jersey cubs fan

I said he's not "very" productive, at least nowhere close to his $17.7m average salary. He's a good player, but nothing special. You said it was likely he's going to have his best year as a Cub. He's going to be 33, well past a player's typical prime. What he's probably going to be is similar to what he's already been as a Cub. If you want to pretend that 33 isn't past his prime, go right ahead. You'd be wrong, but feel free to pretend otherwise.

He's owed 106m ($17.7m per year). Yes, it is that bad of a deal, no he's not "very" productive and no, he's not "probably" going to have his best year as a Cub next year. There could be a market if they ate a big chunk, but I don't see the point in that. There are 150+ free agents still out on the market because nobody outside the Yankees is committing any money this offseason.

It is easy to get Rockies tickets, even for Cubs games.

Uh-oh, Lovie. Being contradicted in public by your boss cannot be good. Safe to say, Angelo will prolly be looking for a QB this offseason. Severe dischord? I think that's taking it a bit too far. Lovie said Kyle's the QB -- which is the ready-made comment he has on speed dial whenever a reporter lets slip a QB question. It doesn't mean there won't be competition for QB next tranining camp. And when you consider there is no real competition currently on the roster, it makes even more sense for Lovie to say Kyle is the QB.

That's the biggest reason I wouldn't want a big name, if he insisted on being GM as well.

Holmgren too maybe? I'd love to see Shanahan given the moon and full control over the offense, but I doubt he'd take it or the Bears would offer it. What has Mike Shanahan done since John Elway retired that Lovie Smith hasn't? Smith is more accomplished since 2005 than Shanahan is since 1999. ONE playoff win in that span and numerous late season collapses. I like him as offensive mind and think he's overall one of the better coach's in the league but he in no way deserves "the moon" at the expense of Lovie Smith. Smith's been a flat out more accomplished coach recently. read again

Holmgren too maybe? I'd love to see Shanahan given the moon and full control over the offense, but I doubt he'd take it or the Bears would offer it.

I thought it was one guy in particular.

I'm assuming both are back until something happens.

I'm not sure love is the appropriate word. But I also think it's a mistake to dismiss a coach's positional coaching ability based on his team's results as a head coach.

I say buy low on TO and hope to get 2 seasons out of him. He wouldn't have a Witten/Williams type to compete with for catches. He'd have much less leverage to act like an ass, since he's no longer coming off the big super bowl run, he's finished with back to back disappointing seasons, and he wouldn't have an insane owner defending his every word. Unless Burress is healthy and available.

Agreed, he'd be a solid replacement for Babich (I like what he did in Tampa). Marinelli I think could fit in with a lot of the teams in the running for D-Coordinators and would love him in Chicago He's probably better off going to a d-line coach. He'd avoid the media a lot more, and any media group is going to take the chance to talk about 0-16 as much as they can if Marinelli becomes a coordinator there.

Seriously though, they aren't doing this, are they? That would be horrible.

Well the simple explanation is things change. When they were involved with Peavy talks, weeks ago, they were operating with an estimated budget. Now, however, they are being told they can't spend anymore until the ownership is settled. Lots of people and companies (and government agencies) changed their minds about spending habits in November and December.

Colts fans must stick their heads in the sand a lot.

A lot of that information was reported for the first time in that article. The first indication fans had that anything was wrong was in July when it was reported that Manning had gone under the knife. Not that he was going to..it wasn't reported until the day of. The story was bursa sac removal and a 4-6 week timetable. That was the last update Colts fans received over the next month. The second surgery was kept completely secret. So were the setbacks. In fact, a common thing on radio that month was speculation about where Manning was and what he was doing..there was even a mock hunt to figure out what secret location he was in. Once the season started, there was absolutely nothing said by the team about his knee. There was no indication (other than his play) that he was anything but 100%. So yes, it was known that Manning had surgery and might not be ready for the start of the season. But it's absolutely amazing in this day and age that the Colts were able to keep all the rest under wraps until now. It was a huge mystery that's finally solved, and it certainly gives me doubts about how much of the story fans ever get. There's a Colts chat on Monday nights with one of the local writers and that article really had the fans buzzing. Of course, I don't like Manning's choice in this. He should have gone to one of the local guys with the story. Also, the timing is...curious. It should be the final push needed to wrap up his 3rd MVP award, and even if he didn't intend for that to be an effect it still was poor timing to have the whole story released this week. You really didn't see the stories about the setback and second procedure? This stuff was reported before, but Peyton and the Colts either stayed quiet or denied it. The only exclusive part of this story was Peyton talking and giving some details. It was already reported. And that bolded statement is just bizarre to me. There was no indication he was anything but 100%? Are you kidding? Everybody knew he wasn't 100% and most everybody talked about it in every story about the Colts.

Ike 'Beats' Tina to Death

Not sure what the perceived distraction is supposed to be. Improving your team doesn't seem like much of a distraction. Lineup order is almost irrelevant to run-scoring. Sure, there's an optimal way to do it, but the difference between that and a normal non-optimal way is tiny. So in order to get that tiny gain, you have to hear questions every day about whether Soriano's happy or not, etc. Not worth it. If a player says he's more comfortable in a spot, unless it's completely out of line, it's usually better just to do it. I wouldn't assume you'd have to hear questions about his happiness every day. But I also don't see how that's a distraction if you decide to do it in the offseason. You're going to be peppered with inane questions all spring anyway.

Again for future reference, what is a successful season? There are varying degrees, but I can't call non-playoff seasons a success. For some teams it's improvement, but not success. Was the Pats 11-5 non-playoff season a success or is that an extremely unique scenario? It's a success in my book. Winning 11 games when your pro bowl QB is lost in week 1 is pretty successful.

And a perfectly deserving anomaly. That 11-5 record was propped up by playing the western divisions, plus their own far from great divisional foes. It wasn't a heroic 11-5 record by any stretch.

Peter King is the worst writer that I enjoy reading. I have no earthly idea why I like reading his stuff because it's wrong so very often.... I don't read much KSK...I'll have to check that out. He gives it the fjm treatment. This week's was kind of weak, because I think he missed some opportunities. But the last 5-6 were really funny.

I'm not going to blast any fan base that has trouble selling playoff tickets in this economic environment. Regular season tickets were sold prior to the fall collapse. Anybody read Peter King's absurd self fellating MMQB story about Peyton Manning's knee? He bills it as a story that's never been told and is absolutely astonished, apparantly, to learn that Peyton Manning had bad knee issues this offseason, and then a setback during training camp. He wonders how they were able to keep this so quiet. I remember reading about this many times in the offseason, hoping it would help the Bears in their week 1 matchup, which it clearly did. It's amazing how out of touch these old school journalists can be. They constantly complain about the downfall of tradition media and the end of the line for their peers, then write this self-congratulatory nonsense about how wonderfully he does his job. If there's anybody else out there that reads Peter King just to get pissed at Peter King, take a look at kissingsuzykolber every Monday morning for Drew Magary's King write-up. I'm bummed it took me half the season to find this.

Not sure what the perceived distraction is supposed to be. Improving your team doesn't seem like much of a distraction.

No, it's not semantics. It's absurdity on your part. He's been here 5 years and had 2 successful seasons. This was not a successful season.

Of course I do, and I used it properly. "Extremely or utterly foolish." http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/asinine Guilty on that one. It's only foolish if you are fool enough to believe the incorrect facts and assumptions you keep spouting out.