biittner77

Lots of ideas here about how to spend other people's money. Any change that results in higher pay for the players will result in higher prices for tickets, parking etc. The owners are not going to make less money. They just aren't. Debate all you want how much that sucks but that's how it's always going to be. But here's an idea: have a relegation system whereby every 5 years, the 3 owners with the fewest wins have to sell their teams to someone else. Are far as avoiding tanking, a draft lottery among non playoff teams would help that. Make it the same chance for all non playoff teams to get the number one pick. There would be no incentive to tank. Such a system would not punish mediocrity the way the current system does. Then let teams trade draft picks. The NFL draft is more exciting because teams move up and down and collect picks.

Grievances are like not unloading the dishwasher. This is more than that.

If you are incarcerated and the only channel you can watch in the day room is mlb network, this show might have some appeal.

At the very least he shouldn't play again this season. Hopefully he has someone in his life that can point him in the right direction.

The Cubs are a cash cow for the Ricketts family or they wouldn't own them and spend money on improving Wrigley and the entire blocks around Wrigley. They are bending to the will of the other owners (and themselves) to not spend money to keep contracts down. Someday after Trump burns down the world and anthropologists from a distant planet discover the remains, they will find private communications between the owners showing collusion. Everyone knows it, but it seems impossible to do anything about it. If collusion helps the Cubs sign Harper than more collusion please and thank you. Poor Bryce Harper may only get $380 million instead of $400. Maybe playing for the Cubs will get him more endorsement money and it will even out.

If the Cubs trade Schwarber, who plays left field? Oh right, Bryant does after they sign Machado.

How is that different than every other journalism outlet? They are don't make a profit outlets

https://www.celebritynetworth.com/richest-businessmen/business-executives/tom-ricketts-net-worth/ According to this, PTR has $900 million in net worth. I think maybe I'd think twice before committing 1/3 of my net worth to something. That doesn't mean it's not worth it to sign Harper but handing out the largest contract ever is not something any owner is going to do lightly.

My Field Hockey coaching career came to an end with an undefeated season and our 3rd championship in 4 years. The other season we won the regular season title but lost the playoff game. Our best player was nominated for player of the year but lost out to the best player on the team that we beat 3 times including the championship game. The conference coaches voted. Maryland just announced the HS all star team and our best player was named to the first team. The player that beat her out for POTY was an honorable mention. It's nice to know that the other coaches in our conference hate us enough to rob our player of the POTY she deserved. They have good reason to hate us since we completely dominated the conference going 51-5 largely due to our would be POTY.

well ten teams would be a lot to choose from. so would half that. and given the types of franchises likely to be involved in that grouping, i'd have a hard time seeing the white sox being one of the most attractive options (again, without blowing the field out of the water in terms of money). Then we just have wildly different ideas of what "no shortage of teams" means out of 30 teams. To me, only 4-5 teams, tops (and that's also all I think is probably out there), being likely suitors is not that. Cubs and Yankees would be enough to choose from in terms of getting paid.

Not sure what to think of this trade. It could benefit both sides, could help neither side or could be a steal for either team. Strome is a big name but looks a little like a bust considering he was a #3 overall pick and is getting traded along with another player for a guy that *might* be pretty good. Perlini is probably a depth player but those guys can add a lot of value. The question with Schmaltz has always been whether he could play center. With the jury still out on that at least the Hawks got a guy in Strome that can.

disclaimer: i'm clueless when it comes to advanced football stats. how long has aikman efficiency ratings been a thing and what does it have to do with troy aikman? It's been around for about a decade at least. Aikman supplied the key metrics he thought were most important and the nerds crunched the numbers into a single digestible rating. I assumed it was just Aikman watching games and deciding who he thought was good based on stuff like "grit" and "swagger". I'm a little disappointed.

They didn't want to pay him what they thought he'd get. He showed some flashes last year but was inconsistent. The Hawks have other fast guys with potential that are cheaper. I liked Duclair but he'd look really good one game and then disappear for 3-4. There's a reason why he's bounced around a bit.

It's in the comments, not the article. Not that it matters, the Hawks aren't going to stand in the way of him coaching somewhere else and someone probably will pay him enough to make it worthwhile. I wonder though if Q can win without the kind of talent he had here given that the game has caught up with what the Hawks did when they were very good. It seems as though there have been decent players that couldn't adapt to what Q wanted them to do. As good as he's been, is he willing to change or will he be like Phil Jackson insisting that the triangle offense still works even when it clearly doesn't anymore. None of that changes the fact that someone will give him a job but I could see him not being nearly as successful and then not wanting to stay.

If he wants one, absolutely. He's still under contract so he'd need the Hawk's permission. Not granting it would be a bush league move. He might not mind getting paid $6 million to take a year off either. But what's the right landing spot for Q? It would have to be a team that is already on the cusp of being good. People started talking about the Kings but I don't see that as being much better than the Hawks. St. Louis? Montreal might be the job he really wants. Where have you seen he'd need permission? He was fired. No coach that was fired needs permission to take another job. That only happens when a coach decides to step away or they "mutually agree" to part ways. Even if he did wait a year, he will still have another job before the Hawks are ready for another shot at a dynasty. It gets discussed here: https://www.secondcityhockey.com/2018/11/6/18067978/blackhawks-fire-head-coach-joel-quenneville-nhl-2018-jeremy-colliton-ahl-rockford-icehogs I guess it was part of the last CBA or something. The team can't ask for compensation from another team but they can deny permission while under contract. The Hawks get out from paying him $6 million if they let him go but whatever team did sign Q would have to give him a lot of money to make it worthwhile.

He's going to have another job long before the Hawks are ready for another shot at a dynasty. If he wants one, absolutely. He's still under contract so he'd need the Hawk's permission. Not granting it would be a bush league move. He might not mind getting paid $6 million to take a year off either. But what's the right landing spot for Q? It would have to be a team that is already on the cusp of being good. People started talking about the Kings but I don't see that as being much better than the Hawks. St. Louis? Montreal might be the job he really wants.

I was surprised by the timing of this move but not by the move itself. Hockey is a little different in that mid season coaching changes typically happen earlier than in baseball or football. There's at least some examples of hockey teams turning it around under a different coach (The Penguins a couple years ago). People are saying a lot of good things about Colliton. We'll see. The Hawks are, in some form or other, rebuilding. Q & the front office probably thought that they might be able to make one last run with the current group. Why they thought that given the roster is anybody's guess but this is a coach that wanted Brandon Manning who is terrible and a GM that gave Brandon Manning way too much money to be terrible. They did almost literally nothing else to improve the team. Maybe they didn't realize that Murphy was going to miss the beginning of the season. None of that speaks well for any of the people involved. Q is not the guy to oversee a rebuild. Why would he even want to? He'll always be a Chicago sports legend. Look how all of the former Bears get treated. The Hawks will welcome him back in a few years and no one will be thinking that Q was treated unfairly. I wouldn't even be shocked if he got another chance to coach the Hawks again. Let's say Bowman gets fired at the end of the season. The New GM gives Colliton a year to show what he can do or brings in someone else to be the scapegoat during the rebuild. When they're ready to take the next step he makes the big splash of bringing Q back for another shot at a dynasty. Stranger things have happened.

Why are the Cubs obligated to positively affect his life? I'd rather they positively affect the fanbase watching them by demonstrating that domestic violence has serious consequences. They aren't obligated. But wouldn't it be great if they used the influence to at least try. Not for Addison Russell but, going forward, if an organization like the Cubs actually held him accountable and other players took notice, maybe this happens less in the future. Make him actually go to counseling. Make him do more than just give lip service to doing the right things. After he's done that, if they're not convinced he's changed for the better than publicly and loudly blast him into a billion pieces. If the Cubs released him tomorrow and someone else picks him up, he will have learned nothing and will probably do it again. Women seem to like this guy.

I certainly understand and appreciate the "release him now" reaction, doing so ends any chance the Cubs have to positively effect his life. I feel like Theo might not release him right away in the hope that he can redeem himself and the Cubs organization can be part of that. I fully admit that Theo might keep him around because he's an asset and they don't privately care if he becomes a better person or not. Considering the way they handled things so far, I'll give Theo the benefit of the doubt.

I didn't get to see the Tampa game so all I got to see were highlights of Trubisky's TD passes. I'm not a Trubisky hater by any means but his receivers made him look better than he was at least on some of those plays. That's a refreshing change from last season when his receiving corp was a local high school team.

This is some sort of cosmic vengeance for Cub fans in the bleachers chanting "Murphy's a [expletive]" at Dale Murphy back in the early 80s.

The closest equivalent in baseball would be striking out on purpose because it's the top of the 5th and its raining so you're trying to make the game official. The PGA and the USGA have been at odds before. I remember John Daly going off on a tirade about how the USGA was just trying to embarrass the players by making the playing conditions brutally difficult. The stock answer to complaints like this that the course is the same for everyone. OK, that's true. But that's true whether the winning score was +10 or -30. The USGA wants the winning score to be about even par. Everyone knows this going in. Certainly Phil Mickelson knew this. I think it's possible he planned on doing this as a protest. Golf is weird because players are supposed to penalize themselves. No other sport does that. However, we've seen players get penalized for doing something that someone saw them do on TV. In those cases, was it a matter of not knowing the rules or figuring no one would notice? I don't think he disgraced the game. I think he made a statement that if conditions are such that taking a 2 stroke penalty is better than trying to play by the rules then something is wrong.

Rahm pulled the city's bid as FIFA wouldn't guarantee that significant local financing wouldn't be required to host, or something of that nature. See you guys in DC which will host some games, won't they?

Anyone else think the Vegas Sports books have "suggested" that the Nights should maybe not try so hard?

He's probably the only one that picked up on what it was.