a700hitter

Puljols should tear up the league.

as I said, the reasons for Tampa's success don't matter, because they are not excuses for beating the Sox that had four times the payroll. Picking up 9 games on a team in September is cleaning their clock. It really is.

I have some pictures that I took at the old Yankee Stadium in 1973 where you can see lots of empty seats against the best teams in the league-- the Tigers, O's and A's.

It's hard for the young Sox fans of today to understand what you are saying. I think that you needed to live through that season to understand it. It was the birth of Red Sox Nation. Yaz and the '67 Sox gave a rebirth to baseball in all of New England and we were the original fans of what is now Red Sox Nation.

Where are the years before 1985. The Yanks had the highest average payroll in the 1980's. The fact the the amounts were much lower doesn't change that the Yankees spent the most in the 1980's. Proportionately the Yanks were pretty close to outspending the Sox by the same amount as they do today. As I pointed out that in 1992, one of the few years when the Sox outspent the Yanks, the Sox came in last place with an under .500 record -- the worst year for the Sox after 1966.

See the language in your post that I put in bold. On the one hand, you say that the Rays are not a fluke and one line later, you call them the "exception". The Sox have so much more in the way of resources that the Rays should not be beating them with their payroll. It doesn't matter whether the Rays are for real and really good, and it doesn't matter why the Rays are good. They lost their entire bullpen after 2010 and completely rebuilt it in 2011 and cleaned our clocks. I hope Ben & Cherries can build such a good bullpen from scratch. We know Theo never did.

Winning the Division will matter much more when there is a second Wild Card team and the WC teams have to play a 1 game playoff. We will have to see how the Sox do under the new alignment.

We used to do much better at this before 2002 and we should be doing better at this since 2002 than the Rays.

The wanting to see your team win when you go to the game argument really wasn't the best way to make the argument. So, would you rather the Sox average 95 wins a year for 10 years, but finish second to the Yanks every year, or average 90-91 wins and finish first every year?

Boise State and Alabama? I can't relate to that, because I don't care much about any college sports. I never said that it wasn't more difficult to beat the Yankees than other teams. My point is that it has always be more difficult to beat the Yankees than other teams, not just since 2002. The Sox from 1972 -2002 did a better job of beating the Yankees more often. The Yanks have been owned by the Steinbrenner family for the entire period and it was always tough to beat them. That being said, we used to beat them more often in the first 30 years of Steinbrenner than the last 10, so it is not an excuse for this ownership vs. past ownership.

This is a huge cop out. Steinbrenner has owned the Yanks since 1972 and he always lavished money on the team, yet we beat the Yanks in the standings more often before this ownership took over. Yankee money is not an excuse, because Steinbrenner always spent big. Also, the Rays have beaten the Yanks twice in 10 years just like us and they have a lot less money than either team.

Win percentage means little. That's my point. As you point out, the Sox are in the same division as the Yankees, their chief rivals. Beating the Yanks is a good measure of success. We've done it twice in 10 years and one of those times the Rays beat us out for the division. Prior to this ownership, we used to beat the Yankees more often.

For all the great things the ownership has done in building this financial giant of an enterprise the team management from the GM down should have done better than win 1 Division title. Finishing first once in 10 years is nothing great to crow about. It's just not. I don't care how many wins we have averaged. Both Zimmer Little had a better win percentages with the Sox than Francona, but I wouldn't say either that he was a better manager than Tito. Average # of wins don't mean a whole lot.

Another possible under the radar move for Ben & Cherries?

I never said that this ownership's tenure had been a laughingstock, but the last couple of years have been a big disappointment. As you have pointed out this has been a period of "great wealth" and because the Sox owners have built this huge financial enterprise, they (not us the fans) can't tolerate back to back years like 2010 and 2011 and follow it up with no playoffs in 2012. The brand they have built is one of excellence. What happened in 2011 with the collapse hurt that brand whether you want to believe it or not, because it was a collapse that was not only unprecedented in Red Sox history but in the history of baseball. It was the reason why the owners cleaned house with regard to FO and onfield management. Whether you want to believe Theo was shown the door or not, in the words of Hawk Harrelson--"He gone!" Based on Ben's statement this week, they really have little interest in getting compensation for Theo. It is because of the great pains that the current ownership has made in building this tremendous brand that I think they will build a team in 2012 that will return to the playoffs even if it means breaking the LT cap. Up to this point of the off season, the FO has made no moves in that direction. The moves that have been made are going in the wrong direction IMO. Until Ben & Cherries starts making moves in the right direction I will remain uneasy and upset about 2011. It was a disgrace and it did turn the Sox temporarily into a laughingstock as result of poor leadership and dysfunctional management.