Justin Verlander wins Emperor of the Land of Awesome

Or, you know, AL Rookie of the Year. Same deal.


Click the image for bigger, natch. And both the source photos were taken by me, for once! A minor miracle. Clickee clickee.

This is all very simple, so far as I can tell. Verlander deserved to win. Verlander won. The other guys were all pretty darn good candidates (Papelbon, Liriano, Johjima, Weaver the second, et. al.), but Justin Verlander played the whole year and played pretty bloody well the whole year. Justice is done, kittens and cupcakes for all, celebrating in the streets, so on and so forth.

I am kind of curious about who gave Nick Markakis his sole first place vote, though. And I’d like to hear the reasoning behind that vote, provided it’s something different from what I think it must be, that being “a whole lot of mushrooms of really, really dubious origin”.

Hooray hooray Justin Verlander AL Rookie of the Year hooray.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.

Unrelated anecdote time!

I was in Starbucks today, supporting the evil corporation in direct violation of my art student code of conduct. I (naturally enough) had my Red Sox hat on, and the cashier made some little ‘booooo!’ noise upon seeing me. Whatever, I get that sometimes; they’re not really rivals of anyone out here, of course, but another AL team is bound to catch at least some flak. I do my little ‘woe is me you have wounded in my heart’ pantomime and order my sugary caffeinated poison of choice.

“Ha, I’m just kiddin’, I don’t really hate them,” cashierette says. “But man, I’m just glad the Tigers didn’t win it all.”

“Awwww, why not?” I ask. It’s not worth getting into my dual fandoms at the cash register, but she’s taking some time with my money, I’m stuck standing there anyways, so as a Tigers fan, even if she can’t see it, I am of course obliged to respond to this remark. I figure she’ll say she’s from Chicago or St. Louis or New York or something and that will explain that.

“They didn’t deserve it,” she says. I cock my head inquiringly. “They only just got good; they haven’t been good long enough. So they didn’t deserve it. Now, if they’re still good a few years down the road, then they’ll deserve to win.”

Bzuh?

I can’t even begin to fathom this logic. I think I gaped a little like a carp and said something intelligent like, “Hey, good teams have to start somewhere,” but I really was sort of blindsided by that FREAKIN’ INSANITY and still am now. I mean… what? A team can’t win a World Series unless they’re some kind of pseudo-dynasty beforehand? To what person does that make sense?
The worst bit?

One of the other baristas immediately agreed with her.

I just took my coffee and sat down at a table far, far away from the cash register, to destroy my hand by doing far too much pointillism and rack my brain for the reasoning that would result in that opinion. I dunno, man. I just don’t know. But I figured I ought to relate it herein, because it’s just that bonkers. I mean, seriously, what?

But yes, Justin Verlander, AL Rookie of the Year. Bears repeating. Hip hip hooray to the max, kids and kittens.

3 responses to “Justin Verlander wins Emperor of the Land of Awesome

  1. Well, I guess we all have our particularities. I for one can in no way fathom how anyone could really claim to be a fan of two AL teams. I can see being a casual fan of more than one team, but a seriously strong held, passionate, fanatical type following for more than one team seems impossible. There’s a woman I work with who claims to be an equally strong fan of both the Yankees and Astros. I don’t really even believe that is possible, and those teams are in different leagues.
    Not trying to knock you, just saying, people have weird ideas about sports.

  2. Eh, it’s not that weird. I’m from MA, so I grew up saturated in Red Sox-ness. My dad’s from MI, so I was forcibly raised on Detroit sports despite my actual geographic location. Both took root. Now I’m at school in Michigan half the year, so it’s just reinforced. There’s really no cognitive dissonance at all except for the few times each year when they play each other, and I usually survive those by rooting for whoever needs it more at that point in the season, and then feeling horribly guilty about it for a while afterwards.

  3. I’m a loyal fan of two AL teams, in the same division even (though they didn’t used to be), so I understand exactly where you’re coming from. In my case the teams are the Tigers and the Royals, which in most years gets no other response from other people than “Ooh, I’m sorry”. But on the upside, it’s never presented a conflict for me of the sort where both teams are in the playoff race and I have to root against one of them when they play each other – I mean, it was _easy_ for me to root for the Tigers to annihilate the Royals as totally as they did last year. They were helping the Royals get a better draft pick.
    I wanted the Tigers to win the World Series, of course, but I don’t think the baristas were insane. For all the shortness of people’s memories, I think it’s obvious that the Cardinals were a better team than the Tigers: I mean, they were pretty much the same team that had won 205 games the past two years. If I’d known that the betting odds against the Cards in the series were 2:1, I’d’ve laid down money on the Cards. THEN, knowing who to root for would’ve been hard. (I think I’d’ve still rooted for Detroit, though.)

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com 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 )

Google+ photo

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

Connecting to %s