CubColtPacer

Fans of teams that aren't in the big 10 get tired of hearing about how OSU/Michigan should rematch for the championship. Everyone said Florida had no chance. Pretty much the big 10 has 2 good teams (sometimes 3). They play about 2 hard games a year and the media acts like they are on a different level than other teams. In the SEC you play a tough game nearly every week. So the fans of an SEC team enjoy it when one of the SEC teams hands a big 10 team their butt. That's the best explanation I can give. I might agree with that point this year but not usually. Usually, the Big 10 is as deep as the SEC-this year, that wasn't the case at all. Still though, the Big 10 did go 2-1 against the SEC, which doesn't prove the Big 10 was better (their 0-4 record in other bowls kind of shows that they weren't) but that the difference wasn't as big as most people would think it is. A friend (who is a big SEC fan and a proud supporter of the SEC's superiority) and I did a comparison of the SEC and Big 10 before this season started. Take the Big 10 schools and the SEC schools and rank them from top to bottom based on their performances over the last 10 years, and throw out the SEC school that's either 6th or 7th (throw out one of the middle ones to equalize the difference of 1 school between the 2 conferences). Then, compare the accomplishments over those 10 years between each of the matchups. I think you'll find that the two conferences have been virtually identical over that time period.

Yes, getting throttled by good teams does not prove much. Needing to come back from down 3 scores against a bad team doesn't prove much either.* * - You can't have it both ways. Either GT sucks (ND beat them on the road while everyone else not named USC was playing I-AA caliber teams) or they're good (they almost beat WV). Pick one. Both teams narrowly beat GT. Notre Dame got whacked by the ranked teams it played. West Virginia split Louisville and Rutgers. Their ability to actually beat a ranked team makes them more qualified IMO. As Ndi as already pointed out, ND did demolish Penn State this year, who is back to being a ranked team. Also, you can't really count WV's win over GT as proof that they were more deserving a month ago to go to a BCS bowl. Let's say it was reversed. WV goes to play LSU, and ND goes to play GT (or a team about like them?). What likely happens? WV loses to LSU, and ND wins their bowl game, and then one could make the argument that ND was more deserving of going to the game. That's why you have to throw out the bowl games entirely when looking at who was more deserving. Neither WV or ND was on LSU's level (especially not if Russell is on his game for the entire game, which is rare but happened last week), but one of them had to be chosen to go play them. At the time, ND was higher in both the polls and the computers, so they were seen as the better choice-my guess is, the exact same thing happens to WV anyway that happened to ND. Again, these are your guesses. Let the teams play and determine it on the field and leave the mythical stuff out of it. It takes the what if out of it. People said the same thing last year before WV beat Georgia in the Sugar bowl, again they actually played and we didn't have to assume who would have won. LSU is a talented team but so is OSU. Look what happens in a one game situation as things change as the game progresses. It just amazes me that people still claim flat out one team is better than an other and yet were saying OSU was going to be a double digit winner over Florida. How did that game work out for them? Believe me, I wouldn't have much of a problem if WV got their shot either. I think they are a good ballclub, and if ND had played WV in a bowl, that would be a very entertaining matchup (and one I have no idea who would win). With the two teams being so close, it's hard to say though that when one team got selected that they weren't deserving-they both were about equally deserving, and one of them had to get selected.

Yes, getting throttled by good teams does not prove much. Needing to come back from down 3 scores against a bad team doesn't prove much either.* * - You can't have it both ways. Either GT sucks (ND beat them on the road while everyone else not named USC was playing I-AA caliber teams) or they're good (they almost beat WV). Pick one. Both teams narrowly beat GT. Notre Dame got whacked by the ranked teams it played. West Virginia split Louisville and Rutgers. Their ability to actually beat a ranked team makes them more qualified IMO. As Ndi as already pointed out, ND did demolish Penn State this year, who is back to being a ranked team. Also, you can't really count WV's win over GT as proof that they were more deserving a month ago to go to a BCS bowl. Let's say it was reversed. WV goes to play LSU, and ND goes to play GT (or a team about like them?). What likely happens? WV loses to LSU, and ND wins their bowl game, and then one could make the argument that ND was more deserving of going to the game. That's why you have to throw out the bowl games entirely when looking at who was more deserving. Neither WV or ND was on LSU's level (especially not if Russell is on his game for the entire game, which is rare but happened last week), but one of them had to be chosen to go play them. At the time, ND was higher in both the polls and the computers, so they were seen as the better choice-my guess is, the exact same thing happens to WV anyway that happened to ND.

How did the Chiefs not deserve it? They were 9-7 while Tennessee, Denver, Cincy, Pittsburgh, etc. were 8-8. It's not like they got voted into the playoffs... Technically, Denver was 9-7. While Denver had the better conference record (Denver went 8-4 in the AFC, while KC went 5-7!), because they are in the same division even though it's for a wildcard spot division tiebreakers go first, and KC won with a 4-2 record against the division while Denver was 3-3.

Seconded. How can so many bad teams be in one division? The Nets are the biggest disappointment in the league, up to this point. The funny thing is that everybody knew that the two divisions in the East besides the Central were going to be bad right when re-alignment happened. The Southeast has gotten better, but the Atlantic has gotten worse. I was very upset at re-alignment-I knew they actually did it right geographically, but at the time they put the two best teams in the conference together (Detroit and Indiana) plus a team with a young Lebron, plus a good up and coming team (Chicago). I'm not surprised at all that now, two (or maybe 3) years later, the Central division is the only respecatable one in the East whatsoever.

Do the Jets know how to play defense at all? 1st half-14 seconds left, 3rd and goal for the Patriots from the 1 1/2, no timeouts. It's an automatic pass, and yet the Jets fall for the play-action fake and give up a TD. Now, right there. 6 minutes left, 3rd and goal-the Patriots are not going to throw any passes that could get intercepted in that case! Where might the pass go? Hmm, might be a swing pass-a nice, safe pass. The Jets put nobody out there though, and it costs them another TD and almost certainly the game. The Jets defensive coordinator has definitely been outcoached today.

I'm surprised you're rooting for the Jets-even though I don't want to, I'm rooting for the Patriots to make it to the AFC title game-then if the Colts can join them, it will be Colts-Patriots in the Dome :D I don't care for either, but I'd root for the Jets over the Patriots. Doesn't really matter after this review. I would normally as well, but I'm rooting for the Patriots because I think they have a chance of beating SD-I see no way that the Jets win that game.

I'm surprised you're rooting for the Jets-even though I don't want to, I'm rooting for the Patriots to make it to the AFC title game-then if the Colts can join them, it will be Colts-Patriots in the Dome :D

You mean the same UM that got hammered by USC, that UM? I would put Florida and LSU ahead of Michigan. If Florida gets hammered by OSU, do you change it back? It's pretty close between those schools though.

But the reason he and Boras are balking at Boston's (possible) out-clause is probably becuase they don't like his chances to play well enough this season that he would be an attractive 2008 FA. I don't think that is the case. If he was hurt this year he didn't show it. To Giles Bros., I don't want to trade Murton. I love Ginger Kids. However, the Cubs don't, or at least they don't seem too. They've talked repeatedly about a platoon for Murton this year. This will be his third season in the bigs and if they are talking platoon they obviously don't value him very highly. The Cubs have never talked about a platoon for Murton. With the Cubs statements about wanting to get a left-handed bat, many people have assumed they want a platoon for Murton, but the Cubs have never come out and said it-they could want another left-handed bat for center field, for example. All the Cubs have said about Murton is that he will get plenty of playing time. Not according to Bruce Miles. Can you point me to where he said it? I didn't think he said that, but I certainly could be wrong (and probably am, if you remember him saying it)-do you know if it was in the paper, or what thread it was in? http://www.northsidebaseball.com/PremiumForum/viewtopic.php?t=37701&start=20 "Share time" is a platoon by any ohter name. I guess I just don't believe that if Murton gets 70-75 percent of the at-bats over a guy like Cliff Floyd it proves that the organization doesn't value Murton. It is more of a case that they want a left-handed guy with pop for the bench. To get somebody really good, they have to promise him some starts. Right now, Murton is really the only candidate to give away some of those starts, unless that person can play CF (which is unlikely). Will a guy like Floyd's presence help the team next year? Almost definitely. Will it hurt Murton's development? Maybe-but it really depends on how much of the playing time Murton gets, and if he gets 70-75 percent I don't think it will impair his development much at all. If the roster stays as it is right now, I can't see Murton not getting just about all of the at-bats, unless they determine Pie is ready and give Jones some of Murton's AB's.

But the reason he and Boras are balking at Boston's (possible) out-clause is probably becuase they don't like his chances to play well enough this season that he would be an attractive 2008 FA. I don't think that is the case. If he was hurt this year he didn't show it. To Giles Bros., I don't want to trade Murton. I love Ginger Kids. However, the Cubs don't, or at least they don't seem too. They've talked repeatedly about a platoon for Murton this year. This will be his third season in the bigs and if they are talking platoon they obviously don't value him very highly. The Cubs have never talked about a platoon for Murton. With the Cubs statements about wanting to get a left-handed bat, many people have assumed they want a platoon for Murton, but the Cubs have never come out and said it-they could want another left-handed bat for center field, for example. All the Cubs have said about Murton is that he will get plenty of playing time. Not according to Bruce Miles. Can you point me to where he said it? I didn't think he said that, but I certainly could be wrong (and probably am, if you remember him saying it)-do you know if it was in the paper, or what thread it was in?

But the reason he and Boras are balking at Boston's (possible) out-clause is probably becuase they don't like his chances to play well enough this season that he would be an attractive 2008 FA. I don't think that is the case. If he was hurt this year he didn't show it. To Giles Bros., I don't want to trade Murton. I love Ginger Kids. However, the Cubs don't, or at least they don't seem too. They've talked repeatedly about a platoon for Murton this year. This will be his third season in the bigs and if they are talking platoon they obviously don't value him very highly. The Cubs have never talked about a platoon for Murton. With the Cubs statements about wanting to get a left-handed bat, many people have assumed they want a platoon for Murton, but the Cubs have never come out and said it-they could want another left-handed bat for center field, for example. All the Cubs have said about Murton is that he will get plenty of playing time.

Not today. He's got his screw ups out of his system Yup-2 miscommunications and 1 absolutely horrible decision. I don't think Manning will throw any more-if Harrison runs the routes that Manning thought he would run, he would have only 1 INT. At 16-8, the game had the potential of a very negative media week even with a win. The Colts have finished in such a way that Manning can have some confidence and the defense has a great game to show for itself. I think the media will have a field day as well-but I think Manning knows that it was a much better day than the 3 INT's would indicate-all they have to do is fix the communication between Manning and Harrison, and things change completely.

Indy plays Baltimore no matter if NE or the Jets win.

Not today. He's got his screw ups out of his system Yup-2 miscommunications and 1 absolutely horrible decision. I don't think Manning will throw any more-if Harrison runs the routes that Manning thought he would run, he would have only 1 INT.

That's really not how the Colts fans are-but there have been so, so many fake injuries by opposing teams in the past 3 years to try to slow the Colts down that the Colts fans have simply gotten sick of it.

I guess Peyton and Marvin just stop speaking the same language in the playoffs-that's 2 INT's possibly that are simply miscommunications between QB and receiver.

I'm happy with the first half. Manning threw two terrible passes (one of those was a miscommunication) but otherwise the offense was ok, and I'm not worried about them longterm. The defense was amazing-if they can play anything like that in the second half and possibly beyond, the offense will come at least somewhat back to normal. Again-I'm very happy. The team made plenty of mistakes in the 1st half, but there are some very encouraging signs in there.

I wouldn't be so sure-the Denver game for example was Denver 14, Colts 6 at halftime-at the end, it was Colts 34, Denver 31. The Colts have been a 2nd half team all year long.

This is the bizarro Colts here-offense struggling, defense dominating so far.

Apparently not if you are at Ohio State, you can't :D. I actually didn't get to see the IU-OSU game the other night, I just heard a great deal of complaining about the foul disparity (OSU shot 35 FT's, IU shot 11). While Oden did get into foul trouble in the second half, apparently there were 2 or 3 obvious fouls in the first half he got away with (not post battles either where they could call it anytime, but hitting a guy's arm while taking a shot for example). Again though, I'm not complaining about it, and am not even sure it's true because I didn't see it. Anyway, I see now the game is at Illinois. Good luck.

Exactly what job was this? Please don't tell me he was going to start... http://chicagosports.chicagotribune.com/sports/columnists/cs-070105rogers,1,1154597.column?page=2&coll=cs-home-utility I don't think it was a starting job. I think Newhan might have thought this: here would be the opening day outfielders with Newhan on the team: Starters: Murton, Jones, Soriano-Bench: Pagan, Newhan When Pie comes up, one of those outfielders would have to be cut-and Newhan was worried it would be him, so he went to the more guaranteed job.

And Steve Finley put up a .900 OPS in 2000. Doesn't much change the fact that he's washed up now, though. http://www.baseballthinkfactory.org/files/oracle/discussion/cubs_signed_derosa/ http://www.baseballthinkfactory.org/files/oracle/discussion/2007_zips_projections_boston_red_sox/ Again, we're paying Derosa more per year for three years when it's likely that Loretta will provide as much, if not more, value next year. That would be a significant improvement on Loretta's numbers from the past two years-the projections have him bouncing back with 64 points better than his better year of the last 2 years (of course, his 2 years were only 1 point apart). While that's certainly possible when looking over his career numbers, having two straight years of the same numbers coupled with being 35 does not give all that much optimism for that high of a jump. He has the potential to get back to those numbers, but he has just as high of a potential at his age to continue to decline and to put up a truly subpar season even for a second baseman. DeRosa I am not touching at all-he's had such little time as a regular that it is hard to project him (along with his swing change, which of course wouldn't be reflected in the projections anyway). He could be close to 800, and he could be a sub 700, or anywhere in between. My guess is that it will be around 750, but again, that could be a case of simply hedging bets (with his swing change, he should be better than the projections say he will be, but still not nearly as good as the career year of last year is my thinking).

9th ranked Michigan in '02. Actually, they were 6th. And they were 8th when we beat them in '04. They must be referring to end-of-season rankings because we also beat them in '05 when they were 3rd. They were 9th at the end of the season. Well, there you go. One good thing that happened this week is that PSU won their bowl game, so we can finally put that "Weis hasn't beaten a team that finished up ranked" talk to rest. Next season, with ND's schedule, I expect 8 wins, with losses to Michigan and USC again (both will be too talented), as well as any two of Purdue/UCLA/PSU/BC/GT if Calvin somehow comes back. 9 wins and a Gator Bowl berth would be an incredible coaching job by Weis. I guesss I'm not as optimistic as you. 6 or 7 wins next year-there are simply too many playmakers leaving at the end of the year. That doesn't mean it will be absolutely be terrible though-it's just a needed year so Weis can continue to get his recruits in. I agree with you that 9 wins would be a big overacheiving year and would probably be the result of some great coaching.

It's nice to see some consistently close games today after the many blowouts early in the bowl season. The funny thing was is that I picked WV in the bowl pickem but I've been rooting for GT in the last quarter because I realized everyone else around me put more points on WV than I did. :D