jjgman21

Johnson makes a play for once in his life.

blatant hold. hanging onto a D-linemans arm. Lance poked in the eye.

You're in Chicago...... mute the TV and turn on WBBM !! I'm finally in Chicago for a game (Thanksgiving break) and as soon as I saw it was Buck, I turned on the best radio team in the NFL. It's the only way to watch a BEARS game, no? Ooooooooooooohhh yeah. What the hell is going on? Pick a damn side and kick the ball! DROP THE PUCK!!!

You're in Chicago...... mute the TV and turn on WBBM !! dish doesn't synch up.

not only does the ref move back, he gives it to another ref who moves it even farther back, then gives a knowing look to the sidelines.

I'm happy with the outlook.

raise your hand if you predicted OSU-UM to outscore Cal-USC by about 45 points at this point in the game.

me likey. Ole Miss beats LSU, LSU beats Arkansas, Arkansas beats Florida, Cal beats USC, USC beats ND, Cincy beats Rutgers, Rutgers beats WV, Pitt upsets Louisville... Big Ten finishes 1,2,3 in BCS standings. LOL, and Wisconsin goes to the Rose Bowl! That would be hilarious. Maybe then someone would finally tell these old, crusty bowl organizers to take their precious money and shove it and put in a damn playoff system like we should have had 10 years ago. it won't happen because the pollsters just can't find there way clear of voting UW ahead of certain teams. they would never see their way clear of voting UW ahead of USC, even if Cal blew them out.

S-C-O-N-S-I-N?

me likey. Ole Miss beats LSU, LSU beats Arkansas, Arkansas beats Florida, Cal beats USC, USC beats ND, Cincy beats Rutgers, Rutgers beats WV, Pitt upsets Louisville... Big Ten finishes 1,2,3 in BCS standings.

buh bye Big East.

ugh. don't remind me of that 1999 game. possibly cost the Badgers the National Championship, or at least a shot at it.

clearly Cincinnati should be rated ahead of Texas if they win this game.

I think he's been much better in the college booth. Not his football IQ.....but he seems to be more relaxed. It's easier to listen to him. With Thiesman he seemed to always be on the defensive. Cal not backing down so far. Good to see. I always thought he was on the offensive. always attacking Thiesman.

long way to go over on ESPN, but anyone else feel Cuse should come around and eat some crow right now?

why isn't that considered a lateral? so what if he didn't intend on throwing the pass backwards, the fact is the pass went backwards.

There's a tendency to try and quantify all of this with stats and whatever. I just think the Heisman is won and lost based on those few big pressure games where the player plays----unless he simply blows it against lesser opponents. Troy has had 2 this year and shined in both. Quinn had 1 and didn't look all that great, for whatever reason. Even if he plays lights-out against USC, they aren't #2 and it won't be that huge mega-game that the Texas and Michigan games were for Troy Smith. if he lights up USC next week, I think he's in the picture but still loses out. I kind of agree with Soul on how these things work. there are a group of guys that are considered candidates, and alot of times it comes down to how those guys do in the spotlight. but keep in mind, Quinn has a chance to be the one with the last hurrah. alot of it will depend on how well the ND-USC commentators do hyping it as the game goes along.

I don't think Brady Quinn should win any Heismans, but strength of schedule (in which ND is ranked higher than OSU) is not the reason why. I highly doubt that is the case after today, but it will swing back to ND next week. I guess I never really looked at OSU's schedule until now. considering how the big ten shook down this year, it was pretty week considering they didnt' have to play the teams in third and fourth place. man do I wish the Badgers had a shot at them. under the right circumstances (at home, when the Badgers were peaking) I think they could have taken them.

terrible pass, terrible job of the receiver to give up on the play. defense makes up for it.

But if contact is made and the defender has their back to the play, they are going to call it every time. There was contact? It looked like they brushed hands at best. He prevented Manningham from coming to the ball. That's interference. not if the Manningham doesn't come back for the ball and there is contact, unless he fact guards, which he didn't do. He didn't face guard him? What he did pretty much defines face guarding, he wasn't looking for the ball and making a play on the receiver. The ball hit him in the shoulder to boot. faceguarding has to do with the hands, ie. putting your hands up trying obstruct the view of the receiver without turning around and looking for the ball. the DB never got his hands up. in fact, the ball hit the DB in the hand down by the waste. I'm looking at it on Tivo, and that's exactly how it happened. Faceguarding has to do with looking at the receiver and never looking at the ball. You aren't looking to make a play on the ball you are looking to prevent the wide receiver from making a play on the ball. had to look into it, and didn't get the answer. what I did find, which is much more interesting, is that shouldn't have been pass interference because there is no face guarding in either pro or college football without contact. there was no contact on that play. http://www.nfl.com/fans/rulesschool120501.html http://experts.about.com/q/College-Football-3195/Pass-Interference-face-guarding.htm but I still disagree with your definition of what face guarding is. "looking to prevent the wide receiver from making a play on the ball" is nothing but a generic definition of pass interference. face guarding has to do with a deliberate attempt to interfere with the receivers ability to see the ball.

Really? I was under the impression they had Barret signed through 2008. I could be wrong and just misinterpreting some statements I heard somewhere on the board here.

This season: Wells: .303/.357/.542/.899 Barrett: .307/.368/.517/.885 Three year splits: Wells: .282/.338/.493/.831 Barrett: .289/.349/.494/.843 How much of an improvement would Wells over Barrett be? I understand that Wells would play more games than Bare, but Blanco/Soto would not provide comparable production to Pierre. Blanco is just bad offensively and Soto is unproven without much of an upside. Plus, Wells would only be under this team's control for a year unless he gets an extension. Wells has age on his side and his three year stats skewed by an injury in 2005. more than likely his star is rising while Barrett's is fading. and the fact that Barrett is a catcher is a huge factor in determining who has more impact on the offense. who would you rather have, Wells for 160 or Barrett for 120 and Blanco for 42. 120 games per year the offense would be comparable, but it's not hard to see that the Cubs offense would be significantly better in those 40 games per year with Wells instead of Hank. I personally think it reasonable that Blanco and Soto combine for a .315/.410 line. Blanco is bad, but so is Pierre. their OPS has been virtually identical the past two years. Soto has put up a .350ish OBP in every level of minor league play and his ability to draw a walk won't go away. he also has more pop than Pierre. Plus they won't be up at the top of the lineup making outs, they will be at the bottom of the lineup making outs. I don't see your point about control of Wells because the Cubs only have control of Barrett for one more year too. The one thing I disagree with is that Soto has more pop than Pierre-Pierre has a very slight edge over their last 4 years SLG percentage (but they are close). The rest of your post I agree with (other than maybe being a little optimistic on the Blanco/Soto platoon). If the Cubs are not ready to give Barrett an extension after this season, then maybe they should trade him for a player who they are ready to sign to an extension. I guess pop needs a little more explanation. Juan's higher slugging is purely a function of hitting alot of singles and stretching singles into doubles/doubles into triples. Soto has more power in his bat, make no mistake about it. bare in mind that Soto has always been well ahead of the league he's played in for his age. he nearly completely skipped short season and totally skipped low A. he had a 756 OPS in a pitchers dominated league at age 21. bold prediction, Soto will be a starting catcher in the major leagues for a decade.

This season: Wells: .303/.357/.542/.899 Barrett: .307/.368/.517/.885 Three year splits: Wells: .282/.338/.493/.831 Barrett: .289/.349/.494/.843 How much of an improvement would Wells over Barrett be? I understand that Wells would play more games than Bare, but Blanco/Soto would not provide comparable production to Pierre. Blanco is just bad offensively and Soto is unproven without much of an upside. Plus, Wells would only be under this team's control for a year unless he gets an extension. Wells has age on his side and his three year stats skewed by an injury in 2005. more than likely his star is rising while Barrett's is fading. and the fact that Barrett is a catcher is a huge factor in determining who has more impact on the offense. who would you rather have, Wells for 160 or Barrett for 120 and Blanco for 42. 120 games per year the offense would be comparable, but it's not hard to see that the Cubs offense would be significantly better in those 40 games per year with Wells instead of Hank. I personally think it reasonable that Blanco and Soto combine for a .315/.410 line. Blanco is bad, but so is Pierre. their OPS has been virtually identical the past two years. Soto has put up a .350ish OBP in every level of minor league play and his ability to draw a walk won't go away. he also has more pop than Pierre. Plus they won't be up at the top of the lineup making outs, they will be at the bottom of the lineup making outs. I don't see your point about control of Wells because the Cubs only have control of Barrett for one more year too.

But if contact is made and the defender has their back to the play, they are going to call it every time. There was contact? It looked like they brushed hands at best. He prevented Manningham from coming to the ball. That's interference. not if the Manningham doesn't come back for the ball and there is contact, unless he fact guards, which he didn't do. He didn't face guard him? What he did pretty much defines face guarding, he wasn't looking for the ball and making a play on the receiver. The ball hit him in the shoulder to boot. faceguarding has to do with the hands, ie. putting your hands up trying obstruct the view of the receiver without turning around and looking for the ball. the DB never got his hands up. in fact, the ball hit the DB in the hand down by the waste. I'm looking at it on Tivo, and that's exactly how it happened.

any other non UM big ten fans want to puke at Carr riding the refs all game for calls that were correct? why is it the beneficiaries of calls are the biggest bitches when things don't go their way?