Skip to content

The Schilling clause??

December 5, 2007

“NASHVILLE – The Baseball Writers’ Association of America voted this morning to approve a resolution where starting in 2013 all contracts that have financial terms attached to major awards will not be eligible for consideration for that award.

The resolution stems from Curt Schilling’s new contract were he received a $1 million bonus for at least one Cy Young vote. The Baseball Writers Association membership votes on the annual awards. The BBWAA will also notify the Major League Players’ Association and Major League Baseball of its decision. A committee will discuss the issue with both bodies at a future date. “

And then this..

When we first started giving out these awards it was just to honor somebody. You got a trophy, there was no monetary reward that went with it,” BBWAA secretary-treasurer Jack O’Connell said. “I honestly don’t think people vote with that in mind. But the attachment of a bonus to these awards creates a perception that we’re trying to make these guys rich.

Give me a break. Don’t get me wrong, 100k, 500k, 1 million dollars is a huge sum of money. But to think that these guys ever approached this as anything other than them being touted as the ‘experts’ on who wins what is crap. Add to that I seriously doubt anyone ever looked at this from a perception standpoint and thought wow, they are making this guy rich. I would disagree.

The only step that hasn’t happened yet is to stop them from voting on awards altogether. They shouldn’t do it. Anytime someone is allowed to vote on this, on the Hall of Fame ballot, and that person injects personal bias into their vote, they should lose the privilege.

The main problem with my opinion on this is that someone, probably more than just one or two people, will assume I mean this as a blanket plastering of the baseball media, I don’t. There are a ton of great people that write about our game. I love reading the people that truly are fans, the Gammons and Starks of the world. Is Peter HORRIBLY biased to the Sox, absolutely! But that makes it entertaining to me. Peter understands the game as well. He knows he’s not the smartest guy in the room and that’s why he taps some of the smartest people in the game to make his points. But I love that he’s a fan.

Same with Jayson Stark. Long before he was an ESPN guy and a national star, he was a regular dude in Philly, and I was a huge fan then. He talks about things that aren’t front page stuff, but he loves the game so much that whatever he writes is interesting. He cares about the players and understands the human side a lot more than most.

George King, NY hack, did NOT vote for Pedro for MVP. he stated that he didn’t believe a pitcher deserved it. A few years later he does vote for a pitcher on the MVP ballot, and no one calls him on it.

Bill Conlin intentionally leaves Nolan Ryan off the HOF ballot. The following day he writes that he did so to make a point! His thought was that if Don Sutton was not a first ballot HOF pitcher, then Nolan Ryan didn’t deserve it either. A 26 year major league career featuring about 4 million more k’s than any other human ever, misses the unanimous selection, which in my opinion he deserved, so this guy could make a point. Please.

Writers are using a players career accomplishments to get material for articles, that’s stupid and incredibly unfair.

This is the same ‘expert’ who touts Jimmy Rollins as a Gold Glove defender. Many other writers felt the same way and many felt that was the thing that pushed Jimmy to win the MVP over Matt Holliday. Bill James defensive formula that creates a stat called Range Factor is, as Bill Conlin describes “chances times something divided by something.”

Then he writes

“Apparently, James decided that a Range Factor based on successful chances times nine innings, divided by the number of defensive innings played is more important than the result – for example, a friggin’ out.”

Then he ridiculously suggests that it is no coincidence that RF ranks Kevin Youkillis the best 1B last year, since Bill James works for the Sox.

So Bill James came up with a stat to make Kevin Youkillis look good, about 20 years before Kevin was born.

Conlin was among the many “baseball” people that ‘exhorted Rollins to take a more small ball approach during his minor league career.”

Any one of them come out and admit to being blatantly wrong about that?

This is the same guy who stated that Mike Schmidt was one of the top 10 players in history when he retired, defending his claim because Bill James agreed with him…..James actually ranked Schmidt somewhere in the second 10, between 13-18th all time by peak or career value. Hmm, if it backs up your argument the guys a genius, if not he’s an idiot.Bottom line for me is that there are way too many personal agendas tabled when it comes to voting and writers should have zero say in who wins what. Or else there should be rules in place to insure anyone that skews a vote or ‘screws it up’, never gets the chance to do it again. Are they the experts? In many cases no they are not. They are just people that have more access to players and the game than others.

That’s not to say some aren’t incredibly smart about the game. Rob Bradford is someone that strikes me as a huge fan who is always looking to learn about the game. Maz, Buck and Sean, I think all know the sport. Maz has a little temper to him, Buck refuses to believe me even thought I can repeatedly tell him the same thing, and Sean is great but plagued by the most monotone vocal delivery in the history of sports. I know them all well enough to say this, and I don’t think it’s a bad thing, I think they are passionate enough about the game and interested enough in the people to have personal bias when it comes to voting.

That’s not to say they don’t vote right, most of them share their picks and the good ones care enough about the votes to ask players opinions before casting their votes. But it only takes 1-2 guys to screw it up and those guys exist in decent numbers.You could put rules in place to fix it, but it still won’t stop the potential errors that may happen. When someone gets 90+% of the 1st or 2nd place votes and there are a few writers that don’t vote for that person, but instead leave him off the ballot completely, you should lose your vote. But that won’t stop a player that may deserve something from possibly getting screwed.

From a personal perspective I have no complaints. The three times I was in contention for the Cy Young award I lost unanimously to the person that should have won the award in unanimous fashion.It’s always been a peeve of mine and I probably should admit to having some of that “They’ve never played the game” mentality, but at the end of the day I like when deserving people get what they deserve. How did Tito end up 4th this year for Manager of the year?

I guess this is much more personal than it started out and I don’t offer up solutions, or good ones, in the end. I just know there has to be a better way for this to happen. Trust me, after a year or two award bonuses became totally meaningless to me because I felt that the size of the contract was always the ‘reward’ for winning those awards. They were paying me to win them anyway. I never turned them down because they became and are now a standard part of a contract. The cool thing is that Theo and I managed to turn the bonuses in the last two contracts into things benefiting Shade and ALS, so it was a win win if it happened.

89 Comments leave one →
  1. soxinsanity permalink
    December 5, 2007 4:20 pm

    Good stuff. And it’s good to know where the money is going when a player like you is signed. Shade and ALS and everything they work for are a beautiful thing that American Professional Sports should work for! One can only wonder where $314M is going to go in 10 years!! Although I am sure that arod will mindlessly give that money to charity theres nothing like the foundations that has complete and utter backing instead of just a player holding a check with the founders!

    On another note, should pitchers consider a clause like this when pitching to ARod to avoid him from getting HIS bonus? Just a thought!

    Good Stuff Curt!


  2. baxie102 permalink
    December 5, 2007 4:23 pm

    Curt…I’ve got $25 buck in my wallet right now. If you get a Cy Young Award vote in 2008 I’ll give it to you. The question is whether you’ll accept cash or check? Annuity or in a lump sum spread out over a 20 year span? Let me know. I’ll be patiently waiting for your reply.

  3. December 5, 2007 4:29 pm

    Hey Curt, for your next rant, take on the BCS rankings, I loved this.

  4. December 5, 2007 4:42 pm

    So funny, I had heard this topic of conversation “The Shilling Clause” this morning on my way in to work.

    To me, the fan – I don’t care personally what your incentives and awards/bonuses are. I figure, it’s sort of like any other kind of employment negotiation when you’re a hot commodity — and whatever agreement the “Employer” aka team agrees to — then clearly it’s worth while to them. It seems hardly plausible to me that not having that particular incentive would be a deal breaker on either side of an employment arrangement? But please, correct me if I’m wrong.

    Now, if team management is feeling that they are being bent over a barrell in an effort to keep players or make players stay, then that’s an issue that should be handled in a forum outside of the media, no?

  5. donfarland permalink
    December 5, 2007 4:43 pm

    I’m sure you’ll get more than a few posts claiming your post is nothing more than sour grapes, but you have some excellent points. The majority of sports writers (not just baseball) are elitist, hypocrites who see themselves in shining armor upon valiant steeds. They’ve become legends in their own minds, keepers of the sacred truth, and the self-anointed guardians of the game. The problem you describe has been going on for decades. It started with the great Ted Williams being left off an MVP ballot in his .406 season of ’41 and has continued to this day with names like Rice, Evans, Gossage, and Dawson not getting their place in Cooperstown.

    Why do the writers care about award related incentives in contracts? Because it gives them power. It affords them the opportunity to sit in their press boxes high above the field and raise or lower their thumb like a modern day Nero.

  6. December 5, 2007 4:45 pm

    Sounds like there are too many BBWAA members with axes to grind and soapboxes to step up onto. Have they forgotten what the meaning of the award is?

  7. December 5, 2007 4:55 pm

    Also, I think in order to be a great baseball writer, you have to have an overriding love and respect for the game. Too many baseball writers are just bitter that they didn’t cut it as players; now, they take their supposed expertise, couple it with their cold, bitter little hearts, and smear players and organizations alike on a whim in order to get some attention.

    Thankfully, it’s pretty easy for a savvy reader to identify losers like that quickly, and put them on the ol’ internal “ignore list”.

  8. burkely permalink
    December 5, 2007 5:07 pm

    The salaries players and owners are making are flat out ludicrous. Period.
    Being awarded these ridiculous amounts for playing a game is sickening.
    Free agency has only added to the melee.

    I agree with the decision. Play the game hard regardless of your contract.

  9. syphax permalink
    December 5, 2007 5:12 pm


    I have a rule- when I’m really steamed about something, I wait 24 hours before expressing myself, whether in an online forum, email, letter, whatever, so I can clear my head.

    You may want to try it.

    But thanks, as always, for sharing your thoughts!

  10. mikea82 permalink
    December 5, 2007 5:26 pm

    Look on the bright side, this is the fastest change they have ever made in history. You should be complemented on being a catalyst for change 🙂

  11. December 5, 2007 5:29 pm

    I like what the writers did here, in some ways, just because there is the potential for the apperance of impropriety.

    No one sane would ever accuse you of doing this, Curt, but I can see a situation in the future where some player is accused of paying off some writer to get a vote for the award. The writers should avoid the possibility of this happening, and this is a reasonable way to fight back against the whole thing.

  12. blackats permalink
    December 5, 2007 5:31 pm

    whoa! how many fonts do you need? 😉

    i fully agree that awards should not be voted on by writers alone. baseball needs to come up with a better group of people.

  13. December 5, 2007 5:42 pm

    You write: “Trust me, after a year or two award bonuses became totally meaningless to me because I felt that the size of the contract was always the ‘reward’ for winning those awards.”

    That’s the way it should be, then anything you get on top of your salary is gravy. You have the right attitude about that. And, you turn around and give it to the organizations that you support. Betcha A-Rod doesn’t do that.

    Great blog, Curt. I’ll keep reading 🙂

    (A Red Sox fan in SoonerLand)

  14. fryman1918 permalink
    December 5, 2007 5:44 pm

    Very well put Curt. Why should a writer have a say in who wins what awards? And if anyone doubts that these guys do vote with personal agendas, just take a look at this year’s Cy Young Vote. Eric Berdard was put above Josh on one ballot. Not to take anything away from C.C. or Eric, both pitched great for their team this year, but give me a break. Anyone who is being paid to write professionally about baseball and thinks that Eric Bedard had a more dominating year than Beckett should be fired on the spot.

    Thanks for the update Curt. Always an enjoyable blog.

  15. shaunsam permalink
    December 5, 2007 5:53 pm


    I can’t disagree with hypocritcal writers, but I have to say that the 1 vote thing is a little crazy. For example, if the bonus were that you had to win the Cy Young, then nobody could dispute that – if you were that undeserving there is no way for the writers to get you to win…but one vote; all you need is one crazy voter to say “hey, let me throw Curt a third place vote and he will get a million dollars…he probably doesn’t need it and maybe even might do the right thing and donate it to charity, but maybe he’ll treat me better the rest of his career”. Not saying it would happen exactly like that, but wouldn’t put it past them. Also, they did reference the fact that you jokingly referred to a “kickback”.

  16. hashcode22 permalink
    December 5, 2007 5:55 pm

    Curt, something you might be missing is that this rule must also be intended to stop writers from selling their votes. If contracts are out there with $1 million for a Cy Young vote, a writer would be tempted to try to “sell” that vote to the player for $40,000 or something.

  17. cmyers37 permalink
    December 5, 2007 6:00 pm

    i agree with you on some of your points, but not all. I think that it’s fair that they take away these bonuses because it can also help people from perhaps corrupting the system and from younger guys to take performance enhancing drugs. If a young stud signs a contract that says if he wins ROY then he get a million bucks, he will have a lot of incentive to improve, both naturally and by drugs.
    Curt Myers

  18. soxwin28 permalink
    December 5, 2007 6:10 pm

    Thats almost as dumb as the Francona rule

  19. pokhra permalink
    December 5, 2007 6:18 pm

    Curt – I really like the blog and refreshing honesty you bring as a writer about sports. Not a sportswriter, but a writer about all things baseball. Speaking of those sportswriters, I certainly hope you have a fantastic season so that someone can legitimately give you more than one third-place vote for the Cy Young. Your donation of the one million dollar bonus to ALS would be a lasting legacy.


  20. wingnut2002 permalink
    December 5, 2007 6:19 pm

    Back in the day when fewer teams meant writers were seeing players constantly all season it may have been okay for only the writers to vote on awards but these days I don’t know how a guy can truly judge a players character and value to a team with only stats and Sportscenter highlights to go by. Many are actually students and true fans of the game but based on what I read in papers from across the nation I would guess that just as many are writing for a paycheck…their own! And like you said it only takes a couple personal agendas to screw things up. Maybe baseball could set up a committee of current and former players, writers, executives, scouts etc. to determine award winners. There would be a vast pool of candidates to tap into so the voters would not be voting every year, thus keeping that ‘supreme high council’ snobbiness having the same group of voters every year may create. Each spring a number of voters would be selected from each segment of baseball and they would have the season long task of choosing the award winners for that season. If personal agendas and ‘statements’ are being made it should be pretty easy to see who the fools are! In the meantime, how many players have rules named after them? Enjoy it!

  21. ctballfan permalink
    December 5, 2007 6:41 pm

    Great rant, Curt!
    Please don’t edit a thing.

    Oh, and it might be added that the BBWAA (“old media”) refuses to share its monopoly on awards voting with other (electronic media) reporters.
    They may succeed yet in making themselves irrelevant.

    OK, back on the treadmill big guy. Get all of Theo’s cash & another ring.

  22. gfishbone permalink
    December 5, 2007 7:11 pm

    You make some great points about bias and voting but wow, the font shifts are out of control! 😀

  23. brendinater permalink
    December 5, 2007 7:11 pm

    Perhaps I am missing something, but if a lot of the writers are as unscrupulous and/or unknowledgable as you say (and I have no doubt a lot of them are), doesn’t this give credence to the argument that bonuses should not be tied to awards? After all, why have bonuses tied to awards when the system in place that gives those awards is severely flawed in the first place? At the very least until the system is fixed.

    Also, what is your opinion on something as divisive as HGH? It seemed to me a LOT of voters last year did not vote for Mark McGwire for the Hall of Fame “to make a point”. Do you feel this making of a point is similarly erroneous? The consensus seems to be that he will get a much higher share of votes this year.

  24. mclark3883 permalink
    December 5, 2007 7:22 pm

    The rule is designed to so votes are not unfairly influenced. Why would you be against this, considering you think the votes are already occasionally unfairly influenced?

    “Writers are using a players career accomplishments to get material for articles, that’s stupid and incredibly unfair.”

    And you’re using your career accomplishments to act like you know how to write, as if anyone wants to listen to a blowhard like you. You have done the unthinkable to me: actually making me like Dan Shaunessy because he gives you so much crap.

  25. denisesoxfan permalink
    December 5, 2007 7:24 pm

    You know what, Curt? These writers are morons! Unbelievable. You’re absolutely right – they never have played the game, but some of them sure are entitled. Well, I hope you go out there next year and have the best year of your life, get that vote from a writer who hasn’t got his head in the sand, and get the million bucks!

  26. thedoctorx permalink
    December 5, 2007 8:03 pm

    [CENSORED–Ed.] Luddites the lot of them!

    I like incentives since they protect the team and show appreciation to the player. I am sure if someone asked Theo & Co. if they could have [i]just[/i] payed you for your post-season work, would it have been worth the money, they would respond “yes.” If a player cannot perform–for whatever reason–the team does not have to pay them.

    Of course you know all of this. Too bad some in the press do not.

    Bravo! This is why fans come to sites like this to try to get it directly from a player.


  27. gotpoetry permalink
    December 5, 2007 8:09 pm

    With the Baseball Writers’ Association becoming more irrelevant dues to blogs, wikis and internet forum (GO SOSH!) I feel this move made them even more irrelevant.

    By 2013 the beat sportswriter may be a dieing breed. They just don’t get it.

  28. dmyii permalink
    December 5, 2007 8:29 pm

    Curt: You are “the man” and I know this is vague and simple, but THANK YOU for all you’ve done for our Sox over the past few years. We appreciate your decision to come back next year and Theo’s decision to accomodate it. FYI, you seem to spell “privilege” wrong more often than not on your blog. We’ll give you a pass on that, but you might want less instances of “[sic]” when the media is quoting your blog. BTW, good work on the blog. It must be very rewarding to get your message across in a timely fashion and in your own words every time. It is a refreshing approach, and I believe average joe fan enjoys your personal insights. Have a great offseason and, seriously, THANKS!

  29. pennstater89 permalink
    December 5, 2007 8:29 pm

    Now that we know how you feel about Bill Conlin, why don’t you enlighten Red Sox Nation on Philadelphia’s own Howard Eskin … that is, of course if Eskin hasn’t been suspended again for saying something that makes him look more like a horse’s (let’s go red sox!) than he already is.

    Writers voting for awards at all is just wrong. Period.

  30. kja270 permalink
    December 5, 2007 8:34 pm

    Agreed, everyones an “expert”, that is until their personal agenda is on the line. Then it magically turns into “principal or doing the right thing”. The writers all too often want us, the readers to think of them as the second coming of Hemingway. When in reality some are no more then glorified gossip columnists who are way to caught up in their own self importance.


  31. samadio permalink
    December 5, 2007 8:38 pm

    Why allow the writers to have the power to vote; develop a peer voting system and create new awards for these winners. Help the writers understand they are not important.

  32. vjv5 permalink
    December 5, 2007 8:40 pm

    Curt is absolutely right. I am SICK to death of some of these sportswriters! Bill Conlin is a JOKE. My 5 year old can speak more intelligently about baseball. Leaving Nolan Ryan OFF of his HOF ballot to make a point? What an absurd gesture. What was really telling about that IDIOTIC gesture? Nolan didn’t care…Nolan has class. Regarding players with a clause in their contract not being eligible for the awards — another farce. Let’s see, in 2013, when a guy like Sabathia or Beckett or Santana wins 25 games and has an ERA of 2 and doesn’t win the Cy Young because he’s not “eligible.” Let that happen ONCE and then listen to the FANS…your award will become irrelevant VERY quickly. Sportswriter are often first to point out that players need to know that FANS pay their salaries…hey sportswriters…we pay yours, too. If we weren’t reading your drivel, you would be irrelevant. Conlin…guess what? You already are. That being said, there are some BRILLIANT sportswriters — Gammons is certainly near the top and so is Rick Reilly from Sports Illustrated. Go get ’em Curt. I certainly don’t always agree with you, but I like that you speak your mind. By the way, I’m an Indians fan and always wondered why you turned us down all those years ago…

  33. 34dunks permalink
    December 5, 2007 8:42 pm

    By this logic, Alex Rodriguez shouldn’t be put into the Hall of Fame or win MVPs in 5 years or so, because he’ll be getting $6 million bonuses for hitting homerun milestones.

  34. bermuda95 permalink
    December 5, 2007 8:42 pm


    I am a big baseball fan and often I feel baseball players are not given enough credit for all they do. With that being said, I think you talk too much and are given more credit than you actually deserve. For instance, going back to steriods, you were quick to speak up and blast Jose, and it looks like he was actually the only one telling the truth in front of Congress. And, you may have tripped over your “bloody” sock while you back peddled from your orignal stance on steroids.

    Again, with that being said, I think you are are terrific gamer who is one of the best clutch pitchers, but often it seems you like to hear yourself talk. I am not saying for you to shut up, just HUSH…..


  35. rufokathcar permalink
    December 5, 2007 8:52 pm

    Contracts have included award bonuses for as long as there have been awards. Usually the bonus was for winning the award, but there have been many cases of bonuses for finishing 2nd or 3rd or even lower. So the BBWAA is full of it. I wonder how many recent winners would have been ineligible under these rules.

    (Just in passing: is the Schilling award bonus for a first-place CY vote, or any vote?)

    But some award-givers are even more full of it than the BBWAA. Bowie Kuhn is going to the Hall of Fame, and Marvin Miller isn’t???? How will Kuhn’s plaque read? “Commissioner of Baseball from 19-whatever to 19-whatever. Forced countless senseless confrontations with the MLBPA, all of which he lost. His courageous and resolute clinging to an unjust and outmoded economic system led directly to work stoppages, the loss of a World Series, and ultimately to a complete reversal of the balance of economic power, a result beyond his worst nightmares.”

  36. ignoreant1 permalink
    December 5, 2007 9:02 pm

    Curt, Good thing you have plenty of Hall votes to spare! Have to say the straight talk is as refreshing in baseball as it is in politics.

  37. cjwilson36 permalink
    December 5, 2007 9:06 pm


    I realize I’ve only been in the big leagues for 2.5 years now but I’ve been a fan for at least 20- and the great example you used of HOF voting is really what scares me about these kind of sweeping motions that writers get going. Tom Seaver was the highest % guy ever elected, but still wasn’t 100% unanimous. why not? I mean were those 3 or 4 writers so happy to take the “I denied Tom Seaver” thing to the grave that it was worth it? Merit should be the single characteristic for which players are judged as Cy Young winners, MVPs or inducted into the Hall of Fame- politics or personality shouldn’t go against a guy because

    Recently the NL MVP vote seems to come down to some really close calls- Pujols/Howard, Rollins/Holliday, etc and it’s an interesting development that this story breaks- really calls into question the agenda or ethical biases of those writers who decide the rewards that players get (whether in the long or short term contractually) and therefore every close vote is going to be much more open to scrutiny. The size or nature of our contracts should not be considered for awards- this isn’t the “best guy for cheap award”. Writers should feel free to skewer any guy who gets too much money or applaud the team who pays too little but leave it at that…oh wait they do that anyway!

    The funny thing is that the AP is reporting the BBWAA voted 41-21…well at least I know a few of who those 21 guys are.

    -c.j. wilson

  38. biomechanicist permalink
    December 5, 2007 9:06 pm

    How is that the Schilling clause? Don’t Manny and Papi have similar things in their contracts based on how they finish in MVP voting? Many players have things like this. People are fixated on this idea that you’re going to be buying Buckley a new car to get your $1M bonus.

    This is the stupidest thing I ever heard.

  39. priscillapitman08 permalink
    December 5, 2007 9:31 pm

    I recently read about the baseball writers dinner. A good friend of the family, and one of my father’s former workers,Phil O’neil is being honored. I still read all the different sports writers from the Telegram, Globe, to the Herald. However, in my eyes they are definitely different than when my dad was writing. Of course, I am probably a little biased since he was my father. There is a different tone than there used to be.

  40. mrwraps permalink
    December 5, 2007 9:48 pm

    Its about time someone stood up to these stupid writers. They are a bunch of wanna be ball players who didnt have the skills to play at the high school level and are now jealous of the money and the fame that the players have achieved. They actually believe that the game is about them and not the teams or the players. They shouldn’t be allowed to vote on anything. All voting should be done by retired players, coaches and general managers and not by the writers.

  41. December 5, 2007 10:15 pm

    Hey Curt –

    My wife and I and our new baby (the one who waited only nine weeks for her Red Sox to become champions) attended the forum in Manchester tonight at Derryfield. I wanted to comment on how impressed I was with your attentiveness and sincere interest in all of the Senators responses to our questions. I often looked up to see you totally entrenched in whatever subject Senator McCain was discussing. It was very refreshing.

    The Senator has a rough road ahead to a presidency, but tonight he further convinced me that he wholeheartedly is the right man for the job. When speaking with another voter behind me we admired a quality about the Senator that is also shared by yourself, and myself. That quality is that no matter the circumstance the Senator would speak candidly and honestly about his belief whether or not the voting public backed him or not. The gentleman behind me said that the Senator would not be afraid to speak at a NRA convention about tougher gun laws. With a group of candidates around him often flip-flopping speeches to meet the needs of the groups or financial backers they are addressing, the Senator is very refreshing because he is so good at standing by his original answer.

    It was nice to see you in a non-sport forum and to quietly stand by the side of a man you have so much respect for. I actually gained a ton of respect for you and the way you so smoothly kept everything about the Senator. And kudos to helping that young man on the student council with the auction by signing that ball.

    My wife was also very impressed with both you and the Senator. As I have stated in previous posts her lupus is very trying on our relationship and finances since she cannot work. We love what you do for the community and the event in Medfield for the holidays sounds amazing. I unfortunately am not able to offer assistance there, but would like to offer my help to any future events involving the military you participate in. I am a mobile DJ and marketing specialist by trade and am more than willing to donate sound systems, and music or even MC talents for any event to aid in military appreciation. I served for years in the Army and my dad, like the Senator graduated from the Naval Academy. So consider a full offer to give whatever I can help with to you in the future.

    Thank you for your support of fans, voters and John McCain and I will also be voting for the Senator in the upcoming election.

    Thanks again for being part of what was a very nice evening in Manchester……..although the Senator really needs to see more snowmen…..A CHICKEN????

    Brian & Sarah (and little Teagan) Sparhawk

  42. redsoxrmyheros permalink
    December 5, 2007 10:23 pm

    Hey Curt,
    Absolutely right. I’ve seen so many bias sports writers that change their opinions from broadcast to broadcast. One week a player can be a Gold Glove candidate, then a week later they say his back-up may have done a better job.
    That’s a big part of the problem, they judge players from week to week, instead of looking at the whole season.
    How ridiculous are they to think that the attachment of a bonus to these awards would create a perception that they’re trying to make these guys rich?
    What’s wrong with striving to be the best you can be at what you do?
    Don’t we all do that in our own unique way, my pay at work is based on incentives, the harder I work, the more I make.
    Don’t sports writers receive bonuses when they win prestigious awards too? How hypocritical is that?
    Incentives are just that, whether it’s monetary or notoriety or awards, they are there to be earned, and those that set their goals that high deserve everything they can get when they achieve those goals.
    Great, great entry today Curt, I can’t wait to read the opinions of others.
    Have a great night Curt, thanks for the info and your perspective.

  43. chadfl420 permalink
    December 5, 2007 10:32 pm


    I have read your blog since you started it. I appreciate your insight into the player’s game. Writer’s are selling paper and not well. I can see this is getting to you and it shouldn’t. They only award you guys deserve is the ring yo are getting in April. And be proud of that. That is something earned, not something that others voted or decided for you. Your team wen out on the field and battled for that. It what i teach me kids. Don’t ever worry about what other feel as long as you know who you are. And you are a champion.


  44. gshelley permalink
    December 5, 2007 10:44 pm

    Hi Curt,
    I gave up on postseason awards when Palmiero won a gold glove while playing 18 games in the field. If it wasn’t for writers voting Jim Rice would be in the hall of fame by now.


  45. davejoyal permalink
    December 5, 2007 10:50 pm

    You are so right about this, Lets just look at the history of the All Knowing All Mighty Sportswriter and you see so many mysterious ommisions and misrepresentations that it boggles the mind. Can you imagine someone winning the triple crown today and not winning the MVP? (See 1947 and Ted Williams) Does winning a Gold Glove at first base during a season that you only played 28 times (while you were probably juicing) at that position, seem fair?
    I don’t know who votes for Gold Gloves but that is very often given to the wrong person, and can someone explain Hall of Fame voting?
    How is it that Nobody, not Hank Aaron, Ted Williams, Joe Dimaggio, Babe Ruth, Lou Gehrig, Honus Wagner, or even Jackie Robinson has ever, EVER been UNANIMOUSLY voted into the Baseball Hall of Fame?
    Maybe someone can give me a reason why ANYONE would leave one of the prior mentioned greats of the game off a ballot? Or why should players like Jim Kaat, Andre Dawson, or Dwight Evans not be elected because they play a position that even if they are flashy with their defense they will not be Ozzie Smith. Dawson and Evans had seasons with More HR than Smith had in his career and they both had better career BA, RBÍ, Hits and Oh my gosh a Better Fielding percentage than the Hall of famer. Keep up the great Posts

  46. hwayne99 permalink
    December 5, 2007 10:55 pm

    Oh good, Curt is getting involved in politics again. Based on your wonderful analysis of the last presidential election then I would say that these writers you castigate have the same right to write about a subject they also no nothing about!!

  47. mnredsoxfan24 permalink
    December 5, 2007 11:11 pm

    In my non-expert opinion I believe all contracts should be at least in some form incentive based. I believe that if an athlete has certain requirements he has to fufill, much like any ordinary everyday worker, that athlete then has the INCENTIVE to attempt to achieve it. Having said that I’m not so nieve to believe most professional athletes only preform when given these extra incentives, but its an almost certainty that it has a positive affect on the athletes that have them in their contracts.

  48. sdl1 permalink
    December 5, 2007 11:13 pm

    Now here’s a point to ponder.

    If a guy wins a Cy Young Award and his team rewards him by ripping up his contract and gives him a bonus or a new contract for doing so, does he have to return the Award?

  49. fivekatz permalink
    December 5, 2007 11:14 pm

    You make some great points about mediots and the issues with them.

    But the current clause in your contract is troubling. Bonus money for one vote? It does put the process in question. That can’t be argued. If your name were Varitek you’d already have Boston writers votes dude.

    In fact all the examples of hack action you sight suggest that one, just one major fan-boy writer could take his vote away from the obvious candidate to reward his favorite interview with some serious cabbage.

    But “Schilling Rule” or not perhaps this is a good thing. Not that a player would no longer be considered for recognition based on his contract but because contract incentives will change.

    Perhaps the metrics by which players earn incentives will now have to be defined based on the players performance rather than the votes of baseball writers. And that is all good IMO because writers for the most part are too often vindictive, judgmental jerks that are pissed as hell that they couldn’t make the middle school JV or the international news desk!

    While CC’s Cy Young is valid, if it cost the 2007 pitcher of the year Josh Beckett 10% of his 2007 earnings, would that be right? Or Barry Zito beating out Pedro in 2002 because the writers were sick of him?

    The end result is probably good and therefore you should be proud rather than defensive about forcing the “Schilling Rule”.

    And BTW, great post about trades and the pros and cons about commenting on them as a player. Age does provide wisdom even if it humbles us in so many any other ways, doesn’t it?

  50. duffyscliff permalink
    December 5, 2007 11:27 pm

    I think active players should vote for these awards. Now I’m sure all of the Redsox votes that would have gone to Beckett would have been canceled out by all of the Indians votes for CC.

    HOF votes should go to living members in the Hall.

    If writers vote on anything they should have to pass a test. George King should have lost his PRIVILEGE to vote after the Pedro debacle.

    But honestly, I’d rather see a contract in your clause for Wins or an ERA mark or WHIP than for a single Cy vote.

  51. himself78 permalink
    December 5, 2007 11:37 pm

    I am confused, if Curt gets a SINGLE Cy Young vote he pockets a cool million? So he goes off on the voters?

    What if his arm falls off in April and someone STILL votes for him?

  52. vjv5 permalink
    December 5, 2007 11:59 pm

    Not sure that the Vets committee got it right this time around either…Bowie Kuhn is in the Hall? Yet, Roger Maris is not? I know…it wasn’t the players’ turn this year…SOMEONE PLEASE PUT MARIS IN THE HALL! As far as I’m concerned, 61 is still the record. Sorry Mark…sorry Barry…Roger did it against all odds and he did it clean….not to mention his back-to-back MVP’s and his gold glove and his CLASS.

  53. December 6, 2007 12:05 am

    I don’t know if you’ve read The Politics of Glory by Bill James; in it, he discusses a few reforms on Hall of Fame voting that would remove a lot of the power the BBWAA has in elections. It’s not that the writers know nothing about baseball, but it’s not like they know everything either. The establishment seems to be highly averse to the “new” (ha, new? More like 25-30 years old, by now) statistical analysis available these days. The intangible aspects of baseball make for wonderful, compelling newspaper stories but they’re really not the best way to rank players.

    Related to that, a lot of the statistically-minded baseball bloggers have been making some good cases re Bert Blyleven’s election to the Hall. As you and most of your readers surely know, he’s not in there yet. Did he tick off the media too much when he was playing?

    The other issue with awards, as another commenter said above, is that writers for electronic media are excluded from voting. Yes, people do indeed write for television. It’s not “new media” anymore. Neither is the WWW, these days. I think most of us reading this blog, including myself, are getting our sports news directly from the Internet (even if it is reading articles from print writers.)

    And to Mr Schilling in specific: I don’t know how fannish you are in the “sf fandom” sense, but the sf community is even more crazy about awards than baseball fen. Check out Science Fiction Award Watch for even more award action and drama. What this award controversy, especially in regards to the James HoF reform plan, reminds me of most would be the Hugo awards. They’re voted on by fans and the reaction to the winners can be quite, um, vociferous in fandom; the thing a lot of fans forget is that anyone who bothers to pay the $40 or so to become a voting member of that year’s Worldcon can vote for them. But few fans are that economically motivated to vote for the award. I’m sure that the same thing would happen if there was a movement in baseball for some sort of fan award; who’d bother to pay the money to vote? You’d need to have some sort of system to prevent the All-Star Game sort of ballot stuffing.

  54. jbbrennx permalink
    December 6, 2007 12:34 am

    Look Curt, I don’t know if you ever actually read the comments to your blog, but if you do, great. 2013 is a long (relatively) way a way, and you probably will not be pitching at that time. Notwithstanding this,

    You and all MLB players deserve all the financial benefits you can negotiate.


  55. TheNorEaster permalink
    December 6, 2007 12:48 am

    Dear Curt:

    It’s good to hear that, aside from the recent award voting news, things seem to be going well with the Sox in the offseason.

    Also, I know you are a Christian so–at the risk of sounding arrogant–I thought you might like to take a look at my website: “” You can certainly visit anonymously; as you probably know, I just get numbers on visitors. But I think you just might find it interesting, perhaps even encouraging.

    Merry Christmas.

  56. simonmason permalink
    December 6, 2007 5:34 am

    Curt, Just wanted to say how sweet it was to see those imbicile’s down at the globe eat their words when you were resigned, particularly Shaunessy whom I detest. I’ve never forgiven him for the article he wrote when you guys were down 0-3 in 04′ calling you out as common criminals, something that was neatly edited out of the version currently online after you won it all. Its of course great to have you back regardless. Ahhhh the last laugh is very hard indeed!!

    Heres to a healthy 08’…nice one


    Simon Mason (UK)

  57. vermonter permalink
    December 6, 2007 6:38 am

    if they paid the writers better to start with the risk would be lower. i’m just sayin’…

  58. December 6, 2007 8:10 am

    “Terry Francona, who had a roundtable chat with national reporters this morning, couldn’t resist shooting a zinger at Schilling. When asked his thoughts on Schilling and Mike Lowell leaving money on the table, Francona said: “It may the first time Schill has ever left anything on the table.”

    Oooh. You got served, Curt.

    You have a cool boss, heh. ❤ Francona.

  59. seachicken11 permalink
    December 6, 2007 8:49 am

    Wow! What a great article. I have to admit I generally think Kurt is a giant blowhard and only read his blog when I need to get fired up (perhaps it is becaus I am a New yorker or perhaps it is because ie believe his faith and his political affiliation tend to cloud the waters of critical analysis….but then again it is his blog). There aren’t too many occasions when I agree with his point of view, but he hit nail on the head with this one.

    I find it appaling that individual writers will not place a vote just to make a point. Do that in your column! That’s what it’s for. You are given a column to write/discuss your point of view. You are given a vote to honor an individual player’s accomplishment. What kind of yahoo wouldn’t vote for Cal Ripken or Nolan Ryan? Someone who feels that his point is more important than an individual’s career. I completely agree that writers who allow their own personal bias or ego to get in the way of their voting should be stripped of their voting privelage.

  60. doogald permalink
    December 6, 2007 9:45 am

    I hope that they make the change, because at some point a pitcher with a bonus clause will go 30-1 with an ERA under 1.00, or a batter will hit over .400, or drive in 175 runs while hitting over 60 home runs in a year and the idiots will have to follow their own rules and award the Cy Young or the MVP to somebody else and try to justify why the player who clearly earned it – whom everyone who follows baseball *knows* was the best player that year – did not earn their award.

    Self-important, silly people like baseball journalists can be fun to watch sometimes when their egos get in the way of common sense.

    I’ll say this: the Red Sox had every right not to offer a contract that offered a bonus for a single Cy Young vote, but they chose to agree to the contract, knowing that they risk playing out more for a single vote. I am sure that Theo Epstein and the Sox brass are confident that if Curt Schilling gets a single vote for the award, then he had a season that either met or exceeded their expectations, and they will be happy for it.

    And the baseball writers who vote for this award have every right to express their frustration by not casting ballots. But they also run the risk of looking like idiots in a case like I mentioned above.

  61. ennuipundit permalink
    December 6, 2007 9:47 am

    Hi Curt. On suggestion. Break me a freakin’ give is funnier than give me a break.

  62. thejadoon permalink
    December 6, 2007 9:58 am

    So, “Writers are using a players career accomplishments to get material for articles, that’s stupid and incredibly unfair”

    But your buddies The Duo of Dung using a man death to get material for their show if okay – you must think so – because you have not spoken out about it.

    By the way The Duo of Dung said they were wrong, it was not something Shawn Taylor did that caused his death.

    But The Duo wants use to give them credit for having the “courage” to get materal for their show – I mean speak out.

    The real reason he is dead (according to The D of D) – black youth and their total disreguard for life –

    Did you read the story about Robert A. Hawkins, the 19 white guy who Police say killed 8 people in the shootings at an Omaha shopping mall.

    Face it yor friends are racist and as my mother used to say – you are judged by the people you make friends with.

    Enjoy Davio’s with The D of D next week.

  63. mudhen permalink
    December 6, 2007 10:08 am

    I have to agree with a bunch of the stuff you wrote but I also have to say I think the $1 mil for just 1 vote should not be allowed. With this, there is clearly the chance that there could be an appearance of something that would not smell right. I doubt it would happen but lets say you have a good season but not good enough where you would normally get a vote, yet you do get the vote? Maybe a Yankee writer would want to cost the Sox a cool million. Yeah, you could rail against the writer, but it COULD happen.

    When I first saw that, I thought it was a bad idea. I don’t have a problem with getting money for winning the awards, that I don’t think would be construed to be fixed. (I am not saying it would be but could appear to be).

    Keep up the good work (From a Tigers fan)

  64. bjonesnboston permalink
    December 6, 2007 10:28 am

    Couldn’t a rule be put in to block your salary package from people who don’t need to know. other companies have policies that don’t allow sharing that type of info.

    Also, only let the players and past players, or those involved in baseball and under the MLB salary pick the award winners. Only my bosses get to choose me for awards based on my numbers. People outside the company can brag on me all they want to hopefully get me the recognition they feel I deserve, but they don’t actually have a vote.

    just a thought.

  65. redsoxnational permalink
    December 6, 2007 10:52 am


    My only issue with contract clauses like the one you have is the risk of abuse. I am not saying that you would abuse the clause. Quite the opposite. I am pretty sure that you are a stand up guy and would not abuse it. However, lets say that some other player, who may be less financially secure than you, and has a similar clause to yours. All he needs is 1 vote and he gets 1 million dollars. Now don’t you think there is at least some possibility that this player might be tempted to offer a bribe, say $100,000 to a writer for one measly third place vote. I don’t want to imply that baseball players are corrupt, because I don’t think that is true. But 1 million dollars is a lot of money, and can put a lot of pressure on a player to get that money for him and his family. I just think that a clause such as this, puts a potential strain on the integrity of the awards and the game.

  66. metz123 permalink
    December 6, 2007 5:07 pm

    I’m sorry that most of you think that all baseball columnists are supposed to write about factual analysis of the game for their respective papers. They aren’t. That’s the job of the beat writer. Most of the columnists Shilling goes off on have a totally different function for their paper. Their job is to be “controversial”. They get paid to do stupid things like hold back a vote for a sure fire 1st round HOF player and write a meaningless article on why they did it. It generates publicity for the paper and possibly greater sales.

    These guys aren’t paid to be unbiased observers of the game or report on the local team. They are paid to generate controversy. Now, this isn’t a job I would seek out or could do well. I imagine you’ve got to be sort of a jerk to do this job well and have a pretty thick skin. However, venting an acidic diatribe at these people accomplishes nothing. They are what they are and they do what they do. The awards are meaningless (as is every sporting event where an outside observer judges the victor).

    Y’all need to chill…Curt included…

  67. 38blabs permalink
    December 6, 2007 6:08 pm

    Blah blah blah….How much ass can these comments kiss?…..When you become an accredited journalist, and a member of the BBWAA, then you can open your never ending trap, until then who cares? You can write all ya want on your little kiss ass blog, but as far a journalism goes…..True journalism, you deriding Bill Conlin shows you don’t have a damn clue.A million dollars for one Cy Young vote?……..C’mon…You don’t need an agent. You need a pimp

  68. baseballfan85 permalink
    December 6, 2007 6:21 pm

    These are the same writers who wouldn’t make Hideki Matsui Rookie of the Year in 2003 because he played in Japan despite the fact that another guy who played in Japan, Ichiro Suzuki, had won the award just 2 years earlier. Personally, although I’m not a fan of yours, Curt (well, I am a Yankees fan, so I know the feeling is mutual, LOL), I do respect what you’ve done in your career, especially in the post season. (Damn you, bloody sock!! LOL) I have a problem with the baseball writers decision. If anything, I think having bonuses like you have in your new contract actually helps baseball, because it makes the player try harder, and it gives him more incentive to go out there and have a great season.

  69. vjv5 permalink
    December 6, 2007 7:18 pm

    Dear 38blabs…is that you Bill Conlin??? ANYONE who doesn’t vote for Nolan Ryan so that he can “make a point” is an ass. If you don’t think someone deserves enshrinement, don’t vote for him. Make a point my ass.

  70. denisesoxfan permalink
    December 6, 2007 7:42 pm

    Just a further thought: If a writer is doing his job properly, why would a player’s incentive clause influence his/her vote in any way? What difference does it make to the writer? Why wouldn’t they just vote their conscience anyway? If writers think this new rule is needed because they would be influenced improperly by it, aren’t they calling themselves untrustworthy scum?

  71. edu498 permalink
    December 6, 2007 9:23 pm

    way to use all the possible microsoft fonts in one post… is that like having 5 pitches?

  72. chesario permalink
    December 6, 2007 9:47 pm

    Hmm. If you hold so many writers in low regard (and have left handed compliments for the ones you “like”), why would you agree to an incentive that is entirely in their hands in the first place?

    While you have gone to great pains to point out the absense of logic or consistency in the canon of arguments put forth by Bill Conlin, you did not explain why these award-based incentives are a good (or appropriate) remuneration scheme.

    It would stand to reason that you are in support of a pay for performance scenario. If that’s true, then why not implement these in some greater fashion, where statistics speak louder. In the cases where the CBA apparently does not allow this, that is a shortcoming that rests largely with the players’ union, and to ownership as well.

    More broadly, if actions are meant to speak louder than words and logic and fact are meant to trump emotion, you should probably re-read your statements and consider your own motivation.

  73. thisisnotabomb permalink
    December 7, 2007 11:52 am


    give the money to charity. that way everybody wins.

  74. soxfandavevingoshen permalink
    December 7, 2007 12:18 pm

    Curt. You mentioned some stuff about the writer’s and the way some use their vote as a personal statement of some kind or another made by them, a writer/person supposedly gifted with a responsibility of maturity in their decision making for something as important as a voice in deciding the fate of someone achieving something important … like Nolan Ryan’s inclusion into the HOF. That was a no-brainer decision for someone to make … yet … look at what Bill Conlin did. (As an example of yours) Stuff like this is a disgrace as far as I’m concerned. I would bend over backwards and kiss my butt for the chance to have the privilege that he has of a vote. I wish the baseball fan could have a hand in the process in deciding whether or not someone like a Bill Conlin should be able to keep the honor of a vote that he has. I wrote this about another voter concerning the 2007 HOF ballot:

    Petition to remove the HOF voting privilege of Paul Ladewski?


    I feel the HOF voting honor bestowed on the Columnist, Paul Ladewski, is completely undeserved … and should somehow be revoked. The man showed no sensibility in his decision to send in a blank 2007 ballot. His doing so with his ballot seems nothing more than a self-promoting showmanship scheme that attempts to upstage the National Baseball Hall of Fame and the game of baseball itself. It is terrible that the man dismissed his obligation to some terrific players that should not have been passed over for consideration in such an irrational and non-caring way, as done by Mr. Ladewski with his 2007 ballot. How could he honestly overlook the players that were well deserving by standards already set for placement in the National Baseball Hall of Fame?

    First off, one player certainly overlooked by Columnist Ladewski, has to be Tony Gwynn. Mr. Gwynn is a man of impeccable character and a player that was exceptional in being fan friendly. His statistical numbers speak for themselves. Tony Gwynn was a player that was gifted with baseball skills and leadership shown to be that of the highest caliber in his time.

    Also, of course, is “Mr. Durability and Dependability” himself-Cal Ripken Jr. – a man blessed with a desire to compete day-in and day-out without exception … through pain and with true grit. He had many very good years at shortstop with the Orioles – far more than anyone would expect for a man of his size. As time went on for Mr. Ripken … he became a modern marvel … and then became the “Iron Man” after playing more consecutive games than the Yankees’ own beloved hero and fan favorite that was beloved by all … Lou Gehrig’s unbelievable 2130 consecutive game streak … that was passed by Cal, for a mere 502 more games! “2632” alone … spells out HOF.

    Both of these players deserved more than the arrogant back-turning to sensibility that was shown by Mr. Paul Ladewski, in dismissing his voting obligation completely for them and for every other player involved. Not only dismissing an obligation to the 2007 HOF class of candidates … but also the former players of baseball, the current players … and lastly … an obligation to us – the everyday fans … that follow baseball daily, and appreciates its history. What true fan wouldn’t cherish the position of a vote caster for baseball’s best that he dismissed without regard. If Mr. Ladewski wants to make a personal statement about today’s baseball issues … he did it in the wrong way. Do it in the column you write instead.

    You owed a vote made for all of us — that can’t vote. You should have shown a ballot that shows rational thinking instead … not one that shows you are not abusing your privilege of being a voter to the National Baseball Hall of Fame. The honor Columnist Ladewski has, should be taken away in my opinion.


    What do you think? Now here we go once again with the writer’s stepping out of their little corner with something more they can mess with … with something now called … The Schilling clause. The writer’s place is to write about what happens on the field — and they should have limited say in other player baseball matters such as a contract’s wording … or their interpretation of such wording in voting for any historical baseball matters.

  75. chasiv permalink
    December 7, 2007 1:13 pm

    3 points on this one…

    I agree with ‘incentive clauses’. Although players are paid a ridiculous amounts of money to pay a game, anything that gets them motivated over a long 162+ game schedule the better.

    Why should writers vote on these awards? Why not more knowledgeable people like either the MLB Managers or MLB Players. The media is one part of the sport that is and always has been horrible for the game.

    Simply put — Baseball needs a salary cap !!!

  76. mlefebvre2002 permalink
    December 7, 2007 1:29 pm


    I am a first timer here with the blogging world, and wanted to give a belated personal congratulations on the WS and the new contract.

    You have been a tremendous figure in New England and will continue to for years to come…

    Also, I have to say with regards to McCain, nice work. He exemplifies what you put forward, hard work, will to win, and views that actually have depth to them. I will ask though, if you were in his shoes, who would be his running mate….I think it might be time for 38 to step up to the plate.

  77. frodo1962 permalink
    December 7, 2007 1:34 pm

    I don’t understand what the fuss about, these clauses are not new … I’ve read about plenty of contracts with clauses if the player is elected to the All Star Game, MVP, Cy Young etc. It is nothing new to the sport … in fact Arod just got 1.5 million for winning the MVP this year… why isn’t it called the Arod clause?

    Another odd thing about this is the call it the Schilling clause, but it should more aptly be called the Jayson Blair Clause because it implys that reporters can’t be trusted to act with integrity when selected to vote for these awards.

  78. bbenfrank permalink
    December 7, 2007 6:01 pm

    Hey Curt, don’t ask the writers to be called out when you run your mouth constantly. As a matter of fact, people pay writers to write, they pay you to pitch baseballs not run your mouth until you stick your foot in it. Continue your HOF career in baseball, let other people write for a living.

  79. gambitmg permalink
    December 7, 2007 8:07 pm


    Suggestion from a fellow wordpress blogger ( about the fonts and such since everyone is having a conniption fit about it…

    Just take the text of everything you wrote in this post (select all and copy) and do one of two things.

    1. You can just take all that text, then open up Notepad in windows – paste all of the text in there. Then, select all and copy the text in wordpad (you are now copying everything in a generic font that is all the same since notepad just makes all text pasted in the same) – then go back to your post, highlight everything and delete it. Then, just paste in the stuff from Notebad, and VOILA its all the same font and will display as your default font on the blog when you hit save. I do this ALL the time when I deal with text I bring in from articles and stuff like you did.

    2. You can just select all the text from your post in the “visual” tab and copy it. Then click on the “code” tab right next to it – highlight everything and delete it (this is where all the html code is to tell the text how to look). Just take your copied text and then paste it in the now blank code tab. You hit save, and BANG – it is all the same font and its your default font and everything.

    They both work well, and if you ever run into trouble with the wordpress fonts/sizes/colors and all that jazz from an import like that, just do either #1 or #2 and you’re golden.

    Hope that helps bud – looking forward to seeing what a 20 game winning “#3” starter looks like. God bless you Curt.


  80. curt24 permalink
    December 8, 2007 12:15 am

    Hey Curt,

    Why don’t you just use this website to raise money for charity? Why do you use it to give your opinion on topics that have nothing to do with your charitable endeavours?

    A regurlar Human Being.

  81. hockeynarrative permalink
    December 8, 2007 8:53 am

    I agree with the decision by the writers.

    Nothing against Curt personally but with the image problems the game has been having, the commodification of awards is something else to turn people off.

    The potential perception problems are too great. Imagine if a writer who is chummy with a player votes for that player? Cries of “kickback” are sure to follow.

  82. attyrosa permalink
    December 8, 2007 5:29 pm

    Isn’t all this discussion for nothing? You don’t really think you are going to actually pitch that well, do you?

  83. December 8, 2007 5:34 pm

    I can’t help it … I’m a Yankee fan! 🙂

  84. baseballvictim permalink
    December 9, 2007 4:05 pm

    Nolan Ryan did not deserve to go in his first time.

  85. soxfandavevingoshen permalink
    December 10, 2007 3:59 pm

    Really? I don’t understand why that would be. But I’m a nothin’ …

  86. mkmmtwg permalink
    December 20, 2007 8:40 am

    I think players who win MVP’s, CY Young’s, & Rookie of the Year Awards, and Gold Gloves should be monetarily compensated. I just think that it shouldn’t be the individual team’s responsibility to add clauses to contracts, I think all team owners should contribute to a pot that the league controls that makes up the bonuses. For example: A Cy Young Award is worth 5 to 10 million, an MVP is worth 5 to 10 million, a Rookie of the Year is worth 1 to 5 million, and a Gold Glove is worth anywhere from 100K to 500K depending on the position played.

    This added bonus would be incentive for every player in the league.

  87. tropicana340 permalink
    December 20, 2007 2:28 pm


    I think you all are missing an important point.

    Assume, for the sake of argument, that the winners of the Cy Young Award (and all other such awards for that matter) are determined perfectly… that there is never any dispute on the part of the players or fans and every year everyone unanimously agrees that the BBWAA (or whatever other body decides the winner) picked the person who had genuinely and unmistakably earned that award by their performance on the field of play. Assume that to be the case for all sports and all awards for athletic performance.

    Whether or not there is an explicit clause in a player’s contract that allows for a bonus for winning such an award (or a vote for that player to win such an award), that player’s compensation as a professional athlete will increase or decrease based upon that player’s performance on the field of play. Players who have won MVP’s and Cy Young Awards etc. command a higher salary at the bargaining table not because of the name of the award or the entity that has awarded it but because the award evidences superior performance on the field of play.

    If the five greatest pitchers in the league have contract clauses that award them bonuses for winning such awards such that the BBWAA (or whatever other body decides the winner) excludes them from consideration, those five greatest players will STILL command the biggest salaries based upon their performance on the field. However, the significance of the “Cy Young Award” will be greatly diminished if people know those awards do not recognize the best players in the league. At that point, such provisions will not appear in contracts NOT because the BBWAA has decreed that they will not consider players who have such provisions in their contracts but rather because players will not bother trying to put such provisions in their contracts because the teams and owners will know that winning such an award no longer means that player had a superior performance that year.

    In short, the BBWAA has confused cause and effect. A player’s performance on the field of play is the cause, the Cy Young Award (and an increased salary) is the effect. The Cy Young Award does not cause superior perfomance on the field of play and it does not cause an increased salary EXCEPT to the extent that it reflects that player’s performance on the field of play. The moment the Cy Young Award ceases to reflect the performance of the players on the field of play is the moment that the Cy Young Award’s loses all significance.


  88. December 22, 2007 7:51 am

    This is a great blog. Who knew a pitcher could write so well and make good points. KUDOS! Keep it going Curt.

  89. Michael permalink
    September 3, 2009 12:33 pm

    Please run for office. We really need you NOW.
    I pledge to do whatever I can to help you get elected.

    Thank you

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

38 Pitches

Curt Schilling's Official Blog

%d bloggers like this: