CubColtPacer

You have forgotten Wells on that pitching staff and I think he would have to be a lock for the rotation. That would probably push Marshall back into the bullpen which is good because the bullpen needs at least a little stability down there. As for Gorzelanny, if the Cubs don't see him in the future rotation plans because of his injuries and walk rate then I can see why they would be shopping him because they weren't a fan at all of his ability to relieve. They might be thinking they can just trade him for an actual reliever. I wouldn't like that deal but I wouldn't hate it either since Gorzelanny is still a pretty big question mark and could very well get squeezed out of the rotation soon even if he remains on the Cubs.

I'm surprised more Cashner backers aren't seeing this angle. Is Cashner even pitching somewhere this winter to get stretched out? So that come ST he'd be ready to be a starter and possibly start the year in the MLB rotation instead of having to go to AAA to get stretched out to be a starter and come up later in the year. Stretching out won't be a problem. All pitchers in ST have to go through that process. The problem becomes how many innings he'll be able to throw in the rotation next year before he needs to be shut down.

What I thought was ridiculous was Herbstreit yesterday said he thought (not necessarily he believed it was right) that if Oregon lost, TCU would get in but if Auburn lost, that they would probably stay above TCU. I get that Oregon would be losing to a weaker opponent, though that would be on the road rather than a neutral site, but I think if you'd keep one ahead of TCU ahead with a loss, you have to keep both. If you're going to drop one below TCU with a loss, you have to drop both behind TCU. The difference is the Auburn will likely be #1 in the computers even with a loss. Oregon won't. Either one of them with a loss will have some people drop them below TCU and some of them keeping them above. In Oregon's case, that wouldn't be enough as TCU's computer rankings would be stronger. In Auburn's case, that might be enough to keep them in that spot.

I've heard a lot of people say that TCU in the championship game would be a disaster for the BCS, but I don't get it. Ratings likely wouldn't suffer that much and while a BCS conference would be losing out on a lot of money this year, wouldn't it ultimately be good for the BCS to have a non-AQ make it to the championship game? It's an example they'll be able to point to as to how the system is fair to non-AQ schools. The thought is that if the precedent is set where a non-AQ undefeated gets in over an AQ 1 loss team that the BCS conferences may decide to change the system. I don't think this year would cause that though...but if it happened multiple times, the big schools would not be happy. It probably comes down to who you think has a better chance of changing the system...the outsiders (small conferences, Congress, the public) or the insiders (mostly the BCS university presidents).

Understood. Earlier dew pointed out that signing Dunn to this deal would've been "a different story" if the Cubs were better positioned to contend for the WS. And I'm saying the Cubs took that same "one player away" mindset into the Bradley situation. As we all know, that ended very poorly. For some reason that was labeled a "really, really ridiculous take." I dunno, seems spot on to me. :shrug: Because it's really, really ridiculous. Adam Dunn and Bradley are completely different in every sense of the word and Dunn IS the type of player that can put a team over the top. There was no reason for the Cubs to go into next season effectively surrendering in such a weak division, and that's what they've effectively done by not landing the one difference-maker FA they had a shot at getting on the market right now. People can spin it all they want, by any combination of dinking and dunking moves they make instead of getting Dunn isn't going to do anything except almost certainly result in a mediocre team that can't even compete in a division this weak. Your overgeneralization is a silly take on this, and the Cubs easily could have been just one player away given their competition, and Dunn is that type of player. To compare it to Bradley in any way is just absurd. The Cubs very realistically were just a Dunn away from being competitive and having a real shot given the circumstances of their division whereas Bradley was nothing but an oft-injured role player at best. You're drastically undervaluing Dunn's impact on this team to make your point. You're wrong. The Cubs may have "kicked the tires" on Dunn, but they never actively pursued him. Berkman and Pena are the options for them at 1B this winter, so stop living in a fantasy world. Secondly, the Cubs aren't "just [one] Dunn away from being competitive ... ." This team seriously lacks leadership both on and off the field. While Dunn may have provided some home runs, there weren't leadership qualities there, as there is with other players the Cubs are pursuing (i.e. Berkman, Kerry Wood, Brandon Webb). Besides, did the team get anywhere by hitting solo home run after solo home run last year? No. The Cubs were one of only 2 teams in the NL last year to hit more home runs with runners on than solo shots (and most of the teams weren't even close). They had a huge lack of solo home runs last year not the other way around.

They're going to almost certainly fill the Fukudome hole from within. Dempster will probably be back for 2012. And 3B they'll probably have to sign a journeyman. They won't have to spend out nearly as much money as they're losing.

If that happened, I'd be perfectly fine with no NFL in 2011. Hell I'll be pissed if 11-5 doesn't make it. I still think its insane that the Pats went 11-5 a couple years back and didn't make the playoffs. How the hell is that not good enough to play in the playoffs? Heck, 10-6 and no playoffs makes me angry too. The worst thing about that 12-4 and no playoffs scenario is that I think the NFC west team qualified for the playoffs at 8-8. Could you imagine the backlash if a 12-4 team didn't make the playoffs and an 8-8 team got a home playoff game? It wouldn't be that different than the 2008 season you mentioned. The 11-5 Patriots missed the playoffs and the 12-4 Colts had to go to San Diego to face an 8-8 Chargers team.

If Theriot is usable at any position it's at SS. He's fine as a backup middle infielder or maybe a well below average starting SS. Having him primarily at 2nd is a mistake as there are better players that can play that position.

This was quite literally my first thought. If Hudson has always been a Hendry favorite, why wasn't he pursued at all in the offseason leading up to 2009? Why were we saddled with Aaron Miles's multi-year contract? Hudson ended up signing for 1 year and 3.3 millions. A bargain. Because Hendry like the rest of the league didn't want to give up a first round pick for Hudson which is why he ended up going so cheaply. That first rounder for the Cubs ended up being Brett Jackson.

No one said they were, genius That's pretty much the running ideas that the Cubs can pull off if they can't sign Dunn. If they can't afford Dunn then it's tremendously unlikely they'll be able to afford either Fielder or Gonzalez next year given the demand that they'll command. If they sign someone like Pena I'll bet it's a multi-year deal since they'll be able to get him cheap. I don't think they will be able to get Fielder or Gonzalez but they'll almost certainly be able to afford them. Fukudome will likely be replaced for cheap (with either Colvin or Jackson). Silva will be gone and so will Grabow and those might be replaced in house.. If they also buyout Ramirez, they'll have holes at 1st, 3rd, and possibly a starter or reliever. But they'll probably have between 30-50 million to replace them.

They have (or at least very close to that). The problem is that the offensive line has never been this bad. Manning only has around 2 seconds to throw if that. The injuries have exacerbated that problem because Addai is a fantastic blocker, Clark was a better blocker than Tamme, and Collie stretches the field. They aren't even running the same plays anymore because they don't have the talent to run their normal plays. Last year the Colts were a very, very good team that won every single close game they played. This year they're not quite as good and they've struggled in close games. The difference between the Super Bowl team and this one is really not that large though.

Why do you think the Rose Bowl will pass on Stanford? I think that they're forced to take the minor conference team this year if that team is not in the national title game. They have to take a non-AQ once in this bowl cycle if either the Pac-10 or Big Ten champion plays in the national championship game (but not if a non-AQ also plays in the championship game). They'd probably be best off taking a #3 TCU considering they might be left with worse options in the next few years, especially if the team they're passing on is one with a smaller fan base. Everything I'm reading suggests the Rose would be forced to take TCU if they don't make the national title game. The Rose would have had a choice of whether to fulfill their obligation this year or delay it to another year in this cycle if one of the minor conference teams had made the title game and the other one was eligible as an at-large. But in this scenario they'll be forced to pick TCU. Stanford is going to be lucky that they're likely to automatically qualify because they'll move up to #4 in the BCS. Otherwise they may have had a hard time being selected because the Sugar and Orange would be worried how they would travel across the country. Now one of those two bowls will be forced to take Stanford (or possibly the Fiesta if the Orange decides the Big East champion is actually a better pick than Stanford).

Why do you think the Rose Bowl will pass on Stanford? I think that they're forced to take the minor conference team this year if that team is not in the national title game.

It's almost certain to have two Big 10 teams and two Pac 10 teams in the BCS and yet they are almost certain not to play each other in any of the games.

Northwestern has a harder SOS than Boise State. Unless you're talking about preseason. 2 of the 3 computers that easily show schedule strength had Boise with the harder schedule before this weekend. It will likely remain close.

To give an idea of how far a team like Boise could fall in bowls because of this, Nevada before the game was projected to go to the Kraft Fight Hunger Bowl against Boston College. Now they'll probably try to find the best matchup possible for a team like Boise but it could potentially get ugly. Unfortunately for Nevada all the focus will be on Boise now and not their great season. They have to be kicking themselves as a couple mistakes in a tough place to play (at Hawaii) is the only reason they aren't undefeated right now.

He mentioned that because ESPN has Jurkin as a 4 star and 53rd on their list of Super 60 prospects for 2012 (actually only 11 spots behind Perea who is ranked all the way back at 42nd on that list). I'm not a big believer in ESPN's rankings so I don't put a lot of stock in that but it is out there.

Taking Sagarins overall ratings (and looking at the entirety of their schedules) Boise State will have played 3 Top 25 teams. OSU will play 2. Boise State will have played 1 team between 25-50. OSU will have played 4. Boise and OSU will each play 1 team between 51-75. Boise will play 3 teams between 76-100. OSU will have played 1. Boise State will play 2 teams between 101-125. OSU will have played 3. Boise State will play 2 teams between 150-175. OSU will play 1. Obviously OSU has one of the weaker major conference schedules this year and it's still better than Boise's but the difference between their schedules is not that big. There certainly should be no argument for a 1 loss OSU even if everybody else in front of them fell away. Wisconsin and Michigan State also have similarly poor schedules.

I just listened to it and Simmons said that he thought they would be getting respect now from people (why I'm not sure). And Sal when he said the line "they do get a ton of respect" was talking about the Eagles because he then mentioned that the Bears are the flip side of that and the home team should normally be favored in this situation.

simply having your hands on the facemask isn't a penalty, Barber's head didn't get twisted at all until Suh tugged on his reins You don't need to twist the head for the penalty to be called. No, but you either need to twist or hold on for a while. Grabbing and then quickly releasing was always the 5 yard variety in the past and that was the penalty that was supposed to be eliminated. What has tended to happen though is that the 15 yard foul gets called on situations where it wouldn't in the past and that's not what the rule change was supposed to do.

The season will probably end with a fizzle this weekend. Let's hope Michigan is at least competitive in the bowl game. This game against OSU is going to be painful. The majority of the projections I am seeing suggest Michigan is gonna end up at the Insight Bowl playing Missouri. I can't see us being favored in that one. Considering there's a good chance that Michigan won't have beaten anyone with a winning record this year going into the game (if ND loses to USC and Illinois at Fresno St.), it's gonna be a tough matchup. Edit: Didn't realize UConn is all the way up to 6-4 this year, but they have Cinci and South Florida to finish the year. UConn is just a couple wins and a WV win on Friday away from making a BCS bowl this year.

I've seen it in college but not the pros. That's risky to even try it. I can't remember about the pros but in college there's no risk. Once a member of the kicking team touches it the receiving team can return it and a fumble wouldn't hurt them at that point.

It sounds like the Mountain West will likely add Hawaii and they'll be looking for a 12th school after that. The MWC is getting close to BCS conference territory again even after losing Utah and BYU. Adding the 4 best WAC schools and then if they add somebody else decent would create a pretty good conference.

Miles was signed to play regularly and the plan changed only after he tanked. Ramirez was in the lineup 13 out of the first 15 games. In those 13 games, Fontenot started 11 times and Miles started twice. That was before Miles tanked. Miles was not signed to start the majority of games at second base.

The Colts put Jennings on Marshall most of the day last year. Marshall had 21 catches for 200 yards and 2 TD's.