If we miss playoffs by one game...

[Lou E Ville]

you can thank the fact that we had to face Kershaw and Greinke twice.

 

Who is the Twins NL counterpart? How about the Rangers and Astros?

[Blarg]

I think the other 80 losses count.

[laagamer]

If we'd have just won that game back in April...

Edited September 10, 2015 by laagamer

[Lou]

What if we make it by 1 game?

[Docwaukee]

What if we make it by 1 game?

we'll lose in the one game play in.  

[Lou]

Which is fewer losses than last year's playoff run.

 

Progress!

[QuinlansMinion]

We have lost a ton of games to bad teams.  Even if we played the Phillies instead of the Dodgers I dont think you can guarantee we win those games.  

[Vegas Halo Fan]

you can thank the fact that we had to face Kershaw and Greinke twice.

 

Who is the Twins NL counterpart? How about the Rangers and Astros?

 

Who are both ahead of us in the standings.

[Lou E Ville]

Come on, you can't tell me there's not a difference between facing those two twice every year and facing whoever it is the Twins get every year (Milwaukee?)

 

Reverse it, the Twins get Greinke and Kershaw twice each and we get Milwaukee six times. You gonna tell me we go 1-5 against Milwaukee? Or whoever the Twins get every year.

 

The Angels, Dodgers, and Mets get screwed every year. Imagine getting Colorado six games every year while someone else gets the Giants.

 

Interleague play needs to be cleaned up now that the divisions are even.

[Stradling]

If we miss it by one game then we can just as easily blame it on Trout's slump, Albert's second half, Scioscia using Salas and Alvarez, Weaver's "fastball", Joe Smith, Victorino and DeJesus, Joyce, Iannetta, Featherston, CJ Wilson, 2nd year Shoe, Stoneman, Dipoto quitting, or simply AO for not self banning nearly enough.

[Blarg]

Come on, you can't tell me there's not a difference between facing those two twice every year and facing whoever it is the Twins get every year (Milwaukee?)

 

Reverse it, the Twins get Greinke and Kershaw twice each and we get Milwaukee six times. You gonna tell me we go 1-5 against Milwaukee? Or whoever the Twins get every year.

 

The Angels, Dodgers, and Mets get screwed every year. Imagine getting Colorado six games every year while someone else gets the Giants.

 

Interleague play needs to be cleaned up now that the divisions are even.

 

The Angels got Colorado four games this year and swept them. Your argument is pretty silly since the Angels have a losing record against the Padres and they stink and an even .500 vs the Diamondbacks that are just as bad.

[Lou]

Houston faced the dodgers 3 times this year. Kershaw  and Greinke each started one game.

 

The Astros swept them. 

[Lou]

Texas was 3-1 vs the dodgers.

 

Beat Kershaw and lost to Greinke

[Guest]

you can thank the fact that we had to face Kershaw and Greinke twice.

 

Who is the Twins NL counterpart? How about the Rangers and Astros?

I have long been an advocate that the schedule should be closer to balanced, and that Interleague games should not count toward division standings, only wild card standings. That's because interleague is broken down completely differently each division by division (this year it's NL west vs AL west). 

[yk9001]

you can thank the fact that we had to face Kershaw and Greinke twice.

 

Who is the Twins NL counterpart? How about the Rangers and Astros?

 

These are the worst kind of posts.  Life isn't fair!!!!

[Lou]

And the players won't even get ribbons 

[19HALO71]

Then again.

 

When we face the Dodgers in the World Series, we would have seen them plenty of times.

 

We'll get even when it counts the most!

 

Go Halos!!!

[Guest]

These are the worst kind of posts.  Life isn't fair!!!!

Actually I'd argue that getting in as a second wildcard at all cheapens the postseason and isn't fair to the division winners and to the best non-division winner. So unfairness cuts both ways should the Angels miraculously sneak into the postseason that way.

Edited September 10, 2015 by ScottLux

[Catwhoshatinthehat]

The regular season is 162 games long.  If they don't make the playoffs you can blame it all you want on one game or one series but they had as many chances as every other team to get it done.  When the Astros moved back to the AL west in 2013 some people on here were saying the Angels would have the luxury of playing them 19 times a year.  Just goes to show you how quickly it can all change and misfortune one year can be a blessing the next when your opponents struggle.  

[Guest]

The regular season is 162 games long.  If they don't make the playoffs you can blame it all you want on one game or one series but they had as many chances as every other team to get it done.  When the Astros moved back to the AL west in 2013 some people on here were saying the Angels would have the luxury of playing them 19 times a year.  Just goes to show you how quickly it can all change and misfortune one year can be a blessing the next when your opponents struggle.  

11 out of the Astros' 51 wins that season were against the Angels.

 

The fact that Scioscia was not fired after the back to back disasters that were the 2012 and 2013 regular seasons suggests he will be managing the Angels until 2019 or until Arte sells the team, whichever is longer. 

Edited September 10, 2015 by ScottLux

[Reveille1984]

It's more the fact that we're a mediocre baseball team with a bunch of nobodies on the roster. 

[Stradling]

11 out of the Astros' 51 wins that season were against the Angels.

The fact that Scioscia was not fired after the back to back disasters that were the 2012 and 2013 regular seasons suggests he will be managing the Angels until 2019 or until Arte sells the team, whichever is longer.

I know you think this is true but give me a break. Scioscia is to blame because we lost to the Astros 11 times one season. That would be like me saying, "because The Angels won 98 games last year Scioscia should be the manager for ever". Blame/credit.

[Blarg]

Well.. He sort of is.

[Stradling]

Hey Eric, as a long time fan which do you prefer, the stability of Scioscia being here for 15 years or the merry go round of managers we had the first 40 plus years? Obviously a balance of the two would be nice, but it was basically every two years we had a new manager.

[Homebrewer]

Why does it have to be one or the other?

Are you trying to justify giving a manager a 10 year contract?

My guess is that Scioscia would have been gone a while back, if not for owner stupidity.