CubColtPacer

While I would agree that the SEC does not have as tough of a non-conference schedule, you forgot some good opponents in there. Tennessee played California for example, Mississippi State played West Virginia, LSU played Arizona (an ok team), Georgia played Colorado (who is awful this year, but is still better than Duke who you listed) and so on. The Pac 10 is really the only major conference this year that has really done a very good job of playing OOC opponents this year-everybody else has been close to the same strength. Look at one computer's strength of schedule non-conference for the 6 major conferences: Pac 10: .530 ACC: .456 Big East: .427 Big 10: .415 SEC: .410 Big 12: .410 2nd is closer to 6th then it is to first, and the last 4 conferences are very, very close,

Let me address this Big East thing real quickly: Louisville should be in the conversation. It doesn't help anything if teams start just dismissing teams without looking at their overall resume. However, once looking at their resume, they are probably still behind both Michigan and Florida. A big part of the reason why is their non-conference schedule. Louisville tried to get good teams, but it didn't work out this year. The teams they played were down, and they only beat 1 of the 2 very good teams in their conference, so that means they only have 1 very good win, and 1 loss to a very good team. Michigan has a better loss than Louisville, and they have two of those types of wins (Wisconsin and ND). Florida? Their loss is similar to Louisville's (I think Florida's is a little better, but I'm willing to say they are similar enough to be very close to equal, so we'll assume they are equal for now). They have 3 other very good wins: LSU, Tennessee, Arkansas. I'd definitely put Louisville in the discussion, but I just don't see how they can be put ahead of the two other teams right now. It's simply too bad about a couple of their non-conference wins-if those teams could have been great otherwise, it would have been a completely different discussion.

I think that second line sums up Georgia Tech's last 4 seasons.

Payton is Juan Pierre with a little less OBP, slightly better SLG, and less speed. I wouldn't want him.

I'll do you one better. If USC loses it would guarantee the rematch. It shouldn't but it would. ND should leapfrog eight teams and get it. I'm just kidding, but I can't say I agree. why shouldn't it? I'm thinking he's saying that Florida would have a legitimate case to be in the NC if they win today, but that they won't probably have a chance to pass Michigan whatever they do. I think Michigan is better, but I can see how some people would think that Florida was better.

I'm sorry, Zelda is one of the greatest franchises of all time. Ocarina of Time is easily my favorite game of all-time. How many versions of GTA, Sonic, Halo, DOA, etc. do we need? You can say that about any of the three companies. Zelda is indeed great. I've been playing them since the NES As for your other questions: Versions of Halo: 2 GTA: 4 (on this generation of consoles) Sonic: Only one or two, and they've sucked since Dreamcast DOA: no idea Now I'm pretty sure that they had like 8 MarioParty's for the N64 alone, so.... Well, close enough. Mario Party 8 will come out for the Wii sometime next year. At the same time though, there have been 2 Smash Brothers games, and only 3 Mario Kart games, and probably only 2 or 3 of the golf and tennis games as well. There haven't been that many-they just seem like it.

This is the point that I think is most interesting. The indications are that Lugo is not going to be picked up as a SS-not for this year anyway. If you don't pick up Lugo now though, then they probably let Izturis play SS in 2008 as well, while the indications are that they would move Lugo from CF to SS in 2008 if he were acquired. So would you rather have Jones and Izturis for 2 years (plus a FA pitcher), or Jennings, Lugo+Izturis for 1 year, and then Lugo+New CF for the second year. I like the second option much better. I know that there are other options that people on here would love to do, but from all indications, those options are not going to happen, and Izturis will be the starting SS come Opening Day 07. So I see these options as the only two real viable ones, and I think the second one is definitely better.

I think that's exactly it. Boston's been after Lugo for quite a while. If we sign him, we may well be able to send Izturis there, which would be EXCELLENT. Problem is Hendry: Izturis = Dusty: Neifi. Izturis isn't going anywhere. Yeah, I can't see Izturis going anywhere this year either. His option might not be picked up though, so it might just be one more year of him. Even with Lugo being signed for CF though, this offense will be decent. They will slug better, and the OBP will be improved as well. Murton will have less at-bats taken away from poor offensive players, and that will increase production in LF. Lugo would be a better OBP Juan Pierre type, so that is an upgrade. Soriano is going to probably be a little better in OBP and SLG than Jones was last year. Izturis will actually be a slight upgrade at SS from the production last year. Lee will be a huge improvement at 1B. The only 2 positions to probably stay about the same are 3B and 2B, and the only one likely to drop is C. If they get a better bench, this offense will probably be in the middle of the league-and if they get Schmidt and Jennings, that could be enough.

the Wii is equal/slightly better than the regular xbox in terms of graphical power. check nexgenwars.com. i can't check it right now, but i'm quite confident that the Wii is dominating the PS3 in sales. the Wii had just as many or more people line up for it. since the PS3 had all of the negative news with it (the shootings, muggings, etc), mainstream news didn't make much mention of it. also, nintendo is the only company that profited in the previous generation. sony and microsoft lost money with the xbox and ps2. they make their money off of the games, not the consoles. saying that the gamecube stuggled to compete is a bit erroneous. http://www.forbes.com/technology/2003/12/22/cx_dd_1222mondaymatchup.html PS2 had 62% of the market share. XBox had 21% of the market share. I'd say Gamecube struggled to compete. That article is from 2003, but if you search, I'm sure you'll see that even more recently, PS2 and XBox controlled the market. Gamecube profited from their system, but they didn't sell nearly as many systems or games as the other two. And I might be mistaken, but didn't the PS3 only release a few hundred thousand units? Could it be that the Wii is beating them in sales simply because they released more and there is more opportunity to get one? is it nintendo's fault that sony is an incompetent company and is only going to sell 400,000 units in north america this year? if nintendo released the same amount of units, i guarantee they would sell out just as quickly (actually, they have sold out just as quickly, even with more units). the ps2's year head start on the xbox and gamecube played a large factor in its market share. Yeah, it's not like the Wii is readily available anyway. There are still plenty of people that are waiting to get their hands on one in the next shipment. It will be interesting to see if the 360 will have the same advantage by releasing early. Almost 8 million units in a year is pretty good, and it will be interesting to see if the other 2 systems can match that number in the next year. I don't think the Playstation 3 will get there-the Wii has a decent chance, but I'm not sure they will either.

Well, the upside of moving Jones for Jennings is not only do you get a potentially very good pitcher, but you only suffer with Lugo in CF for one year before he replaces Izturis. This could be a potentially very good long-term move for the Cubs, and it would improve their team OBP.

I would think you would have to-I mean, it was 2002, and he did pitch those innings. So he has reached 200 innings once, and gotten within 3 innings another time. That's still not great, but it's not as bad. I guess you don't get the humor. He threw 76.66666666666666 innings for the Yankees, and 23.333333333333333 innings for the A's. Add that up and it equals 100. The only way you get to 200 is if you add those two numbers to the total, of 100. You are double counting. I assume you are looking at his ESPN page. You see 3 categories of 2002. The first one is NYY, the 2nd is OAK, and the 3rd is his total for the year. Thanks for the correction (and thanks to all those who were laughing at me as well). I was looking at his baseball reference page-they have his total listed first, and for some reason I looked at TOT and saw TOR. I see now that it was only 100 even.

I'm fine with Lilly being the 2nd banana to whomever else they sign this year. I just think it's inaccurate to paint him as a reliable #3. He's never even thrown 200 innings in his career. I do like that his name is Theodore Roosevelt though. I keep hearing that about him-doesn't his 2002 numbers add up to 200 innings exactly though? Only if you add up his innings with NY and OAK, and then add that total to his total (ie, doubling the actual total of 100) I would think you would have to-I mean, it was 2002, and he did pitch those innings. So he has reached 200 innings once, and gotten within 3 innings another time. That's still not great, but it's not as bad.

I'm fine with Lilly being the 2nd banana to whomever else they sign this year. I just think it's inaccurate to paint him as a reliable #3. He's never even thrown 200 innings in his career. I do like that his name is Theodore Roosevelt though. I keep hearing that about him-doesn't his 2002 numbers add up to 200 innings exactly though?

Of course you'd like to look at it like that, because it's the only way to make your case. But in reality he's bee inconsistent. He's got a fairly high walk rate, his ERA+ has been up and down and he's highly susceptible to the HR. I liked him as a guy who you'd slot at the end of your rotation and hope for 180 mediocre innings. But he's nowhere near a #3 pitcher, and clearly not consistent. His ERA+ has been up and down has been more of a function of the league being inconsistent than Lilly if you take out his 2005 year. Lilly has had 4 years under 4.35 ERA out of the last 5-that's pretty good consistency. The move to the NL would probably be good for him. I'd be fine with him for that contract as long as his medical information is all right.

There isn't all much more that he could do being 2 years away from free agency. I'm sure on the open market he would have gotten more, but I doubt arbitration would have given him too much more, especially when this is a pretty decent raise from last year.

He was paid for the play in the minors, correct? So how is he eligible to play college football? You can be professional in one sport and play college ball in another sport as long as you didn't take endorsement money. That's the same reason that Jeff Samardizja was able to pitch for the Cubs this summer and play college football this fall, but Jeremy Bloom was not able to play college football because he took endorsement money to fund his skiing career.

Palmer when throwing to Chad Johnson, Housmanzadeh, or Rudi Johnson so far tonight:15/17, 160 yards Everyone else: 0/5 That's with Rudi only getting 2 of those 15 catches also. Who needs balance? :D

Where is any recent report that says that Hendry is going hard after Meche? The only thing I see is a report dated November 15th-that was a long time ago.

You do realize that report about Meche was written over 2 weeks ago, don't you? This was before the Soriano signing. I mean I got excited that we'd be getting great players after we signed Soriano. Meche is not what I had in mind. I know, but nothing has been reported that the Cubs are the favorites to sign Meche since then. That rumor is not nearly as strong as it was 2 weeks ago. It is possible the Cubs end up with Meche, but I don't see anything recently that would call it likely right now.

You do realize that report about Meche was written over 2 weeks ago, don't you? This was before the Soriano signing.

Does a guy like Ryu (or most of the young guys actually) even have at least a 30% chance of giving the team an ERA under 5.00 next year? Batista will almost certainly do that-his 2 highest ERA years in the last 6 have been 4.80 and 4.58. Batista would be a certain upgrade from most of the young starters simply because he is going to be reliably average, while people like Ryu would be wonderful if they were average next year, but they are most likely going to be terrible.

It's quite obvious to those paying attention. But it's still something that needs to be plainly written out. There's still a large contingent bewildered about Pierre not returning. Many people think the Cubs problem is a lack of small ball and poor defense. It's not saying a lot, but it appears to be an answer to a chat question, and it's a 100% accurate statement. It's plenty accurate, but it's kind of silly to not even answer the person's question. The question about the contracts and the impending sale was perfectly legitimate, and Neyer just brushed it off completely with a completely different issue. I think he answered the question to the best of his ability. He's not in the "are they going to sell the team" side of baseball. He's a guy you ask questions about on the field issues. The person asked if the Cubs are saddled with a GM who has a motive of getting the team ready to sell. I think his answer is no, they are saddled with a GM who has bad priorities when looking at players. It seemed to me that the question was "Why are all these big contracts being handed out now? Is it the impending sale, is it the pressure to win, why would they be spending all this money". That's basically a good restatment of the question-and Neyer's answer does not address that question whatsoever.

It's quite obvious to those paying attention. But it's still something that needs to be plainly written out. There's still a large contingent bewildered about Pierre not returning. Many people think the Cubs problem is a lack of small ball and poor defense. It's not saying a lot, but it appears to be an answer to a chat question, and it's a 100% accurate statement. It's plenty accurate, but it's kind of silly to not even answer the person's question. The question about the contracts and the impending sale was perfectly legitimate, and Neyer just brushed it off completely with a completely different issue.

the Wii is equal/slightly better than the regular xbox in terms of graphical power. check nexgenwars.com. i can't check it right now, but i'm quite confident that the Wii is dominating the PS3 in sales. the Wii had just as many or more people line up for it. since the PS3 had all of the negative news with it (the shootings, muggings, etc), mainstream news didn't make much mention of it. also, nintendo is the only company that profited in the previous generation. sony and microsoft lost money with the xbox and ps2. they make their money off of the games, not the consoles. saying that the gamecube stuggled to compete is a bit erroneous. You are correct that the Wii has outsold the PS3 so far. 680,000 to about 337,000 in North America. Wii sales are expected to hit 1 million in a couple of weeks. BTW, nextgen has the 360 at almost 8 million sales after a year.

Of course they do. Teams that win impressively are often moved ahead of teams that don't win impressively. This in turn effects the BCS. The same goes for losses. If someone beleives that Michigan didn't play as well as the score indicated, then sure, it does matter. When and where? Before you go looking don't waste your time. It is impossible. There are too many variables in play to make such an argument. Did Michigan lose spots when they barely beat Ball State or OSU when they barely beat Illinois? A ND fan could probably tell you the exact occasion(s) but I believe ND dropped in the polls one week after winning that weekend. ND dropped in the polls (2 spots) after beating GT in week 1 because it was determined that they didn't win in an impressive enough fashion. They then dropped again after they beat UCLA because they didn't win in an impressive enough fashion-it was 2 spots again-one team they dropped behind had beaten Alabama by 3 the other week, and the other team they dropped behind was off that week. After Army, they dropped again for the same reason (although this one has a possible other explanation depending on how the pollsters put Rutgers the week previous, who lost to Cincy that same week). A team can most certainly drop after winning unimpressively-ND has shown it can happen multiple times this year. ND beating up the weak sisters of D1 did not happen in a vacuum. I'm not that interested to go ook in to it any further but there probably where other variables in play that could explain dropping in the polls, like who the teams behind them beat, among other things. The entire BCS is a travisty. No, it is a sham. No a mockery. It is a travishamockery. Well, in week 1 there is certainly no question. If you can find a single team behind ND who beat a better opponent then them that week besides USC (and Arkansas wasn't regarded better than GT at the time) than let me know. I can tell you one thing though-if ND had beaten GT 50-14 and USC had beaten Arkansas 14-10, there is no way that USC moves past ND in the polls. It was the style points. In the UCLA example, it was the same way. Tennessee beat Alabama, who isn't really any better than UCLA. Florida didn't play anybody, so they really had nothing to move up with. Style points matter a great deal in the polls, and how much a team wins by can determine if they go to a better game or not, or even to the national title game.