Sammy Sofa

And then they turn to Wright and talk to him about...Cutler running over that dude. When he wins a ring the narrative is going to be how he learned from the NFC Championship and how it taught him how to be a leader and all that [expletive]. Lord almighty, this is so right. Blech. It's like how whenever the Cubs win it it's of course going to be linked to Bartman.

And then they turn to Wright and talk to him about...Cutler running over that dude.

hey man, the way this stuff works, we should be thrilled with that. we have had bad stuff come from these sunday night games and just cutler's body language in general a number of times. if people want to correct this stuff for us for an equally arbitrary reason, i'm all for it. They should love him like we do, dammit. WITH WISDOM.

Yup: MEET THE NEW JAY CUTLER SAME AS THE OLD JAY CUTLER.

What was it, the first game of his 2nd year when he ran for a TD and got helicoptered in? Cutler has shown no fear all along. Haaaaaaaate that [expletive].

Jesus Christ, shut the [expletive] up with the meatballery, Collingsworth. This is a "different Jay Cutler" because of that run? [expletive] the [expletive] off; Cutler was throwing himself into [expletive] from day one.

How has Peppers looked? I haven't seen much outside of the BB commercial breaks and it seems like the Bears are always on offense then (though I got to see the pick 6).

This is a sexy, sexy day.

Nothing was hard to follow; he was very clear that he thought rebuilding the team was based on the necessity of shedding the older players. He even posted a list of the players he thought had to go just make sure he was super-dooper clear. The rest didn't happen (this time).

Yeah, it was a dumbass point to begin with and I was watching him squirm. Go fart out a bird cage and leave us be.

HRAMMER TIME.

Not really. They're losing him because they have a good, younger option in Castillo.

Heh-heh-heh..."mule."

So please point to how many of those "products" were obtained by "unwinding the old team."

The fact the team didn't net high ceiling prospects in return for what they were trading away speaks volumes about the quality of player they traded. When you do a one for three deal you add two players that are better than two players you have. You are elevating the level of play at every level. I don't see how that could be a bad strategy. It's just not even a strategy at all; again, you're talking about the "old team" (whatever that is) like they had to take it apart to move forward, but that's simply not true. They did it simply because it's what you tend to do when you have a terrible team and veteran players coming to the end of their deals, but it's not like rebuilding the team/organization hinged on moving older players.

Why? I mean, it didn't even play out that way. It did play out that way. Zambrano, Soto, Maholm and Dempster last season. Marmol, Harriston, Feldman, Garza, Soriano and DeJesus this season. While not 24 months, it took nearly two complete seasons to trade six core players from the old team. What is the "old team?" How do Maholm, Hairston and Feldman fit into whatever that is since none were on the team before 2012 and none lasted an entire season? The rest of those players all had very different legths in terms of their time with the Cubs, so, again, what exactly is "the old team (DeJesus was only on the team for a year and a half and was signed by the current FO, so how is he a "core player from the old team?")?" Why would it have been necessary to "unwind it?" What is "unwinding" in the first place? Maholm (and Johnson) were moved because the team liked the package and Dempster balked. Marmol had no value because there was zero chance he'd be with the team beyond his contract. Harriston . . . we actually got something for him? I'm still in shock. Feldman was signed to replace Maholm whom they intended to trade this season and they found a taker. All of these deals bring back multiple minor leaguers who create greater competition in the minors allowing management to cull the herd, so to speak. But that's seemingly a completely separate goal/action from "unwinding the old team." I don't know how you can lump in players who were signed by the current FO and lasted less than a year with any kind of effort to dismantle the "old team."

That doesn't explain why they had to "unwind" anything; nevermind most of the "older" players weren't preventing the FO from rebuilding the organization and most of them were moved near or the end of the contracts with the Cubs (and most of them for crappy or unremarkable returns, too).

Why? I mean, it didn't even play out that way. It did play out that way. Zambrano, Soto, Maholm and Dempster last season. Marmol, Harriston, Feldman, Garza, Soriano and DeJesus this season. While not 24 months, it took nearly two complete seasons to trade six core players from the old team. What is the "old team?" How do Maholm, Hairston and Feldman fit into whatever that is since none were on the team before 2012 and none lasted an entire season? The rest of those players all had very different legths in terms of their time with the Cubs, so, again, what exactly is "the old team (DeJesus was only on the team for a year and a half and was signed by the current FO, so how is he a "core player from the old team?")?" Why would it have been necessary to "unwind it?" What is "unwinding" in the first place?

Why? I mean, it didn't even play out that way.

Oh, Rose is an awesome player and I love watching him play...when I say worst Chicago sports superstar it's based on how boring/stupid he is. I demand entertaining stars, dammit.

Anyone who disagrees can got [expletive] out an emu.

Most unlikable Chicago superstar athlete ever. EVER.

That is awesome. And shut the [expletive] up, Arizona. You put a stupid pool in your stadium.

Mmmmm, dog meat.

Perfect.