a shell of his former self (being generous), it's better off he goes off to the Apple and sucks for them.

GFY Sheff. I can't wait to see you in a Mets uniform and boo like crazy.

Sheffield used to be my favorite player, but as the years have gone by...he's just an asshole. I haven't really liked him for awhile now.

i like sheffield but we really needed a left handed bat off the bench and that's not what he is.

i rather have Brett Carroll

Then you're the only one.

I don't believe it either. Not to say you are lying, but you are 3 connections away from the actual source; and we have no idea how much the actual source knows. It's like the game of telephone, by the time this info gets passed on to us it's distorted. Samson straight up said no interest in Shef on the LeBatard show the other day. He could have given the typical 'we are evaluating all options to make the team better blah blah blah' instead he straight up said No, no interest at all.

Samson said the same thing about Pudge.

is the mets' goal for each season now to acquire as many former marlins as they possibly can?

 

i know samson is forever immortalized because of his leadership in the stadium deal and i might just kiss the bottom of his shoes for it. but every time i hear him comment on a baseball decision on the radio, he seemingly has no idea what he's talking about. it's almost offensive to the intellects of Admin and co. for him to make such uninformed and worthless comments as a representative of the organization, but i guess Admin and co.'s collective brilliance allows them to ignore him. i would just once like to hear samson say, after being asked a baseball question, i'm not really sure and i'll leave that to the geniuses we have in the baseball operations side.

Here is the deal with Samson:

 

 

He has so little to do with running the team it's borderline hilarious, assuming you find blatant nepotism funny.

 

If you are angry about something to do with the organization, on the field or off, blaming Samson is like blaming the Queen of England because you don't like our trade agreement with Canada.

I dont believe that one bit. The same day he got released he was interviewed by MLB Network and they asked him where he thought he would go. He responsed by saying Phillies were after him and would love to play for Rays or Marlins.

Here is the deal with Samson:

 

 

He has so little to do with running the team it's borderline hilarious, assuming you find blatant nepotism funny.

 

If you are angry about something to do with the organization, on the field or off, blaming Samson is like blaming the Queen of England because you don't like our trade agreement with Canada.

 

 

There is no such thing as "The Queen of England". The monarch in Britain is only known as the King/Queen of The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland until 1937, and since then as of The United Kingdom of Great Britain & Northern Ireland. It has been such for more than 300 years. (The act of union was ratified by Scottish and English parliaments in 1707)

 

As for Canada, the monarch is separately, and independantly known as King/Queen of Canada. If Britain were to become a republic tomorrow, Elizabeth Windsor-Mountbatten would still be Queen of Canada, and also of, Australia, New Zealand, The Bahamas, Jamaica and a number of other states.

 

As for Samson, he is and will always be a weasel. Loria keeps in the organization for God knows what reason. Loria is to blame. He needs to go.

Here is the deal with Samson:

 

 

He has so little to do with running the team it's borderline hilarious, assuming you find blatant nepotism funny.

 

If you are angry about something to do with the organization, on the field or off, blaming Samson is like blaming the Queen of England because you don't like our trade agreement with Canada.

 

 

There is no such thing as "The Queen of England". The monarch in Britain is only known as the King/Queen of The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland until 1937, and since then as of The United Kingdom of Great Britain & Northern Ireland. It has been such for more than 300 years. (The act of union was ratified by Scottish and English parliaments in 1707)

 

As for Canada, the monarch is separately, and independantly known as King/Queen of Canada. If Britain were to become a republic tomorrow, Elizabeth Windsor-Mountbatten would still be Queen of Canada, and also of, Australia, New Zealand, The Bahamas, Jamaica and a number of other states.

 

As for Samson, he is and will always be a weasel. Loria keeps in the organization for God knows what reason. Loria is to blame. He needs to go.

 

Am I the only one that found this post (while informative) still completely hilarious?

Here is the deal with Samson:

 

 

He has so little to do with running the team it's borderline hilarious, assuming you find blatant nepotism funny.

 

If you are angry about something to do with the organization, on the field or off, blaming Samson is like blaming the Queen of England because you don't like our trade agreement with Canada.

 

 

There is no such thing as "The Queen of England". The monarch in Britain is only known as the King/Queen of The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland until 1937, and since then as of The United Kingdom of Great Britain & Northern Ireland. It has been such for more than 300 years. (The act of union was ratified by Scottish and English parliaments in 1707)

 

As for Canada, the monarch is separately, and independantly known as King/Queen of Canada. If Britain were to become a republic tomorrow, Elizabeth Windsor-Mountbatten would still be Queen of Canada, and also of, Australia, New Zealand, The Bahamas, Jamaica and a number of other states.

 

As for Samson, he is and will always be a weasel. Loria keeps in the organization for God knows what reason. Loria is to blame. He needs to go.

 

Am I the only one that found this post (while informative) still completely hilarious?

 

Arguably one of the most obnoxious posts I've read in my (admittedly short) time here, even by Mungo standards.

Here is the deal with Samson:

 

 

He has so little to do with running the team it's borderline hilarious, assuming you find blatant nepotism funny.

 

If you are angry about something to do with the organization, on the field or off, blaming Samson is like blaming the Queen of England because you don't like our trade agreement with Canada.

 

 

There is no such thing as "The Queen of England". The monarch in Britain is only known as the King/Queen of The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland until 1937, and since then as of The United Kingdom of Great Britain & Northern Ireland. It has been such for more than 300 years. (The act of union was ratified by Scottish and English parliaments in 1707)

 

As for Canada, the monarch is separately, and independantly known as King/Queen of Canada. If Britain were to become a republic tomorrow, Elizabeth Windsor-Mountbatten would still be Queen of Canada, and also of, Australia, New Zealand, The Bahamas, Jamaica and a number of other states.

 

As for Samson, he is and will always be a weasel. Loria keeps in the organization for God knows what reason. Loria is to blame. He needs to go.

 

Am I the only one that found this post (while informative) still completely hilarious?

 

Arguably one of the most obnoxious posts I've read in my (admittedly short) time here, even by Mungo standards.

 

Obnoxious why ? Because I truly believe that Loria is the worst and most unfit owner in MLB ? I will continue to harp on that until he is gone, and we have an owner that truly believes in making the Marlins a winner.

Here is the deal with Samson:

 

 

He has so little to do with running the team it's borderline hilarious, assuming you find blatant nepotism funny.

 

If you are angry about something to do with the organization, on the field or off, blaming Samson is like blaming the Queen of England because you don't like our trade agreement with Canada.

 

 

There is no such thing as "The Queen of England". The monarch in Britain is only known as the King/Queen of The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland until 1937, and since then as of The United Kingdom of Great Britain & Northern Ireland. It has been such for more than 300 years. (The act of union was ratified by Scottish and English parliaments in 1707)

 

As for Canada, the monarch is separately, and independantly known as King/Queen of Canada. If Britain were to become a republic tomorrow, Elizabeth Windsor-Mountbatten would still be Queen of Canada, and also of, Australia, New Zealand, The Bahamas, Jamaica and a number of other states.

 

As for Samson, he is and will always be a weasel. Loria keeps in the organization for God knows what reason. Loria is to blame. He needs to go.

 

Am I the only one that found this post (while informative) still completely hilarious?

 

Arguably one of the most obnoxious posts I've read in my (admittedly short) time here, even by Mungo standards.

 

Obnoxious why ? Because I truly believe that Loria is the worst and most unfit owner in MLB ? I will continue to harp on that until he is gone, and we have an owner that truly believes in making the Marlins a winner.

 

No, not because of the Loria part. You say the same thing over and over - nothing new, so nothing particularly obnoxious. The whole lecture, which sounded like it was copied and pasted from a website (not saying it was, just commenting on the style) was obnoxious. Your didactic post was silly, since Rab was making an analogy to the Queen as a figurehead, which she is, just like Samson. And he's right. And it doesn't matter what the Queen is officially called.

It was as if you saw the chance to make a legitimate, factual point, and you jumped all over it. You are apparently correct about your statement. +1. But what the heck difference did it make here? And again, the tone of your post - like you were screaming "OMG Rab, I can't believe you said that, it's sooooooooo wrong, I'm going to tell you the facts, you idiot. God, some people's children!!!!! (Rab must be related to Loria, that jerk!)"

Here is the deal with Samson:

 

 

He has so little to do with running the team it's borderline hilarious, assuming you find blatant nepotism funny.

 

If you are angry about something to do with the organization, on the field or off, blaming Samson is like blaming the Queen of England because you don't like our trade agreement with Canada.

 

 

There is no such thing as "The Queen of England". The monarch in Britain is only known as the King/Queen of The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland until 1937, and since then as of The United Kingdom of Great Britain & Northern Ireland. It has been such for more than 300 years. (The act of union was ratified by Scottish and English parliaments in 1707)

 

As for Canada, the monarch is separately, and independantly known as King/Queen of Canada. If Britain were to become a republic tomorrow, Elizabeth Windsor-Mountbatten would still be Queen of Canada, and also of, Australia, New Zealand, The Bahamas, Jamaica and a number of other states.

 

As for Samson, he is and will always be a weasel. Loria keeps in the organization for God knows what reason. Loria is to blame. He needs to go.

 

Wow...

Sheffield used to be my favorite player, but as the years have gone by...he's just an asshole. I haven't really liked him for awhile now.

 

 

same here

No, not because of the Loria part. You say the same thing over and over - nothing new, so nothing particularly obnoxious. The whole lecture, which sounded like it was copied and pasted from a website (not saying it was, just commenting on the style) was obnoxious. Your didactic post was silly, since Rab was making an analogy to the Queen as a figurehead, which she is, just like Samson. And he's right. And it doesn't matter what the Queen is officially called.

It was as if you saw the chance to make a legitimate, factual point, and you jumped all over it. You are apparently correct about your statement. +1. But what the heck difference did it make here? And again, the tone of your post - like you were screaming "OMG Rab, I can't believe you said that, it's sooooooooo wrong, I'm going to tell you the facts, you idiot. God, some people's children!!!!! (Rab must be related to Loria, that jerk!)"

 

I can assure you that was not copied and pasted from a website . I am a historian, a genealogist specializing in Royal and Noble families, journalist for a number of magazines including Royalty Monthly, and Hello magazine, and a non-fiction writer who has co-written or shadowed a number of published works, including the soon to be published Living Decendants of Charlemagne.

 

I only sought to clarify something that bugs me to no end. The improper use of Her Majesty's title. It's tatamount to calling President Obama, President of only the African-Americans. Its incorrect and disrespectful.

 

I take enough crap from the posters at this site, because I feel the Marlins would be better served with another owner, actually any other owner. :banghead I admit I do it to get a rise out of them, and some of them fall for it each and every time. :shifty

 

Most of them understand it, and I think actually get the joke, but some I guess just are too thick headed to follow it.

No, not because of the Loria part. You say the same thing over and over - nothing new, so nothing particularly obnoxious. The whole lecture, which sounded like it was copied and pasted from a website (not saying it was, just commenting on the style) was obnoxious. Your didactic post was silly, since Rab was making an analogy to the Queen as a figurehead, which she is, just like Samson. And he's right. And it doesn't matter what the Queen is officially called.

It was as if you saw the chance to make a legitimate, factual point, and you jumped all over it. You are apparently correct about your statement. +1. But what the heck difference did it make here? And again, the tone of your post - like you were screaming "OMG Rab, I can't believe you said that, it's sooooooooo wrong, I'm going to tell you the facts, you idiot. God, some people's children!!!!! (Rab must be related to Loria, that jerk!)"

 

I can assure you that was not copied and pasted from a website . I am a historian, a genealogist specializing in Royal and Noble families, journalist for a number of magazines including Royalty Monthly, and Hello magazine, and a non-fiction writer who has co-written or shadowed a number of published works, including the soon to be published Living Decendants of Charlemagne.

 

I only sought to clarify something that bugs me to no end. The improper use of Her Majesty's title. It's tatamount to calling President Obama, President of only the African-Americans. Its incorrect and disrespectful.

 

I take enough crap from the posters at this site, because I feel the Marlins would be better served with another owner, actually any other owner. :banghead I admit I do it to get a rise out of them, and some of them fall for it each and every time. :shifty

 

Most of them understand it, and I think actually get the joke, but some I guess just are too thick headed to follow it.

Actually, there is no such thing as "President Obama". His title is President of the United States Barack Hussein Obama II.

 

Gotta love it.

No, not because of the Loria part. You say the same thing over and over - nothing new, so nothing particularly obnoxious. The whole lecture, which sounded like it was copied and pasted from a website (not saying it was, just commenting on the style) was obnoxious. Your didactic post was silly, since Rab was making an analogy to the Queen as a figurehead, which she is, just like Samson. And he's right. And it doesn't matter what the Queen is officially called.

It was as if you saw the chance to make a legitimate, factual point, and you jumped all over it. You are apparently correct about your statement. +1. But what the heck difference did it make here? And again, the tone of your post - like you were screaming "OMG Rab, I can't believe you said that, it's sooooooooo wrong, I'm going to tell you the facts, you idiot. God, some people's children!!!!! (Rab must be related to Loria, that jerk!)"

 

I can assure you that was not copied and pasted from a website . I am a historian, a genealogist specializing in Royal and Noble families, journalist for a number of magazines including Royalty Monthly, and Hello magazine, and a non-fiction writer who has co-written or shadowed a number of published works, including the soon to be published Living Decendants of Charlemagne.

 

I only sought to clarify something that bugs me to no end. The improper use of Her Majesty's title. It's tatamount to calling President Obama, President of only the African-Americans. Its incorrect and disrespectful.

 

I take enough crap from the posters at this site, because I feel the Marlins would be better served with another owner, actually any other owner. :banghead I admit I do it to get a rise out of them, and some of them fall for it each and every time. :shifty

 

Most of them understand it, and I think actually get the joke, but some I guess just are too thick headed to follow it.

 

I clearly said that your post/lecture sounded like it was copied and pasted from a website (not saying it was, just commenting on the style) [and] was obnoxious. Clearly and deliberately stated that way, because I was 0% accusing you. I was, however, picking on your tone, which gave off quite an obnoxious vibe. I'm sure you are an excellent writer/journalist, but most of your posts don't sound like this (as I recall), and this one sounded silly.

 

It's fine that you wanted to clarify that, and I found it interesting. But it's the way you said it.

 

And that analogy is awful. You're comparing countries/borders, which are actual geo-political lines of demarcation, and race, which does no sort of thing. Race is independent of geography, and it is not a priori significant in any way, relative to where/whom Obama is considered the President of. It's tantamount to calling President Obama instead President of the Eastern Seaboard, or the Midwest, or the Southeast, or New England, etc. Race was a very poor choice, and not because it's a "sensitive" issue - just because it's a poor analogy.

 

And obviously I'm aware of your MO with Loria, which is fine and your opinion, which alone makes it valid. I don't agree with it, but I both understand your position and the "joke" of it, yet clearly state that my criticism is independent of that. (not saying that you were saying I don't get it - just clarifying)