Exile on Waveland

seriously, you believe in a curse? I believe in an organizational effect of some kind that causes the Cubs to play worse in the playoffs. Getting the wrong types of players, the field, the day games, the pressure? I don't know, but it's something. We're up to being outscored 56-18 in the last 9 playoff games. what were they in the 9 before that 3-6 record, I'd have to check the numbers later. 6-3 Yeah. They were up on the Marlins 3-1 and beat the Braves 3-2.

while this is true, the umps arent helping and there is nothing wrong with pointing that out..... Martin was safe on that play I'm not sure what you were watching.

http://chicago.cubs.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20081003&content_id=3588112&vkey=news_chc&fext=.jsp&c_id=chc :beg: Good. Fontenot should be in the lineup.

I...wow. I'm giving you 12 hours. That was epic. I vote standing ovation for that. Wow, hilarious.

Had he said that about three weeks ago in General Baseball, no one would have thought anything of it. Saying it in the middle of a contentious game thread full of pissed off Cubs fan is generally a bad idea. So the truth is bad? You don't think there's an appropriate time and a place issue?

But he hit .292!

Bye troll. :banned: I thought the trolling was pretty obvious when he said the Cubs might have finished in fifth in the AL East.

The Dodgers have a favorable pitching matchup tonight.

I think Fukudome is going to have a good postseason. I just think Fontenot should be playing today.

Anxious.

http://mlb.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20080930&content_id=3575269&vkey=news_chc&fext=.jsp&c_id=chc&partnerId=rss_chc Wow, they're just completely writing off Gaudin and Guzman? That seems surprising they weren't at least among the "taxi squad" members. Glad it sounds like Pie makes the roster. I knew Ward would make it, but I'd prefer Hoffpauir (also obviously anybody -- DOA -- over Howry).

Cubs in 4, Phillies in 5, Rays in 4, Red Sox in 5. Cubs in 6, Rays in 7. Rays in 6. Also, I think the White Sox probably win tonight. I think the Cubs come out of the NL, but just don't quite believe they'll win the whole thing. No solid reason. Angels are overrated, but I'm torn on who to pick between the Red Sox and Rays.

If the Cubs beat the Dodgers, I immediately expect the Cubs to win the World Series. In fact, if the Cubs win the first game against the Dodgers, that will do a lot to get the monkey off their backs and make me feel a lot more confident. I agree for the most part. Scoring a couple runs off Lowe and winning Game 1 eliminates any chance to use that excuse of not being sharp from not having a game of importance in weeks. It also removes the best matchup the Dodgers have. If we get past LA, I'm much more confident in being able to win a 7 game series against Philly or Milwaukee. The world series? It depends on the opponent, but again, the big strength of the Cubs this year was depth throughout, and a 7 game series plays to that strength. I agree that if the Cubs beat the Dodgers (I certainly think they will), I'll be even more confident in a 7-game series in the NLCS. I'd fear Milwaukee more, especially depending on their pitching situation (how Gallardo fairs, Sheets's health and Sabathia's arm not falling off). I've thought for awhile the Cubs would break the World Series jinx, but I'm concerned it'll just be the 1945 variety, not the 1908 variety.

The fatalism is unbecoming and irrational. I don't expect the Cubs to win the World Series -- that's too great of expectations for any team, really. I do, however, fully expect them to beat the Dodgers. Sure, anything can happen in a short baseball series, but the Cubs are clearly superior and should win.

I'm nervous, but only because of the short series and I've seen the Cubs disappoint too many times. Otherwise, the Cubs are clearly a better team than the Dodgers and I expect to win in four, if not three.

You have my permission.

let's see PSU beat at least one more good team before we get too excited. I'm as big a PSU homer as anyone on this board, but Illinois is the only team to give them a tough fight so far (and they aren't the toughest game on the schedule). Talk to me in a few weeks So who gets it? USC and their one loss? Texas and their toughest game being UTEP? One loss Florida or Georgia? One loss Ohio State? BYU and their signature victory over UCLA? South Florida? Texas Tech and their signature win against Nevada? Honestly, you can twist the top 4 around just about any way and have a legit argument...the clustercoitus begins at #5. I'd put Penn State #5 too. I'm not sure who else is more deserving. I think Penn State is the best team in the Big Ten, but have doubts that actually makes them a top-5 team. Still, they deserve to be ranked ahead of Texas.

Michigan and Texas A&M are both so bad because they have stubborn coaches that refuse to adapt their schemes to their personnel. It's not stubborn in Michigan's case. It's instilling a new offensive system. Everyone knew Michigan was basically punting this year to get the personnel used to running the spread. Obviously the players at key positions aren't suited for the spread, but by the time we get people who can play it well, the rest of the program will have already had a year of experience running it. Would they not be better running a different system? Why not recruit for a new system and install it when the players can actually run it? Michigan has too much talent -- even this year -- to "punt" a season. It's not what's best for this year's team. It's stubborn in my book. I can see your side, but I really don't mind at all. They hired a coach who is known for running the spread. It takes time for a team to completely shift its offensive philosophies. Maybe the QB or the WRs might not be there for years 2 and 3, but the coaches might, a guard might, I know the RBs might be there. With Lloyd Carr leaving, and a large class of players leaving, it was the perfect time to strip down and start anew. Jim Tressel did the same thing when he took over OSU, and it worked out well for him. I just don't like seeing Michigan bottom out. Nor do I think a whole lot of Rich Rodriguez.

I'm not saying stick with a Pro-Style offense. Combine the two; whatever. I just don't see conceding a season at a school like Michigan as a good way to go. It shows a lack of adaptability. *I do understand your argument, I just don't see this as an either or situation.

Michigan and Texas A&M are both so bad because they have stubborn coaches that refuse to adapt their schemes to their personnel. It's not stubborn in Michigan's case. It's instilling a new offensive system. Everyone knew Michigan was basically punting this year to get the personnel used to running the spread. Obviously the players at key positions aren't suited for the spread, but by the time we get people who can play it well, the rest of the program will have already had a year of experience running it. Would they not be better running a different system? Why not recruit for a new system and install it when the players can actually run it? Michigan has too much talent -- even this year -- to "punt" a season. It's not what's best for this year's team. It's stubborn in my book.

Michigan and Texas A&M are both so bad because they have stubborn coaches that refuse to adapt their schemes to their personnel.

Which would beg the question: Is a two loss SEC team better then a 1 loss Non-Sec team? Anybody who knows my conference loyalty knows the answer to that question. But I will say it would also depend on who the non-Sec team is. But if LSU proved last yr is that a 2 loss SEC team was better clearly better then what the Big 10 had to offer (and Michigan had to hang on against Florida). Right now the NT game would be Oklahoma and........whoever survives at the end of the season. But we know things should and will change between now and Jan. What a ridiculous all-encompassing question. Love that Michigan had to "hang on" against Florida. Nevermind, that EVERYONE said Florida was clearly superior to Michigan. And then they lost. But I'm sure this game is just proof of the SEC's superiority that even your bad teams are top 20 caliber. Not that Florida is being taken to the wire against a mediocre team. I think the real question is should an 8 loss Mississippi St. Team get a BCS bid instead of another conference winner? I don't appreciate the mocking SSR so cool it. I was asking a question based on what bukie said about the SEC. That is not a question I would ask out the blue. (Because I know Big 10 homers would not like the answer but in their hearts know it to be true) I was asking a simple question in reference to a previous post. And the answer still holds true...Michigan last yr while a good team, still barely hung on and beat the Gators regardless of what Big 10 homers say. And my opinion still is...a 2 loss SEC team is better then 90% 1 loss no SEC teams. If you can't deal with it, that's your problem. I would take Alabama/Georgia/LSU/Florida against other conferences best teams anyday of the week. So save your mocking for your fellow Big 10 fans, or whichever conference holds your loyalty. I don't think there is a single Big Ten fan on here who believes the league is as good as the SEC. It's clearly not. I've yet to see anyone argue it is. However, Michigan beat Florida last year. They were supposed to get blown out. They didn't; they won the game. Who cares if they "barely hung on"? I fail to see what point you are trying to argue here.

If the Brewers get in, I think they'll win the first series. (And that's not to say they'll definitely lose the next series.)

I like the Brewers chances in the first round against the Dodgers. When the season comes down to just 3 games it is more or less random what is going to happen so I have no prediction on what is going to happen. Whichever team loses will have had epic chokes two years in a row though. The Brewers wouldn't play the Dodgers.

Did they not call illegal contact? I was groaning and didn't hear the call. Also, it was extremely stupid to throw twice before running in for the score. You run -- especially since the ground game was working -- and either score, run clock or make them burn timeouts. Surprisingly poor clock management for the Colts. They called interference and gave the Jaguars 11 yards..from the 29 to the 40. I have no idea where they came up with the 40 though..that certainly wasn't where any interference happened. Then I'm at a loss too.