TruffleShuffle

man ucla sucks a lot worse than i thought they would.

so he wants his own guy in the sales and marketing department but he's cool with keeping on the general manager who's running the team into the ground? awesome.

nice start for mcnutt. chirinos is awesome. somehow midget campana hit a home run.

hopefully Gville stops in to give us his evaluation of dempster's performance tonight.

more ghetto? uh oh

green font?

i'm sure a neutral site boise state-duke game would be really well attended.

plus he still adds way more than the average pitcher with his bat. if he pitches like a #3 guy and hits really well, you're not getting too bad a return for your $18M. certainly not bad enough to just give him away while eating half his salary.

good move letting zambrano throw 120 pitches in a meaningless game when he's been a relief pitcher for like half the year.

i'd like to read that book actually

speaking of people who are actually not terrible, carlos zambrano

some organizations already have come around; those are the ones that actually win (i.e., not cubs)

poor clevenger... absolutely raked in the second half and chirinos usurps his spot. though to be fair, chirinos is the better hitter and played much of the year at tennessee. brett jackson is 1-3 with a walk and home run. chirinos has doubled and homered and tony thomas also has a homer (second 3-4 game in a row for him). carpenter had a good start: 6 ip, 4 h, 1 r, 0 er, 3 bb, 8 k, 99 pitches/63 strikes, 6 GO/5 FO.

.295 babip in the second half, so mostly he's been good. the huge difference is because he was really unlucky the first half, not that he's been really lucky the second half.

i'm surprised you made it that far. i turned it off after about 15 seconds.

is andy reid coaching the saints? 18 pass attempts against 1 rushing play.

yeah the money thing is a big deal; boise st, tcu and utah can't just go tramping around to play 3/4 road games against good bcs teams every year - even in the unlikely event that they could get that many takers, they really can't afford to not make whatever they make from 2/3 home games a year. and it's not like bcs teams are going to give boise or tcu $750k to come beat them.

i'm confused about what a foul start is.

oh my bad, it was youngstown stat. other things that didn't make sense in that poll: -minnesota being left out after winning at MTSU, which went 9-3 last year (yeah they're not a good team, but why the hell are you giving ohio st credit for beating a marshall team that has been bad since byron leftwich left) -oregon getting into the poll simply because they destroyed a team - if you're going to leave out teams like texas and alabama then go all the way with it. the entire thing seems like it was written by CubbieBum for the ball state register.

another well-attended game thread, i see

he must have watched dempster's playoff start against the dodgers for inspiration.

hopefully the cubs brass left before he [expletive] the bed the rest of the way.

go away andy

unless you have access to an NFL team's medical staff, then you can probably just go see them.

What in the world are you talking about? This isn't hard to grasp. We only have a 1 game season to go on right now, so everyone who won their game has done more than those who lost. As the season progresses you have more teams with losses and a strength of schedule component becomes a greater and greater part of your resume(even in Doc Saturday's Week 1 poll, he gave top billing to those who beat BCS conference teams last week). If Texas Tech plays SMU and Abilene Tech the whole year then they aren't going to have a better resume than other undefeated teams, several teams with 1 loss, and maybe even some teams with 2 losses. it just seems arbitrary to me. he refuses to rank texas because they played a perennial doormat (that happened to go 10-3 two years ago), but then he ranks troy for beating bowling green and texas tech for beating usually-terrible smu. and if every team that won their game has done more than a team that has lost, why are teams with losses ranked ahead of teams that won games in the first week, even if they were against bad i-a programs or against i-aa programs? it seems to me that if you're ranking a team like utah #4 for beating a team that he thinks is good (pitt), then you don't put pitt down beneath teams that beat crappy MAC and WAC teams when they took a good MWC team to overtime on the road. and this statement is absurd: yes TCU playing on the neutral ground of irving, texas, a grueling 15 miles from campus. he then goes on to say that texas a&m beat youngstown state. the entire thing is just riddled with errors and inconsistencies. it's a really poor piece of work.