Baseball and “Swagger” - Would you rather…

[Faustdog]

Atotal360’s post on swagger in baseball got me thinking.


Would you rather:

A. Be where we are right now in baseball, with a team that’s just not very good.

or

B. Be a team like Tennessee, with a team full of Kenny Powers wannabes from the head coach down, flipping off opposing outfielders as you round the bases, getting ejections, suspensions, acting as if they’re on a constant ‘roid rage… But winning ballgames.

I think younger me would have chosen B, but older me would just turn it off completely and stop following if we became that. I may feel differently if we didn’t have a natty in our back pocket from a couple of years ago. Who knows.

But for now I’m definitely A.

 

[ZombieKissinger]

I'm in favor of A. Embracing the understated confidence of Johnny Cash or Burl Ives will do wonders for winning over Gen Z.

 

[ZombieKissinger]

I'm in favor of A. Embracing the understated confidence of Johnny Cash or Burl Ives will do wonders for winning over Gen Z.

But in all seriousness, I'd always rather be good then pressure the AD to have them tone it down a notch/instill Mississippi State values. I hate Tennessee, but I also hate the last two seasons.

 

[Thebulldogcountry1]

I would no longer support the program if we hired Vitello and all the players acted like d-bags. I hate that crap. I don't understand why it's allowed at all.

 

[Faustdog]

I'm in favor of A. Embracing the understated confidence of Johnny Cash or Burl Ives will do wonders for winning over Gen Z.

Binary choice. Be them or suck. No "be good but then try to change our behavior."

I'd be fine with all the swagger of 2021 MSU. Or 2022 Ole Miss. Or the "Vandyboys," whatever that is. Or really any other team in the history of college baseball. I imagine Tennessee to be the college baseball equivalent of a Limp Bizkit concert.

 

[ZombieKissinger]

Binary choice. Be them or suck. No "be good but then try to change our behavior."

I'd be fine with all the swagger of 2021 MSU. Or 2022 Ole Miss. Or the "Vandyboys," whatever that is. Or really any other team in the history of college baseball. I imagine Tennessee to be the college baseball equivalent of a Limp Bizkit concert.

Well, my answer was binary but had recommended approaches to make it less terrible down the road, but if we’re talking about this as a cross-section in time without any past or future considerations I would 100% go with winning. Even if it got to the point of not watching and checking the box scores, that’d be an improvement. But I still think I’d watch

 

[patdog]

Neither. I want what we had for 1979 - 1990, 1997 - 2001, and 2011 - 2021. That's not unreasonable.

 

[OG Goat Holder]

Neither. I want what we had for 1979 - 1990, 1997 - 2001, and 2011 - 2021. That's not unreasonable.

I think you can leave out the 1997-2001. As fun as it was to win in some of those years, I think those teams underachieved, at least 1997 and 1998. Incredibly talented though, but it was basically all that one class. And I didn't enjoy the McMahon Era at all. I thought those teams were weak. 2007 was a high talent team too, in a few places. But still, toughness wasn't the culture then and wasn't from 1991-2008.

 

[patdog]

I think you can leave out the 1997-2001. As fun as it was to win in some of those years, I think those teams underachieved, at least 1997 and 1998. Incredibly talented though, but it was basically all that one class. And I didn't enjoy the McMahon Era at all. I thought those teams were weak. 2007 was a high talent team too, in a few places. But still, toughness wasn't the culture then and wasn't from 1991-2008.

2 CWS, and 2 more super regionals, plus 1 regional in 5 years. No matter how you look at it, that's pretty good.

 

[OG Goat Holder]

2 CWS, and 2 more super regionals, plus 1 regional in 5 years. No matter how you look at it, that's pretty good.

We are talking about swagger, and however you define that. You can have a good team, results wise, without things like that.

I would argue that LSU and Alabama had both that year, while we only had talent. We weren't a true contender any of those years, just had success in spurts.

 

[Podgy]

Tennessee's "swagger," meaning total assholishness, makes me want them to lose to Ole Miss. Bianco doesn't let his team do that crap.

 

[The Cooterpoot]

Show me a baseball team without swagger and I'll show you our current baseball team. There are no good baseball teams without swagger.

 

[PartTimeGenius]

Atotal360’s post on swagger in baseball got me thinking.


Would you rather:

A. Be where we are right now in baseball, with a team that’s just not very good.

or

B. Be a team like Tennessee, with a team full of Kenny Powers wannabes from the head coach down, flipping off opposing outfielders as you round the bases, getting ejections, suspensions, acting as if they’re on a constant ‘roid rage… But winning ballgames.

I think younger me would have chosen B, but older me would just turn it off completely and stop following if we became that. I may feel differently if we didn’t have a natty in our back pocket from a couple of years ago. Who knows.

But for now I’m definitely A.

Have the team mindset of B, without the blatant and obnoxious presentations. You want a team with that same dawg in them. Unfortunately, I don't see that with this current team, on the mound specifically.
Baseball is mostly mental. We have talent on this team, we just don't have that dawg that just wants to eat.

 

[karlchilders.sixpack]

I rather enjoyed seeing Tnn. get beat in their Super Regional last year.

I enjoyed watching the air leave the balloon.

Deliver me from that. Cocky SOB's.

 

[Faustdog]

Tennessee's "swagger," meaning total assholishness, makes me want them to lose to Ole Miss. Bianco doesn't let his team do that crap.

Bianco wouldn't and I don't know of another D1 level coach who would. I'd even go as far as saying that Vitello encourages it. It starts with him.

 

[Mjoelner]

We

Atotal360’s post on swagger in baseball got me thinking.


Would you rather:

A. Be where we are right now in baseball, with a team that’s just not very good.

or

B. Be a team like Tennessee, with a team full of Kenny Powers wannabes from the head coach down, flipping off opposing outfielders as you round the bases, getting ejections, suspensions, acting as if they’re on a constant ‘roid rage… But winning ballgames.

I think younger me would have chosen B, but older me would just turn it off completely and stop following if we became that. I may feel differently if we didn’t have a natty in our back pocket from a couple of years ago. Who knows.

But for now I’m definitely A.

We're actually at A.5. We aren't very good but we still wave and shake our *** at second base no matter the game situation when we get a double like we just got the game clinching hit in game 7 of the World Series.

 

[beachbumdawg]

Atotal360’s post on swagger in baseball got me thinking.


Would you rather:

A. Be where we are right now in baseball, with a team that’s just not very good.

or

B. Be a team like Tennessee, with a team full of Kenny Powers wannabes from the head coach down, flipping off opposing outfielders as you round the bases, getting ejections, suspensions, acting as if they’re on a constant ‘roid rage… But winning ballgames.

I think younger me would have chosen B, but older me would just turn it off completely and stop following if we became that. I may feel differently if we didn’t have a natty in our back pocket from a couple of years ago. Who knows.

But for now I’m definitely A.

Give me a team that fights for each other, plays the game intensely with aggression, and attacks in all facets

the only person sitting down when you’re hitting is the pitcher, everyone else at the top of the steps

you can create a loud energy without ever acknowledging the other dugout

1. attacks pitches at the plate (and by god stops fist bumping the chest with 2 strikes)
2. Puts pressure on the defense
3. attacks the zone using each pitcher’s strengths (if they are sinker ball pitchers, why are they attacking the top of the zone - last I heard ground balls are a good thing)
4. Fight each game until the last out is recorded

 

[Cantdoitsal]

I'd Rather not Have the Diamond Dogs and Sports God Having Their Way With My Arse Righta 'Bout Now. Not sure I can put it any simplier than that.

 

[AstroDog]

Atotal360’s post on swagger in baseball got me thinking.


Would you rather:

A. Be where we are right now in baseball, with a team that’s just not very good.

or

B. Be a team like Tennessee, with a team full of Kenny Powers wannabes from the head coach down, flipping off opposing outfielders as you round the bases, getting ejections, suspensions, acting as if they’re on a constant ‘roid rage… But winning ballgames.

I think younger me would have chosen B, but older me would just turn it off completely and stop following if we became that. I may feel differently if we didn’t have a natty in our back pocket from a couple of years ago. Who knows.

But for now I’m definitely A.

Tennessee lost a bit of swagger this past weekend. Mizzou didn't only beat them, but stomped them. You don't have to have swagger to win. Just need the confidence you can play the game. I don't like flipping bats on HRs, flipping the opposing team or fans off, nor some kind of weird moves like you're having a seizure after a double or triple.

 

[LimaoCabeca]

Which one wins games and isn’t last in statistical categories? Just win, baby.

 

[aTotal360]

Winning fixes everything. I don’t care how you do it.

 

[dickiedawg]

Atotal360’s post on swagger in baseball got me thinking.


Would you rather:

A. Be where we are right now in baseball, with a team that’s just not very good.

or

B. Be a team like Tennessee, with a team full of Kenny Powers wannabes from the head coach down, flipping off opposing outfielders as you round the bases, getting ejections, suspensions, acting as if they’re on a constant ‘roid rage… But winning ballgames.

I think younger me would have chosen B, but older me would just turn it off completely and stop following if we became that. I may feel differently if we didn’t have a natty in our back pocket from a couple of years ago. Who knows.

But for now I’m definitely A.

I’d much rather be winning, even if we look like a-holes.
Luckily it’s not a binary choice. We can win at a high level without the nonsense.

 

[M R DAWGS]

When did the word binary become so popular??**

 

[retire the banner]

Atotal360’s post on swagger in baseball got me thinking.


Would you rather:

A. Be where we are right now in baseball, with a team that’s just not very good.

or

B. Be a team like Tennessee, with a team full of Kenny Powers wannabes from the head coach down, flipping off opposing outfielders as you round the bases, getting ejections, suspensions, acting as if they’re on a constant ‘roid rage… But winning ballgames.

I think younger me would have chosen B, but older me would just turn it off completely and stop following if we became that. I may feel differently if we didn’t have a natty in our back pocket from a couple of years ago. Who knows.

But for now I’m definitely A.

Would I rather suck *** or be good? Umm, I’d rather be good

This holier than thou schtick ain’t it man

 

[aTotal360]

I bet the same people picking A are also glad we didn't pay Cam Newton. ***

 

[bolddogge]

There are no good baseball teams without swagger.

Japan's WBC team = very good. Swagger level (if any) is near zero.

 

[BingleCocktail]

Atotal360’s post on swagger in baseball got me thinking.


Would you rather:

A. Be where we are right now in baseball, with a team that’s just not very good.

or

B. Be a team like Tennessee, with a team full of Kenny Powers wannabes from the head coach down, flipping off opposing outfielders as you round the bases, getting ejections, suspensions, acting as if they’re on a constant ‘roid rage… But winning ballgames.

I think younger me would have chosen B, but older me would just turn it off completely and stop following if we became that. I may feel differently if we didn’t have a natty in our back pocket from a couple of years ago. Who knows.

But for now I’m definitely A.

 

[paindonthurt]

I think you can leave out the 1997-2001. As fun as it was to win in some of those years, I think those teams underachieved, at least 1997 and 1998. Incredibly talented though, but it was basically all that one class. And I didn't enjoy the McMahon Era at all. I thought those teams were weak. 2007 was a high talent team too, in a few places. But still, toughness wasn't the culture then and wasn't from 1991-2008.

2007 wasn’t that talented.

 

[Anon1664516582]

This team is to worried about making commercials and their walk up tunes. I say cut that music bull **** out and maybe that will motivate this team. We need a leadership badly.