Just having fun.


Gotta be tough being a Rangers fan losing in heartbreaking fashion every year. One of my good friends was tearing up Facebook last night after the loss

I didn't really watch a whole lot of Rangers games this year.

Is the collapse based on the manager's actions or the players not showing up?

Not at all. Tough year with the myriad of pitching injuries but they were still a contender to the final(+1) day. Still a good franchise with lots of talent and hopes for next season. I'll take that any day over rooting for a bottom dweller or a team that can't ever seem to win a playoff series like the Rangers were previously.

I definitely feel for Rangers fans. I like to stir the pot on rivalries just because it's fun to see the crazies lose their minds. But as an Astros fan, yes it sucked major ass this year, but we all knew it would going into the season. So I would just have my tried and true Jack Daniels nearby and enjoy the games and brace myself for the loss. It is much more painful to be so close and fall just short. The injury bug definitely bit the Rangers this year, but they are a good team and they will once again be a player next season in October

quote:

---

Is the collapse based on the manager's actions or the players not showing up?

---

It was a collapse until they won 7 straight and it wasn't a collapse.

They had some bad runs, as does everyone. Its always frustrating when it comes close(r) to the end of the year, but just ask the Angels if a win or loss in April or May counts just as much as a win or loss in September.

Anyways, its no longer a team built on a bunch of relatively young, sprightly athletes. And they lost who was arguably the best athlete they had in Josh Hamilton, and you don't replace that kind of player.

You don't, and won't ever see the 1950s Yankees in this era of free agency and mega contracts.

They then lost their arguably next best hitter in Cruz for 50 games.

Flawed lineup, mixed with injuries and some disappointing performances by the pitching staff.

Biggest pure managerial/decision making flaw would be using the bunt a little too much, but I don't subscribe to the one liner "never bunt again" guys that post in the game threads.

if only we could have went 18-1 in stead of 17-2 versus the lastros!

It was a team built to win 90 games that won 91 games.

Injuries played a bit of a role, but it was a relatively injury-free year from an offensive standpoint. Losing Harrison hurt, but Yu, Holland and Perez all improved enough to offset it. Colby and Feliz you didn't know what you'd get coming into 2013, and it turned out to be nothing. Plenty of guys stepped up in the bullpen to cover the loss of Feliz.

It was a team with likely equal blame to go to each department -- Daniels didn't go get the guys needed in the offseason or at the deadline (or they weren't enough) to make this team a legitimate contender, Washington continued to give away outs and make questionable calls that likely cost Texas a game or two, and while the players didn't perform way below what people might have envisioned (aside from Murphy), they collectively all played somewhat below what they had showed to be capable of.

It was a team that could have been made a game or two better by their front office, a game or two better by their manager, and a game or two better by their production -- but struck out on all 3.

quote:

---

if only we could have went 18-1 in stead of 17-2 versus the lastros!

---

Yep Rick Ankiel got yall on opening day...If wasn't for comments above I would root for the rangers..but most of their fans on here are giant dbags.

quote:

---

.If wasn't for comments above I would root for the rangers..but most of their fans on here are giant dbags

---

A quick post search of just your recent postings on Texags show that you are the poster boy for "hahahah INSERT DFW SPORTS TEAM HERE sucks!".

quote:

---

If wasn't for comments above I would root for the rangers..but most of their fans on here are giant dbags.

---

THIS

^
This is rich given this thread is created by an Astros fan solely to take a dig at the Rangers. The holier than thou fandom stuff is a good barometer of IQ.

Rangers were a combined 27 games over .500 against the Astros and Angels...that means they were 7 games below .500 vs the rest of mlb. That is not a playoff worthy team.

They would not have even sniffed the playoffs if mlb played a balanced schedule.

I'm okay with excluding the Astros W's since they couldn't finish 4th in the PCL. However, the Angels victories are legit. If you want to start excluding victories against a team or two that one did well against, you could quickly work every team in the league down to .500 or worse. The Angels were 5 games over .500 against the rest of the league. Why would you exclude W's against a team like that?

[This message has been edited by DannyDuberstein (edited 10/1/2013 6:11p).]

As an Astros fan, I will admit Troll Boy is a worse poster than any ranger fan poster.

Dude is terrible.

for shady.

the Rangers were basically a .500 team w/o the dreadful astros. Only in the hunt because they drew Houston 19 times

Texas was 20-15 vs division winners.

Boston was 8-8 vs division winners.
Detroit was 10-7 vs division winners.
Oakland was 9-7 vs division winners.
Tampa was 13-21 vs division winners.
Cleveland was 12-28 vs division winners.


While Texas wasn't really built for the "long-haul" and wasn't really a pennant-caliber club, to try and spin it like they were just a mediocre team that just feasted on the Astros simply isn't true... They held their own against the best teams in baseball -- at a higher clip than the other playoff teams did.

So if they weren't a mediocre team, why didn't they make the playoffs?

Was Texas going to win the World Series if they made it past Tampa? Probably not.

But to say that they were a mediocre team is kinda silly.

They were above average. Finished 6 out of 15 AL teams.

quote:

---

So if they weren't a mediocre team, why didn't they make the playoffs?

---

In the last decade there have been two teams who have had 4 consecutive years of 90 or more wins in the AL.

New York and Texas... it ain't easy.

Texas didn't make the playoffs this year because there were 6 teams in the AL that put up 91 or more wins, when typically there are only 3.

91 wins would have won the AL West in 2010, tied for the wildcard (when it was still just one) in 2011 and made the wildcard in 2012 (or won the AL Central).

A legitimate penannt contender? No, not without Cruz in the lineup.

But mediocre? 91 win teams aren't mediocre.

[This message has been edited by free_mhayden (edited 10/2/2013 1:13p).]

91 wins and the pitching staff was an injury-riddled mess for most of the first half. Then when the pitching staff settled down some, one of their best bats went missing.

This team "was what it was". Above average but just barely on the outside looking in playoff-wise. With a healthy pitching staff and Cruz all season, this was a solid playoff team, Astros or no Astros.

quote:

---

In the last decade there have been two teams who have had 4 consecutive years of 90 or more wins in the AL.

New York and Texas... it ain't easy.

Texas didn't make the playoffs this year because there were 6 teams in the AL that put up 91 or more wins, when typically there are only 3.

91 wins would have won the AL West in 2010, tied for the wildcard (when it was still just one) in 2011 and made the wildcard in 2012 (or won the AL Central).

A legitimate penannt contender? No, not without Cruz in the lineup.

But mediocre? 91 win teams aren't mediocre.

---

Again 17 of those wins came against the Astros. Everyone in the MLB knew the Astros were not going to be competitive this year. Everyone...including ESPN. If the Astros were somewhat competitive, Texas wins MAYBE 11-12 of those and aren't even in the playoff picture. Take away the Astros and Angels, and the Rangers are 5 games over .500, which is the definition of a mediocre team. Y'all beat up on 2 crappy teams and still think the Rangers were elite? It's going to be hilarious watching the Rangers slide back into irrelevancy within the next couple of years while Houston rises to the top. I'd be worried too, Rangers fans (if there will be any left after this slide back irrelevancy).

And the injury talk is completely bull****. Every team has injuries.

quote:

---

Texas wins MAYBE 11-12 of those and aren't even in the playoff picture.

---

if Houston is that much better wouldn't you also have to take wins away from the A's as well?

Last I checked, the rest of the AL got to play the Astros too and the West division played them as much as Texas did.

The Angels were +5 games over .500 against everyone but the Rangers. The Rangers are what made them a "crappy" team by making them their beech.

Cleveland was +22 over .500 vs. the White Sox and Twins, 2 teams whose combined record was as bad as the Angels and Astros. Throw in +5 Cleveland was against the Astros, and Cleveland was well below .500 against the rest of the league. So let's cross those off and the Indians are "a mediocre team that wouldn't sniff the playoffs".

I could play this game with every team and work them all down to being a mediocre team that wouldn't have sniffed the playoffs.

[This message has been edited by DannyDuberstein (edited 10/2/2013 2:35p).]

Texas was 4-2 vs Boston.
Texas was 4-3 vs Detroit.
Texas was 3-0 vs St. Louis.


That's 3 of your 4 biggest World Series favorites.

This idea that Texas just beat up on the Astros and struggled against good teams is just poorly researched.


[This message has been edited by free_mhayden (edited 10/2/2013 2:38p).]

This is going to turn into a old rivalries-like **** show, isn't it?

Let's just remember who is starting some of these rivalries-type threads like this one before calling out the Rangers fans as the aholes.

quote:

---

This is going to turn into a old rivalries-like **** show, isn't it?

---

That would be hard, as the argument from Houston fans would ultimately be "our team sucked so much is the only reason your team was even close to the playoffs!"

That's tough smack to pull off.

Challenge accepted!

quote:

---

That would be hard, as the argument from Houston fans would ultimately be "our team sucked so much is the only reason your team was even close to the playoffs!"

That's tough smack to pull off.

---

quote:

---

if Houston is that much better wouldn't you also have to take wins away from the A's as well?

---

Not really...the A's are one of the elite teams. Elite teams find a way to beat everyone not just the crappy, rebuilding teams.

Wake me up when the Astros get to the building part. It's re-something, but I'm not sure building is the right word.

quote:

---

Not really...the A's are one of the elite teams. Elite teams find a way to beat everyone not just the crappy, rebuilding teams.

---

So you ignored the posts above where the Rangers performed very well against good teams.

quote:

---

Wake me up when the Astros get to the building part. It's re-something, but I'm not sure building is the right word.

---

Oh it's ****ing on now