The Boston Globe's Brian McGrory wrote an article about 2004 changing everything.
For the worse.
Here's a sample:
As it was, we claimed all the angst for ourselves, though the good people of Chicago seemed to have their own supply. Red Sox fans could always blame our misfortunes on New York's payroll, Boston's mismanagement, free agents' unwillingness to come here. It gave us our status as perennial underdogs, the lovable spectacle. We wore that suit, frayed as it sometimes seemed, very comfortably.
Without it, what have we become?
And here's the answer we know but dread: Another free-spending, big market team that buys its way into the postseason with every expectation that it will win.
He continues:
But here's the problem with the 2007 edition of the Boston Red Sox: There is no narrative arc. They started the season as playoff favorites. They finished the season as playoff favorites. There will be a whole lot of stunned people if they don't win.
They don't, in short, have a story. Maybe that's how the Yankees do it, or the Dallas Cowboys, or the old Montreal Canadiens, but it's not generally how we do things on Yawkey Way - at least not in 1967 or 1975 or 1986 or 2004.
Which doesn't necessarily make it bad. And having Fenway as the epicenter of the entire baseball world this week is nothing short of thrilling. But it's different this time from any other time, and it's really and truly not us.
Can you believe it?
No, seriously, can you believe it? It's the morning of Game 1 and this bastard is whining that things aren't dramatic enough.
Here's what I think:
Brian McGrory can take his "narrative arc" and shove it up his ass. Jesus Christ, what the hell is wrong with people?? Why does everything need a god damned storyline? Why does it have to be about everything other than what's taking place on the field. You know, THE GAME? 2004 was an incredible, amazing, exhilarating experience. But does it diminish what will happen on the field tonight and what might happen four or five or six or seven games from now? Hell no. If 2004 makes you less enthusiastic about winning this year or makes you feel like this is just another team then shame on you. I actually feel sorry for you because you've apparently decided that unbridled joy can only happen once in a lifetime and that's a bunch of bullshit. Is it different? Of course it's different. And thank God it is because as good as 2004 was, having it happen year after year after year would get boring after a while. It's a different team with different players and a different style that makes them no less than the 2004 team. It just makes them different. And if you're someone that needed the 86 years of fucking misery to define your experience as a fan, go root for the Cubs. McGrory acts like there's something wrong with being like the Yankees or the Cowboys or the Canadiens. Isn't that the entire f'ing point of watching sports? To hope that your team wins every single game? When did that become some kind of sin? Why, because it breeds contempt in some jackasses like Easterbrook and Peter King and other internet and newspaper tough guys? Eff them. Let them hate us. They can lament the lack of storylines all they want because God knows they'll just create some where they don't exist in an effort to try and justify their sorry lives. And that's exactly what McGrory did. He created a storyline about not having a storyline to fulfill some ridiculous need to have a curse or a sob story in play in order to enjoy the game. How incredibly pathetic and sad. I'll take being hated any day over that.
The only storyline I care about between now and November 1st is the Red Sox winning the World Series. That's it. If that's not interesting or entertaining enough for you, go watch Still, We Believe.
