Chicago Fanatics Message Board https://mail.chicagofanatics.com/ |
|
adam laroche https://mail.chicagofanatics.com/viewtopic.php?f=75&t=99220 |
Page 1 of 2 |
Author: | ontiveros [ Wed Mar 16, 2016 3:49 pm ] |
Post subject: | adam laroche |
http://deadspin.com/adam-laroche-retire ... 1765311014 makes for a good excuse, but I think it was more than that. |
Author: | rogers park bryan [ Wed Mar 16, 2016 3:50 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: adam laroche |
Rejected. Should be Drake LaRoche. Stupid fucking kid never heard of Bo |
Author: | jimmypasta [ Wed Mar 16, 2016 4:12 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: adam laroche |
I really don't understand why you subject your kid to what goes on in a clubhouse. |
Author: | Regular Reader [ Wed Mar 16, 2016 4:14 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: adam laroche |
jimmypasta wrote: I really don't understand why you subject your kid to what goes on in a clubhouse. I really don't understand why you subject your clubhouse to what goes on with your dumb assed kid. |
Author: | leashyourkids [ Wed Mar 16, 2016 4:17 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: adam laroche |
Regular Reader wrote: jimmypasta wrote: I really don't understand why you subject your kid to what goes on in a clubhouse. I really don't understand why you subject your clubhouse to what goes on with your dumb assed kid. They're fine on a leash. |
Author: | Gloopan Kuratz [ Wed Mar 16, 2016 4:20 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: adam laroche |
Adam LaRouche can go buy the nicest trailer in the park. |
Author: | jimmypasta [ Wed Mar 16, 2016 4:22 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: adam laroche |
Author: | good dolphin [ Wed Mar 16, 2016 4:23 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: adam laroche |
rogers park bryan wrote: Rejected. Should be Drake LaRoche. Stupid fucking kid never heard of Bo and drake is a really stupid WASP wannabe name |
Author: | Ed_from_Lisle [ Wed Mar 16, 2016 4:34 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: adam laroche |
Maybe Kenny Williams is trying to shield young LaRoche from any potential Otis Wilsons walking around the locker room nude. Since it became an issue recently, maybe it's one of their new additions that's packing some "scare the shit out of a young kid" manhood. Todd Frazier? |
Author: | DannyB [ Wed Mar 16, 2016 4:38 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: adam laroche |
Drake LaRoche wrote: You are weak and stupid. For that you shall be field dressed alive before I drink your blood. |
Author: | Juice's Lecture Notes [ Wed Mar 16, 2016 4:41 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: adam laroche |
Once that Duck Dynasty guy hears about this, I can't wait for the thinly-veiled racist implications to flow Kenny's way. |
Author: | Hockey Gay [ Wed Mar 16, 2016 4:54 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: adam laroche |
Anyone who hunts for fun is a weirdo |
Author: | Regular Reader [ Wed Mar 16, 2016 5:08 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: adam laroche |
Hockey Gay wrote: Anyone who hunts for fun is a weirdo Paging Darkside in 3...2...1... |
Author: | Hatchetman [ Wed Mar 16, 2016 5:22 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: adam laroche |
It at least give the animal a chance unlike factory farms. |
Author: | ontiveros [ Wed Mar 16, 2016 8:08 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: adam laroche |
jimmypasta wrote: I really don't understand why you subject your kid to what goes on in a clubhouse. So, drake...you ever see a grown man naked? |
Author: | Scooter [ Wed Mar 16, 2016 10:30 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: adam laroche |
Locker room kids out. Sent the kid to a real school. No problem that I can see. |
Author: | Douchebag [ Wed Mar 16, 2016 11:01 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: adam laroche |
Scooter wrote: Locker room kids out. Sent the kid to a real school. No problem that I can see. I can see multiple problems in your statements. |
Author: | Beardown [ Wed Mar 16, 2016 11:09 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: adam laroche |
That's just it. What if the guys want to talk about the hot waitress they banged on the road trip? What if they want to let out a few "F-Bombs" after striking out 4 times? What if they want to tell dirty jokes? Can't do it cuz Adam's damn kid is here...ALL THE TIME. |
Author: | Darkside [ Wed Mar 16, 2016 11:10 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: adam laroche |
Scooter wrote: Locker room kids out. Sent the kid to a real school. No problem that I can see. Did you go out after work today? |
Author: | Beardown [ Wed Mar 16, 2016 11:31 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: adam laroche |
Kids shouldn't be in clubhouses. But I do believe the players hookers should be allowed every day. |
Author: | Colonel Angus [ Thu Mar 17, 2016 12:07 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: adam laroche |
good dolphin wrote: rogers park bryan wrote: Rejected. Should be Drake LaRoche. Stupid fucking kid never heard of Bo and drake is a really stupid WASP wannabe name |
Author: | ontiveros [ Thu Mar 17, 2016 8:26 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: adam laroche |
I need some more information. is drake in the clubhouse every day? I'm talking spring training, road trips, the whole thing. or is it just during his spring break from school and home games in the summer? |
Author: | Rod [ Thu Mar 17, 2016 8:34 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: adam laroche |
ontiveros wrote: I need some more information. is drake in the clubhouse every day? I'm talking spring training, road trips, the whole thing. or is it just during his spring break from school and home games in the summer? Drake was like a member of the team. I think even the Guillen kids went to school although you wouldn't know it to hear them talk. |
Author: | good dolphin [ Thu Mar 17, 2016 9:15 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: adam laroche |
I didn't know he was 14. That kid should be either enjoying his last days of grade school or in high school. This isn't a child we are talking about. |
Author: | BigW72 [ Thu Mar 17, 2016 10:29 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: adam laroche |
i'm sure there's a lot we don't know...and this could only happen to the White Sox. Bottom line...there's no job in the world where it's ok to bring your kid to work on a daily basis. 14 yrs old....he has other priorities, as do you as the parent. Then you leave $13M on the table because you are told to knock it off. he's a douche...and a weirdo. |
Author: | Chus [ Thu Mar 17, 2016 10:30 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: adam laroche |
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote: ontiveros wrote: I need some more information. is drake in the clubhouse every day? I'm talking spring training, road trips, the whole thing. or is it just during his spring break from school and home games in the summer? Drake was like a member of the team. I think even the Guillen kids went to school although you wouldn't know it to hear them talk. |
Author: | a retard [ Thu Mar 17, 2016 11:06 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: adam laroche |
wdelaney72 wrote: i'm sure there's a lot we don't know...and this could only happen to the White Sox. Bottom line...there's no job in the world where it's ok to bring your kid to work on a daily basis. 14 yrs old....he has other priorities, as do you as the parent. Then you leave $13M on the table because you are told to knock it off. he's a douche...and a weirdo. And how'd the sox not know he was a douche and a weirdo before they signed him? Either this kid in the clubhouse thing was something the sox should have known about before signing him or they (the sox) should have nipped it in the bud. |
Author: | Douchebag [ Thu Mar 17, 2016 11:08 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: adam laroche |
This kid just lost a possible $13 million in an inheritance. I would be fuming. |
Author: | No Clever Moniker [ Fri Mar 18, 2016 9:54 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: adam laroche |
WMVP reported that the kid in the clubhouse was a contract stipulation, but someone (KP?, JR?) didn't like it and stepped in over the general manager and manager. If there was language in the contract then I can understand LaRoche's stance and the players standing with him because there was a contract. |
Author: | Brick [ Fri Mar 18, 2016 10:00 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: adam laroche |
No Clever Moniker wrote: WMVP reported that the kid in the clubhouse was a contract stipulation, but someone (KP?, JR?) didn't like it and stepped in over the general manager and manager. If there was language in the contract then I can understand LaRoche's stance and the players standing with him because there was a contract. Doesn't that mean that it wasn't a contract stipulation because it was taken out?
|
Page 1 of 2 | All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ] |
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group https://www.phpbb.com/ |