WBC

OK. Well, I'm gonna go right ahead and say it. What George Steinbrenner said about the WBC, although morally unsound, is, from a realistic standpoint, completely justified. Sure, it's easy to attack, I mean, how many opportunities do you get to go out and represent your country against the world? Some would say it's like turning down the Olympics. But it all honesty, the WBC is not more important than the MLB.
To put it in perspective Yankees fans, how would you feel if Jeter, oh, I don't know, dislocated his shoulder while sliding into 3rd or something crazy like that. That would be a serious blow to our chances at a ring. In the end, is it really worth it to pursue a fledging idea at the risk of injuring the top players in the league? But the Jeter example is not even the best available due to the fact that money is not a problem. =) What about you Mets fans, what if Pedro overthrows trying to win over the hearts of D.R.? What if he gets hit with a comebacker, concussion, etc? Obviously you guys don't have a chance in hell at a title,)= but still you'd be paying the guy 50 million plus to sit on his ass. I love the idea, I will be watching the games, but ultimately, someone of importance is going to get hurt and the injury will overshadow the games themselves.
Don't get me wrong, I don't want this to become an olympic basketball situation where teams (or just the u.s.) are sending a bunch of selfish, unproven players to represent our country. In fact, I might hold a gold medal in higher merit than a ring. After all, we are playing the entire world. However, the price of gold could end up being too much, and that's where this good idea is going to run into opposition.
So don't blast Steinbrenner for his Scroogelike comments and 'unpatriotic' outlook on the WBC. He's honest, people have always hated him for that, and that's all he's doing now. Telling the truth. The comments on Selig were totally out of line, but hey, can you blame a guy for being overpassionate about his sport?