rawaction

Tillman also didn't practice but is supposed to play. Green Bay could be without Greg Jennings and James Starks.

Answers to everyone's questions. Bengals D I'd actually start Peyton this week. 49ers D is really good. Stafford did do decently vs. the Niners last year, but Atlanta just lost their best CB. But you can't go wrong either way. Don't play Jeffery, play Lynch. Seahawks D over Bears D this week. Ridley and Stafford Tamme and Wallace, though Moore wouldn't be a bad start either. Spiller if you get him, if not Bush. Antonio Brown especially if PPR.

It probably should. That line was brutal early and really benefited from him leaving. If by early you mean 4 plays, then you're right. The OL was pretty much fine after the pick 6. Actually, they were fine on the first 3rd down. It was a bad snap, Cutler had time but freaked out about the time lost picking up the snap. Hell, now that I think about it, on the first play, Kellen Davis was the one assigned to blocking Mathis, who got the sack. Not that the rest of the OL didn't collapse on that play too, but that sack wasn't on the OL, technically. Freeney was nowhere near that sack either, FWIW. Oh and for the record, Jerry Hughes (Dwight Freeney's replacement) is probably a better fit as a 3-4 OLB (played some at TCU) than Freeney is. Not that it matters much because obviously Freeney is the better player and pass rusher, but Hughes was a former 1st round pick, playing in what should be a more comfortable situation for him than it was for Freeney.

I think Cobb has the best long-term prognosis of that group. I would say Fleener, but he's a TE and I really don't value the position. It's likely you already have a better option anyway. I was really intrigued by the fact the Packers seemed to use Cobb basically like he was a 3rd down RB. Lined up and caught a lot of passes out of the backfield.

i guess he doesnt have a concussion. I don't know. "#Skeetersfordays" kinda sounds like something someone with a head injury would say.

BEARS HAVE TRIPLETS! :shock:

What a [expletive] throw!

Eh, OL has been fine, probably even closer to good. DL has shown flashes.

I don't like to speak ill of the dead....but seriously, that was Johnny Knox last year. The Bears may be losing this game if Brandon Marshall is not on this team.

I think it's both an INT and a fumble.

http://www.mr-irrelevantpgh-chi.blogspot.com/ My game preview, if anyone cares.

Check your PMs

I don't understand bringing in Drew. I think the Cubs have enough bodies to man 2B until a long-term solution comes around. Hopefully, they get an upgrade at 3B (more important position), then 2B could be manned by Valbuena, Cardenas, possibly Watkins and maybe even Torreyes at some point. I think any combination of those 4 could be just as productive as Drew next year....especially since Drew has been injured and bad for 2 years now.

Apparently IU's backup QB is Chase Coffman's little brother, so that's something I guess.

Interesting. Must be a pretty bad concussion if Booker was IR'd/cut or whatever was done. Figured the move would be Quigley to waivers (Podlesh is probable) with Allen taking his spot. Releasing Trahan means Bears have a 52-man roster. Nate Collins gets a spot when he comes back from suspension for Week 2, but another spot opens when Quigley is released.

Ugh. IU just probably lost the only good thing they got going for them, Tre Roberson probably out for the year after his ankle pops out of his leg. But at least Gunner Kiel is coming in the game!!!! oh wait.

Yeah, I know. And it would probably take more than I gave up. But he's set to get expensive, not next year, but in 2014 and 2015 he'll make a ton. Plus, even if they do lose Anderson, McCarthy and Colon, they'd still have a loaded rotation. It may be easier to get one of their younger pitchers, but the As have to be loving the results of trading their last 2 top young pitchers. Obviously, this is not the same type of package they got for Gio or Cahill, but Anderson does have the injury history/risk and has only thrown 215 innings over the last 3 seasons....whereas Cahill and Gonzalez both had back to back seasons of at least 198 innings each.

I think the key to the off-season will be trying to create a more offensively diverse team. Castro, Barney, Castillo, and even Vitters are nice young players who have/should outperform their cheap contracts, but add Soriano to that and you have 5/8 of your potential lineup that will struggle to get on base at even a 33% level next year. I don't expect any big splashes on offense, but I do expect a few of these guys to be gone (i.e. traded) in order to, if not increase the talent necessarily, just to create a different type of team. I think the odd men out will be Barney and Soriano. Vitters may be kept, but won't start in the majors if he is. I think the Cubs get a couple minor leaguers for Soriano. I wouldn't expect too much, maybe a 5th starter/long relief type and a toolsy OF that would slot in the 20s-30s in the Cubs minor league system. I think Barney is traded/packaged with other parts to get a starting pitcher. I'd the say the following players are "safe" to be on the ML team to start next year (assuming health) LF- CF- Brett Jackson RF- David DeJesus 3B- SS- Starlin Castro 2B- 1B- Anthony Rizzo C- Welington Castillo SP- Garza, Samardzija, Wood, Don't know that any of the relievers are safe, though I'll guess Marmol, Russell, Cabrera, and Beliveau have the best shots to hang around, the the first 2 could be traded. I'll guess Youkilis at 3B also, because of the ties to the F.O. Also, he would adequately replace Soriano's RH power in the middle of the order, and helps with my theory of making probably a lateral change for the sake of the team's OBP. I think 2B is handled by committee, with Valbuena, Cardenas, and maybe even Logan Watkins getting a shot to start the season there. A RH counterpart could possibly be brought in here, maybe even Jeff Baker again or a guy like Jeff Keppinger. No long term option is brought in because position is being kept warm for Ronald Torreyes at some point (maybe even mid 2013 if he gets some luck at AA next year). As for LF, frankly, I have no idea what they're going to do if they trade Soriano. Hairston is interesting, but doesn't get on base enough. I guess the Ryan Sweeney thing could be a real possibility. Nick Swisher would be pretty interesting, and would provide enough of a splash that the Cubs could possibly compete if they got lucky. Some interesting names on the trade market for OF could be Shin-Soo Choo, Hunter Pence, or Justin Upton, but I don't know if the Cubs have the ammo they are willing to give for those guys. But for now, I'll go with Sweeney/Sappelt platoon situation. Lineup: RF- DeJesus 2B- Valbuena 1B- Rizzo 3B- Youkilis SS- Castro LF- Sweeney CF- Jackson C- Castillo Bench- Sappelt, Baker, Clevenger, Cardenas, LaHair (I guess?) As for the rotation, I think this is where the bolder moves will be made. I'm bad at trade proposals, but I'll say: Darwin Barney, Matt Szczur, Arismendy Alcanta, and Starling Peralta for Brett Anderson and a minor leaguer. Then I'll go with a minor trade of Vitters for Jurrjens to fill out the rotation with a reclamation project. SP- Garza, Anderson, Samardzija, Jurrjens, Wood I'll keep those 4 above for the pen. Also, I'll add Dolis to this group. Camp is a FA, so I'll let him walk at 37 years old and I think they'll sign another veteran reclamation guy. I'll say a Jason Frasor, Ramon Ramirez, or Clay Hensley type of mid-30s. Then I'll say a long reliever type of the last spot, whoever loses to Travis Wood for the 5th starter spot. CL- Marmol RP- Russell, Beliveau, Cabrera, Dolis, Hensley, Rusin Potentially a pretty good rotation, with a handful of quality arms in the pen. The offense isn't very good, but has the potential to really get on base if guys like Jackson, Youkilis, Valbuena, and Sweeney can hit even in the .250-.260s. The 2014 team could look really good if Garza and Marmol can regain some of their value, a few young guys develop, and the young prospects start to inch further up the minor league levels.

anywhere i could find his second half splits? Yeah, milb.com .297/.361/.450 after the AS break. And that's with a .235/.300/.333 August. June and July he was amazing.

Ugly inning in the Hawks favor. Walk, wild pitch, single, wild pitch, walk, Candelario hits a pretty deep flyball, but the OF is setting up to make the play......and the ball goes 10 feet over his head. Hawks score 2, lead 3-0.

Contreras scores on a wild pitch. 1-0 Hawks.

Pena gets out of the 2nd unscathed. Gives up an IF hit off his glove, then gives up a double off the wall, but because Bruno looked like he was going to catch it the runner had to hold and couldn't score.

Nothing for Boise first 2 times to the plate, other than a Bruno single down the 3B line.

As for the earlier discussion. I kinda agree with Goony. The rankings look respectable still for the Bears D, other than 2009, but this is clearly not as good of a defense. First of all, the standards for having a top 10 defense have gone down considerably. But it's going to be hard for any team with the current pass-friendly rules to be as good as a defense from 5-6 years ago. Secondly, it was just physically a lot harder to move the ball against the 06 team. The 06 team allowed 90 fewer points. Allowed 1.1 fewer yards per attempt in the air. Yards per carry were actually the same, but the 06 teams gave up way fewer 1st downs and forced more 3 and outs. So, I would say the Bears definitely have taken a couple steps back (or missed beats, if you will) from the levels of 2005-2006. I would consider them elite, comparable to the top defenses ever in 05 and 06. I wouldn't consider them even close to elite level comparable to all-time Ds now, but relatively speaking they are definitely a decent bit better than average. So, saying they went from "elite" to "average" is probably not correct, but whether they are #1 now or not, they are clearly not as strong as they were 6 years ago. Whether that is because of rule changes, offensive scheme changes, or the actual loss of talent of the D....I couldn't say for sure, but probably a combination of everything.