wrongfullyaccuzd

This thread is inspired by Rick Reilly's article in last week's Sports Illustrated, where he questions the amazingness of Ichiro's new single season hits mark. I have never been a fan of Ichiro, and remain underimpressed with his feat. Halx seems to be the only one who agrees with me (as evidenced from the Ichiro! thread.) George Sisler set his record with 8 fewer games, as Reilly points out. At that point Ichiro had not broken the record, so as far as I'm concerned, Ichiro's mark will and should forever have an asterisk next to it in the books, just as the home runs will. Everyone knows Barry and Mac and Sammy and even Maris had more games than Ruth, and yet no one seems to be recognizing the fact that Ichiro has more games.

On the other hand, and perhaps more under my skin, is the New England Patriots. The media is making such a huge deal about their streak of wins, and yet no one is mentioning the fact that their "18 in a row" is not even a record that is recognized by the official NFL record book. The record that is so often misquoted is consecutive regular season games won. Am I deliberately bashing on the Patriots because I hate them? Yes, a little. I do understand that 18 games is impressive, especially when it includes the playoffs and Super Bowl, blah, blah, blah. That's not the point. The point is they haven't tied any record yet. They're still 2 games short of the 1933-1934 Chicago Bears, who hold the real record.

I also realize that with their next 3 games being against Miami, Seattle, and the New York Jets, all at home, the Patriots have a good chance of tying or breaking the record. Good for them if they do it. But they haven't done anything yet, record-wise.

djtestudo

Asterisks are stupid.

He broke the record for hits in a season.

Should NFL players have records with asterisks because the schedule went from 14 to 16 games?

Should we put an asterisk next to the guys that hit .400 because modern players have to play eight extra games with that many more chances to drop below?

Asterisks are an embarrasment to record books. Either something is a record, or isn't. Make it the record, or you have to split up the eras.

One more thing. In 84 years, including 43 in the 162-game era, NO ONE was even close to breaking this record before Ichiro. You have to look at more then, "well, he has eight more games," when obviously that hasn't mattered for anyone else.

__________________
"Final thought: I just rented Michael Moore's Bowling for Columbine. Frankly, it was the worst sports movie I've ever seen."
--Peter Schmuck, The (Baltimore) Sun

Konichiwaneko

I think it's harder now to hit 400 then it was back then. There are so many factors now.



Also what about records that have been made that could never be broken again? Should they have a special notification?

Cy Youngs win record, isn't it like 500+ I don't think phyisically you are allow to pitch in the majors that much anymore. Should some exemptions be put in place?

__________________

Spartak

It amazes me how soft the Pats schedule is.

__________________
I can read your mind... looking at you... I can read your mind...

wrongfullyaccuzd

Fine, there don't have to be actual asterisks, but people who care know. For instance, I love Bruce Smith and all, but I know it took him roughly 9,000 years to break Reggie White's record. And while I'm on the subject of sacks,
don't tell me you won't think of Brett Favre's gimme-slide sack for Michael Strahan for his record.

Records are stupid.

Konichiwaneko

a game based on stats of the individual, records are what makes the game sometimes Wrongfully.

What does it matter anyways? Records are meant to be broken. It's what allows us to imagine what are athletic heroes of today are compared to those of our fathers.

__________________

djtestudo

Pete Rose played until he was about 50 to break Ty Cobb's hit record. Does that make his acheivment any less impressive?

__________________
"Final thought: I just rented Michael Moore's Bowling for Columbine. Frankly, it was the worst sports movie I've ever seen."
--Peter Schmuck, The (Baltimore) Sun

radioguy

i don't think how many games or how long somebody played should be factored into a record. the hitting record was 257 (?) and ichiro hit 261 (?), he now holds the record. forgive me if my numbers are wrong. are we going to not count bonds' eventual homerun record because of better medicine and rehab capabilities that weren't around for ruth or aaron? times change, records fall. it's still impressive.

tarvuz

How many black folks did Sisler have to play with? How many tired starters going the distance pitched to Ichiro. Really impossible to compare the two records. Sufficed to say that nobody has come close in modern era.

__________________
funny quip

byesman

But wasn't the asterick removed in the late 60's? I understand what you are saying, and I am also underimpressed with Suzuki, ( noone else can go by their first name,) but I look at it like this. Jim Brown is the greatest running back to play in the NFL. He played 9 years and gained 12,000 + yards in 12 and 14 game seasons. But when his record was broken, it was broken, and he is now 4th or 5th on the list. But if he would have played the 15-16 years that some RB's do now, the record would still be unbroken. But, we can't imagine what would have been. Maybe if Sisler played 162 games in a season, he would've taken a few nights off. We'll never know.

__________________
If after I depart this vale you ever remember me and have thought to please my ghost,
forgive some sinner, and wink your eye at some homely girl.

H.L. Mencken