Patrick425

My Mom died in August 2019 and my Dad died in March 2020. Back in May of this year I filed a final tax return for my deceased Dad (filing deadline was extended due to COVID). In early September I received a 5071C letter stating I needed to verify ID. It stated I should do this online, but if I prefer to call it also gave me a number. I was unclear if they wanted to verify my ID (as representative of the estate) or my Dad's ID. It requires you to set up a IRS login to verify. I already had a login under my name so I tried that first and it appeared that the letter was not in connection to my ID. So, I tried to set up an account for my Dad. I used 2 different addresses when attempting this. First, my address (as that is what was used on the tax return) and then my Dad's last address before his death. Each time it stated that there is an issue detected that is not allowing me to set up an account and verify ID online for this individual and that I will need to call. So, I called the number. I called several times. Each time, after listening to 2.5 minutes of information it then says please hold while we connect you and then I get a message that states due to high volume we can not connect your call at this time, please try again later or on the next business day. So, after many days of trying this, I looked up the local IRS center and called that number. That number is basically a recording that states they can't talk to anyone on the phone and that if I want to make an appointment that I should call another number. I call the other number, and again, after a minute or two of listening to useless information it states it will now connect me, then, I get the same message regarding not being able to connect my call due to high call volume. I understand I am one of many experiencing issues because of short staffing, not only with the IRS but other areas of life. However, it feels like I'm trying to get in to see the Great OZ! I'm willing to stay on hold for 5 hours if needed. There should be some solution other than having to keep calling and hoping that you are the lucky caller that gets through. How about, like what many private companies do, a system that allows the IRS to call me back (and provides a reference # so I know it's not a scam)? At the very least, let me know right when I call that there is high call volume and they can not connect me rather than making me sit through 2+ minutes of useless info before it tells me to try again.

Huh? Francouer, former Brave, seemed dejected. He clearly seems to be pulling for the Braves to me.

According to Karl Ravech: Christian Pache will now hit leadoff and play RF for the Braves. Jorge Soler was in the original lineup. No way in hell we'd put him at leadoff. I'm guessing Dansby moves up and they start Rosario in LF and slide Joc to RF. I thought it was odd enough that Soler was a leadoff hitter. I think he has a .316 OBP.

I'd feel better with Taylor in Center. Not a big fan of Avi's defense in general. I still have PTSD from that fly ball that should have ended the game on that Saturday night vs SF.

[sarcasm]You want the Giants to play in the WS this year?[/sarcasm]

For any fans of the movie "Idiocracy", The White Sox fans cheering Altuve getting barely hit by a pitch reminds me of Guido cheering the crowd that was smashing his car. ...and now Altuve scores with 2 outs. Hey White Sox fans - that opposing player getting HBP was not a good thing for your team.

I feel like one of the only possible concerns about Lauer pitching today would be his last start in the regular season, but that game had zero meaning for the Brewers and I think this concern is offset (or maybe more than offset) by the concern of how pitching on short rest would effect Burns. If you discount that last game, since June 26th, Lauer has 1.78 ERA. If you include that last start it's 2.23. Like someone said earlier, this is not like pitching Suppan over Burns. Statistically, Lauer would have been our number 2 starting pitcher, behind Miley, in 2018. I have no issues with the decision to start him today.

Not seeing this as I look at his post season game logs. He's had a few bad post season outings. Most notably, 2017 ALCS game 3 and 2020 WS game 3, but neither of these appeared to be on short rest. https://www.baseball-reference.com/players/gl.fcgi?id=mortoch02&t=p&year=0&post=1

The Brewers could lose today and, yes, I would be disappointed. They could not make the playoffs or get eliminated in the playoffs for the next ten years and, yes, that would also be disappointing. However, as I have done for the last 45 years, I will always have some optimism or hope for the next year. For fan bases of some sports teams that is just the way it is sometimes. The outcome of each game in baseball involves more randomness than most other sports and in many games one or two ABs or defensive plays determines the entire outcome of a game. Puig just misses barreling up that one pitch and one of our hitters does barrel up a pitch that they just missed in game 7 and we may have been talking about a WS team in 2018. A different outcome on 2 pitches. That's it. For that reason, my emotion will usually be more disappointment than anger when the Brewers are unable to pull off the desired outcome. And I will always look forward to and have hope for the next season. Otherwise it ceases to be fun and why would I engage my time and emotion into something that is not fun? Go Brewers!

Nope. That would be absolutely horrible. White Sox fans would dominate AmFam...would look really bad on the national stage and would not be fun for Brewer fans in attendance. ....also want White Sox to lose tonight as I prefer a 3pm game tomorrow. ....also..how does A.J. Pierzynski (spl?) announce a nationally televised White Sox playoff game?

Yeah, they definitely need to tweek that rule. Got a quick runner on 1st, ball takes a nasty bounce off the wall - outfielder could perhaps purposely try to boot it into the stands. However, that play was also a function of the short right field wall in Fenway. In most stadiums that ball would have stayed in play.

Ah, ok. I thought maybe it was something like that, but I also thought the game on the 25th was a night game. Went back and looked, and saw that it started at 4:10. I still think that's an odd policy. I guess because it's a bit darker at night, so sun reflecting off the fans is not an issue to the batter's eye?

If he does it every pitch and is consistent with it, then it's not a balk. I never understood that, but that is always the way they have explained that. Seems like it would be beneficial to a pitcher to add "deceptive movement" to your normal pitching delivery.

I posted this in the general "in game" NLDS playoffs thread. However, also posting here as I'm hoping more people will see it and someone will have some information about this, because I'm really curious. I'm watching the TB/Bos game. I noticed that they have a black tarp on the seats in the batters eye in CF. I remembered watching a game recently where fans were sitting there and thought it was odd that they allowed that. I could not remember if it was the wild card game or a regular season game. So, I went back and watched highlights of the wild card game and the Sept 25th game vs. the Yankees. Wild card game, fans were allowed to sit there. Sept. 25th (and today), it was blocked off with a black tarp. What is the rhyme or reason on when they allow fans to sit there?

Ha..I assume you are saying that tongue in cheek. Even if that was the case A) They only do it for certain games? and B) I believe MLB dictates where the batters eye is and where fans are not allowed to sit. Odd that during the WC game fans were allowed to sit there and for the NLDS they are not (or apparently in the regular season they were not allowed either).

I'm watching the TB/Bos game. I noticed that they have a black tarp on the seats in the batters eye in CF. I remembered watching a game recently where fans were sitting there and thought it was odd that they allowed that. I could not remember if it was the wild card game or a regular season game. So, I went back and watched highlights of the wild card game and the Sept 25th game vs. the Yankees. Wild card game, fans were allowed to sit there. Sept. 25th (and today), it was blocked off with a black tarp. What is the rhyme or reason on when they allow fans to sit there?

The West had a 92-72 record against the East (and vise-versa for the East against the West obviously). Not sure how you could look at the teams and players in the West vs. the East and not agree that the Western division is, overall, clearly a stronger division. However, I understand that every year is different. I can concede that division winners should have playoff priority over wild card teams - mainly because of different schedules. However, I stand by my point that there should never never never be a one game playoff in baseball (I'm ok with it for tie breakers - if for no other reason, logistics.). Baseball is way too random and unpredictable for one game to determine the remaining playoff fate of a team. I like the 3 game, better record gets home field for all games idea that was brought up earlier.

How about that one game is not enough to prove who is the better team and who deserves to advance. Shouldn't that be the goal of the playoffs? I understand that a 3, 5, or even 7 game series is not perfect either, but it's a lot better than 1 game. The Dodgerd have 106 wins and the 2nd best record in baseball and face the possibility of getting eliminated in one game? That makes zero sense to me. I feel like if the Brewers were in this situation and then lost that game, a lot of people on this site would suddenly not feel as "excited" about the 1 game showdown. Baseball lends itself to upsets more than any other sport. There is not really such a thing as a "huge upset" in baseball. Arizona can beat the Dodgers in one game. Does that mean they are a better team? That's the reason they play 162 games and not 81 or 17. You shouldn't be expected to play a 162 game schedule to prove you belong in the playoffs and then have your fate decided by one game. The Wild Card game is not a "play-in" game, it's part of the play-offs and should be treated as such. The playoffs are mostly about entertainment. We already know that the Rays, Dodgers, and Giants are the three best teams in MLB. If this was college football, the "committee" would advance them to the semifinals. However, if you value the regular season, then the Dodgers already "lost" to the Giants and therefore should be eliminated. So it's really a gift by MLB to even give them a chance. And if they're going to throw a bone to second place teams, you may as well make it as entertaining as possible. The wild card games are awesome, they are by far the safest guarantee of an entertaining, must-see MLB game. It's a win-win because you are not involving the division winners and you are still entertaining the fans and giving the Dodgers another chance. The Dodgers already lost to the Giants--they lost the season series and they lost the division. The Giants are the better team over 162 games. A 7-game series will not change that, but it would provide us with a ton of entertainment, and potentially a different outcome because the postseason is different than the regular season and everyone optimizes their rosters to win in the postseason. It's just more fun. So in my view the single-game wild card is a perfect balance of rewarding the best regular season teams and entertaining the fans. The playoffs are mostly about entertainment? The goal of each team during the season is to make the post-season. They aren't exhibition games. Like every other sport, the post season crowns a league championship who is engraved into the history of that sport for eternity. So let's at least attempt to have a logical and fair process regarding the post season. This is the time where even the casual fan or non-fan starts paying attention. The Dodgers lost to the team with the best record in baseball by one game and their record was better than every other team in the majors by at least 6 games. So, they should feel lucky to be "thrown a bone" and be allowed to be in the playoffs? If anyone is getting thrown a bone, it's Atlanta. Twelfth best record in MLB, but does not have to play a one game do or die. Doesn't even have to play the 1 seed in the first round. How does that make sense? Oh, but they won their division! A division who's 2nd place team was barely above .500. Congratulations for being champions of a horrible division!! At least make the WC a 3 game series. Can we at least start with that? That would be a huge improvement in my opinion. Then next step would be to "re-rank" the teams after the WC series. This would not be good for the Brewers this year, but it would objectively be the fairest way to award post-season position based on regular season performance.

It's not always just that you can't make games. My playoff tickets are more than twice the amount I pay for my 20 game package. That's more than I can afford, but I also want to go to as many games as possible. So, selling one or two of the games to help recoup cost and hopefully pay for some of the tickets I'm keeping is my best option for doing that. Probably will not sell NLDS, but if they get beyond that then I will probably need to start selling some games. I have a feeling that if they get to the WS I'm will make the dumb financial decision not to sell any games...because I would really struggle with selling any of those games!! I went to the WS in 82. $8 a ticket for bleachers. I believe I got them through a lottery the Brewers did for the postseason that year. Got 4 tickets for each game. I was in High School and sold the other 3 tickets to my friends at face value. Went to every game. I think tickets were being re-sold for $300 or something like that. A fortune to a High School kid at the time. My friends were bouncing around the idea of selling the tix. I said "No Way!". No one sold and we went to all 3 home games.

I could be wrong, but with it now being October and the sun setting earlier, I don't think it will be a factor for the 4:07 start, and will probably only be a LF factor for 1 or 2 innings of the Friday game. More of a factor for people sitting in the LF bleachers (assuming its a sunny day).

I would argue just the opposite. The team that won 106 games in the regular season and has the 2nd best record in ALL of baseball is playing one game against a team that won 90 games to determine their fate. On top of that, if they win, then they go on to play the team with the best record instead of reranking based on regular season records. Seems to me like the regular season really is not being prioritized at all. They didn't win 16 more games than the Cards because of an "unbalanced" schedule where they play teams in their division more. In fact, I would argue that they would have won more games if they were in the East or Central. The West is clearly the strongest division in the NL. I'm not shedding any tears for LA and I also think having WC teams is great. In fact I have issues with the current financial structure in MLB and big market TV contracts, but that's a different discussion. I'm trying to look at it objectively and I think a team with the 2nd best record in baseball deserves more than a 1 game playoff. Saying that it "evens out" over the years seems like an admission that it is sometimes not fair to certain teams. So, why not attempt to fix it or make it better rather than assuming it will all even out. Again, 3 games is not perfect either, but it's so much better than 1 game. At least then you have to show some pitching depth. Yes, that would probably require shortening the regular season, but I think its worth it.

How about that one game is not enough to prove who is the better team and who deserves to advance. They get 162 to win their division - that is their shot at a berth for being the most consistent over the course of the season. Neither one did. If we're this hung up on that, may as well just pick the best record from each league and do the World Series. Yes, but is it the Dodger's fault that they were in the Western division rather than the Central or Eastern division? So if you are an good team in a weak division, you deserve to make the playoffs more than a Great team in a really strong division?

Ughh...that makes me so angry. Proof that there is zero accountability for umpires. It's a lifetime job no matter how horrible you are at it. We expect that MLB, for the most part, represents the 700-800 best players in the world. Why is there not the same expectations for Umpires?

How about that one game is not enough to prove who is the better team and who deserves to advance. Shouldn't that be the goal of the playoffs? I understand that a 3, 5, or even 7 game series is not perfect either, but it's a lot better than 1 game. The Dodgerd have 106 wins and the 2nd best record in baseball and face the possibility of getting eliminated in one game? That makes zero sense to me. I feel like if the Brewers were in this situation and then lost that game, a lot of people on this site would suddenly not feel as "excited" about the 1 game showdown. Baseball lends itself to upsets more than any other sport. There is not really such a thing as a "huge upset" in baseball. Arizona can beat the Dodgers in one game. Does that mean they are a better team? That's the reason they play 162 games and not 81 or 17. You shouldn't be expected to play a 162 game schedule to prove you belong in the playoffs and then have your fate decided by one game. The Wild Card game is not a "play-in" game, it's part of the play-offs and should be treated as such.

Not asking anyone to feel sorry for the Dodgers. However, if my team won 106 games and had the 2nd best record in baseball, but had to play a one game winner take all to advance, I would not be too happy about that. Not a fan of the one game wild card for mostly this reason. In an ideal world, I would like to see the divisions eliminated and each team in each league have a balanced schedule against the entire league. Then, the 4 and 5 best records in each league play each other in the wild card. However, I know because of extra travel and other reasons, this will probably never happen. So, at the very least, I think it should be a 3 game series. Even if that means shortening the season by 3-5 games.