erik316wttn

I'd grab Iowa St, Missouri, and Kansas. Iowa vs Iowa State gives you a natural rivalry game every year, and so does preserving Kansas and Missouri. Then I'd go East: Michigan Michigan State Indiana Purdue Northwestern Penn State Ohio State West: Wisconsin Minnesota Iowa Nebraska Missouri Kansas Iowa State Notre Dame isn't going to give up their sweet gig, and Missouri, K-state, and I-State make a hell of a lot more sense than Texas does. hmm, thinking of kicking the illini out of the [expletive] big ten? Oops. Ok then, drop Iowa State and replace them with Illinois.

Yes it's about money. So how does Iowa State bring in money? They add no tv revenue, they have a small stadium and they're not a draw anywhere on the road or television. It's clear you really don't know what you're talking about. Iowa and Iowa St. could quickly become a rivalry? Apparently you're unaware they already play each other every freaking year. Yes God forbid we lose the Mizzou/Kansas rivalry that packs stadiums because no one goes to other Big Ten games. Boise State? Just stop. Awww.... is someone cranky today? Not a bit, I'm in a fantastic mood. You just have no idea what you're talking about. You want to create an Iowa/ISU rivalry when they've played every year for 30 years. You think Boise St. would be part of the ultimate group. You want to keep the Mizzou/KU football rivalry going because it would pack stadiums. At the same time you say it's all about money you suggest moves that make no financial sense. Am I opposed to Texas or Notre Dame? For the second time now, no I am not. I would be thrilled to add those teams to the Big 10 and see the Badgers play them on a regular or semi-regular basis. I'm just saying that I don't think those schools will agree to join the conference, so I'm suggesting schools that will also be looking to move that I think would be more realistic alternatives. Please enlighten me with other suggestions. I'm not looking for an argument here, just a good discussion. Ultimately I think Notre Dame stays independent and Texas waits to see where Oklahoma and Tech and A&M go and then make their decision.

Yes it's about money. So how does Iowa State bring in money? They add no tv revenue, they have a small stadium and they're not a draw anywhere on the road or television. It's clear you really don't know what you're talking about. Iowa and Iowa St. could quickly become a rivalry? Apparently you're unaware they already play each other every freaking year. Yes God forbid we lose the Mizzou/Kansas rivalry that packs stadiums because no one goes to other Big Ten games. Boise State? Just stop. Awww.... is someone cranky today? My son gets crabby like that when he needs a nap, too. I'm a fan of tradition, I guess. I would hate to see the 2nd oldest rivalry in college football be dissolved. Yes, the Big 10 is a popular conference and is a big draw on the road. But do you honestly think Missouri vs. Kansas would be detrimental to the conference? Answer me yes or no.

I'd grab Iowa St, Missouri, and Kansas. Iowa vs Iowa State gives you a natural rivalry game every year, and so does preserving Kansas and Missouri. Then I'd go East: Michigan Michigan State Indiana Purdue Northwestern Penn State Ohio State West: Wisconsin Minnesota Iowa Nebraska Missouri Kansas Iowa State Notre Dame isn't going to give up their sweet gig, and Missouri, K-state, and I-State make a hell of a lot more sense than Texas does. Why the hell should the Big 10 care about preserving Big 8/Big 12 rivalries? Adding Iowa State makes about as much sense as the Pac 10 adding Baylor. Because at the root of this, it's about money. Plain and simple. Iowa vs. Iowa St could quickly become a rivalry, and Missouri vs. Kansas is a huge rivalry that would feature a packed stadium filled with rabid screaming fans every single year. Do you honestly think they want to take that away? Hell, if they can grab Notre Dame and Texas, go for it. I just don't think those schools would be interested in moving to the Big 10. Especially Texas, who will follow their big-money rivals wherever they go. I'd think the ultimate big move here would be grabbing 2 of Texas, Notre Dame, and Boise State. My last post is what I think is feasible and what schools they could get to agree to jump, not in a vacuum of what I think would be best.

They just grabbed Colorado: http://sports.espn.go.com/ncaa/news/story?id=5271438

I'd grab Iowa St, Missouri, and Kansas. Iowa vs Iowa State gives you a natural rivalry game every year, and so does preserving Kansas and Missouri. Then I'd go East: Michigan Michigan State Indiana Purdue Northwestern Penn State Ohio State West: Wisconsin Minnesota Iowa Nebraska Missouri Kansas Iowa State Notre Dame isn't going to give up their sweet gig, and Missouri, Kansas, and I-State make a hell of a lot more sense than Texas does from the point of the respective schools. edited because I meant Kansas and not Kansas State

Yeah, I don't know if anyone other than God himself could get this group to start hitting consistently right now.

Oh [expletive], you got me. Oh, wait. you didn't. I didn't say he wouldn't be special, I said I didn't think he'd live up to the hype (you know, the he'll be historically good-get his HOF bust ready stuff). It was really, really impressive. But it was one game, and it was the Pirates. What Kerry did was far more impressive, and we know how that one turned out. Strasburg has a better command of his repertoire, and looks like a special pitcher. But a lot of people are having hyperbole laced, premature baseball ejaculations over the guy. He's good, but he's not pitching Jesus. playing devil's advocate is only fun as long as you don't make yourself look like an idiot in the process Try following your own advice there, champ. Anyway, Strasburg was very impressive tonight. I liked what I saw. I'm really liking all the young talent that's either in the Majors or not too far away from it. You have one hell of a who's who 10 years from now: Lincecum, Strasburg, Harper, Castro, Chapman, Mauer, Heyward, and probably a dozen or so more guys I won't name right now. It just seems like the talent level coming up is on another level from a lot of the young talent we've seen at any other point.

Wasn't the game supposed to be on ESPN? Where the hell is it?

Maybe we can get some decent prospects for him.

It's great that he doesn't care what anyone else thinks. That's a great strength. However, even if for some reason this joker was #1 overall on your draft board, if everyone else has him rated as low as he was, you're a freakin' moron if you take him with your #1 overall pick. That should have waited until at LEAST the 2nd round, if not the 3rd. With as loaded as this draft is, you could have still gotten two really good talents before Simpson. You have no idea where everyone else had him rated. None. All it takes is one team to have him ranked in the next 49 picks and the top guy you had on your board at 16 is gone. I must say I'm shocked that you would rant about this and call him "a freakin' moron". And why are you saying this draft was loaded? You have no idea. I guess time will tell about the Simpson pick. But each team has a general idea of what other teams needs are, their previous draft histories, what kind of players they like, etc. If the Cubs had a general idea that nobody had him on their radar this high, they essentially wasted a pick. However, I guess if they had a feeling that he wasn't going to be there their next pick and this was their top overall player, then I guess they did the right thing.

It's great that he doesn't care what anyone else thinks. That's a great strength. However, even if for some reason this joker was #1 overall on your draft board, if everyone else has him rated as low as he was, you're a freakin' moron if you take him with your #1 overall pick. That should have waited until at LEAST the 2nd round, if not the 3rd. With as loaded as this draft is, you could have still gotten two really good talents before Simpson.

I just got in. Serioulsy? WTF guys? That guy wouldn't have fallen? This organization sucks at all levels.

there's a lot to like about that .500 OPS There's also a lot to like about his age and ceiling.

I suppose it's better than paying him all that money to be horrible when they could find a pitcher to perform as well or better than he for much less.

I'll take a flyer on that Beckham kid.

Did Rotschild help with with something in the way that he helped Dempster when he became a starter? I guess Larry helped him develop that glove motion he does during his windup to hide the ball longer. Could it be something like that?

Crimeny, Arthur Rhodes has been around forever. I believe he once struck out Joe DiMaggio.

It really is exciting to see all these future faces of the game break in all at once.

Well, C.C. went missing in action, Butters broke his leg and they had to shoot him, and Ski has been imprisoned in North Dakota, where they only have 3 seasons..... July, August, and Winter !!! and besides, he would have done the game thread in anime anyway, so.... what am I do ??? This made me lol. I'm officially stealing it.

Jiminez's ERA skyrockets to 0.93 after yesterday's game. Loser.

I can't help thinking about the former relief pitcher by the same name whenever I hear of him. Also, the town of Strasburg, VA is considering changing its name to Steven Strasburg, VA. http://www.sportingnews.com/blog/the_sporting_blog/entry/view/67969/virginia_town_wishes_to_adopt_name_of_nationals_potential_savior_

Thank you for answering my question.

Very much so. We just had a riveting discussion in the Armando Gaalragga thread in this very subforum. I was very much a part of that discussion. Very few agreed with me, but there were no insults or jabs at other posters. Discussion was certainly stimulated. Thanks for playing, though.

I was one of the very last Lou defenders, but even I got sick of his crap. You cannot expect to keep this man and win. He just doesn't give a damn anymore.