jersey cubs fan

He should be fired for being cautious with a firm budget?

I wouldn't be surprised, only depressed. Can someone tell me please: Why would the Cubs be disincented to offer arby? Is the thinking that Wood isn't worth the likely arb-awarded $? Yes, if they chose not to offer it would be so they don't have to pay him. There's no legit reason for them to consider the option, but the fact that they so aggressively pushed him out the door makes me wonder.

So anyway, the Bears don't play New Orleans for 16 days, they have Minnesota in 5 days and the result will be far more important than the Saints game.

Who says 32?

Accuweather's extended forecast for early that week is highs in the 20's and lows in the teens. For a night game, that won't be pleasant. But I don't think it will be cold enough to impact the game in a huge way. Any precision passing offense is going to be affected by that type of cold, especially an offense that plays half it's games in domes and 2 more in Florida and Carolina. Obviously I hope so. But on the other hand, Brees played at Purdue. This won't be his first experience in cold weather. And Purdue never played in December. He played in the fall.

Accuweather's extended forecast for early that week is highs in the 20's and lows in the teens. For a night game, that won't be pleasant. But I don't think it will be cold enough to impact the game in a huge way. Any precision passing offense is going to be affected by that type of cold, especially an offense that plays half it's games in domes and 2 more in Florida and Carolina.

Accuweather's extended forecast for early that week is highs in the 20's and lows in the teens.

And don't forget, while the Bears have lost to every NFC South team this year, they've had a late lead against every one of them and New Orleans is the most flawed of those teams. Is there any reason why Brees won't torch Vasher/Tillman as he did the better GB corners? He played that game in a dome and he'll play the Bears at night outdoors in Chicago during December. Plus, if Tommie Harris is awake that week he could make a huge difference.

I hope Wood comes back too, but no matter what you say about Wood (loves Chicago, money isn't everything, etc.) he would have to be crazy to take the Cubs 1-year deal and leave $16 million on the table (in your example). I'm sure he knows his medical history better than any of us and he should take the most guaranteed money he can find in case his medical problems reappear. I don't see why that is being described as having to be crazy. He's already financially set for life. He can do whatever the heck he wants. And he could end up making a heck of a lot more than $24m over 3 years if he takes a 1 year deal and signs longterm after next season. It's a risk, but it's not a horrible risk or a crazy decision. But won't the players asso be up in arms about Wood accepting a 1 yr arby deal over a 3 yr much more lucrative deal? No. And the union has absolutely no influence in the matter. I don't understand why people think the players association will come into play in this. Players give hometown discounts to stay where they want all of the time, it's not uncommon. Hell, how many times did Edmonds and other Cardinals allow their deals to be restructured to help the team bring other guys in? I'd like to see Z or Lee or someone like that step up and do what the Cards had some guys do several years ago for the team. But giving a "hometown discount" to stay with your current club or restructuring your contract is quite different from a player accepting a 1 yr deal for 8 mil over a 3 yr deal for 7-8 mil a year. When a player restructures his contract he typically gets the same amount of $$ or more in exchange for it being paid over a longer period of time. Hometown discounts don't typically equate to several million dollars being left on the table as has been suggested in this thread. Accepting a one year deal over a longer contract is leaving money on the table, but it's not taking it off the table. You act as though every player takes the max money on every deal. Taking a one year deal is actually a very smart move for a player who wants to max out his eventual earnings over time.

And don't forget, while the Bears have lost to every NFC South team this year, they've had a late lead against every one of them and New Orleans is the most flawed of those teams.

I'm not assuming that is a loss. I actually have fairly high expectations for a win there. It's not about Bear weather, but it is based largely on a dome team without a great history of playing outdoors, including against the Bears the past 2 years. The short week is the bigger story for that week, however.

What's the situation with the Minnesota players that are about to be suspended?

How so? I don't see how an "extremely" young team can be an excuse anymore. If Weis was any good he should have had a quality team out there this year, but they aren't good. By firing a coach every 3 or 4 years. Perspective coaches have to think that they have a very short leash to obtain unreasonable results. Weis has 2 BCS appearances and an improving team this year after the talent bottomed out from previous coaches recruiting. If I was a top level coaching candidate I would prefer going with Tenn or Clemson. Improving? He's been there for 4 seasons and they have been worse the last two than his first two, when he had other players. This entire team is his. If it's too young then it's his fault for failing to put together a better team earlier. Firing a bad coach is a decision you make regardless of whether others will worry that you fire a coach every 3-4 years. What's to be gained with sticking by a guy who is plainly overmatched just for the sake of consistency? So let him coach next year and now you can say you only fire coaches every 5 years? He's either the right guy or he's not. USC struggled through a few coaching changes before finding Pete Carroll. Alabama went through coaches much quicker and that hasn't hurt them now that they've found a good one. Sure, ideally you don't change coaches every 3-4 years. But ideally you don't lose to crap teams like Syracuse when you were supposed to be a legit team. They've had three coaches since 1996. I don't see how that's all that high of a rate of turnover.

We've the shift in recent years by some players. Many of them want long-term deals for security, and that has been the push and standard. But in the last two years we've seen several players opt out of lucrative deals, only to sign more lucrative deals because the salary inflation is so rapid, such that the back end of a 4 or 5 year deal may not maximize value. You end up with possibilities where you could argue someone was underpaid at the back-end of his contract. Wood is 31. A one-year arbitration does nothing to hurt his value next off-season at age 32, unless a season-ending injury occurs. So as Goony points out, it's not crazy at all. 3/24 this off-season or next, there is little Wood could do to damage that value, again barring a season-ending injury. If he makes it through the season healthy, thus showing he can handle the bullpen workload 2 years in a row, 5/50-60 wouldn't be out of the question next offseason.

How so? I don't see how an "extremely" young team can be an excuse anymore. If Weis was any good he should have had a quality team out there this year, but they aren't good.

According to this they hosted the Chargers on October 26th. http://www.neworleanssaints.com/Game%20Day/Seasons/2008%20Schedule.aspx In London, though. They haven't played at the Superdome in 6 weeks. ](*,) My bad: you're right. Very stupid. The NFL owes the Saints a couple times over for that one. Not really, the team signed up for the opportunity. You can make a case that the NFL and Saints owe the New Orleans fans, but that's about it.

Isn't their draft spot safe due to finishing in the bottom half of the league (top 15 in the draft)? It really doesn't matter to them, except for Minny's comp pick pushing SF's picks down one spot.

I hope Wood comes back too, but no matter what you say about Wood (loves Chicago, money isn't everything, etc.) he would have to be crazy to take the Cubs 1-year deal and leave $16 million on the table (in your example). I'm sure he knows his medical history better than any of us and he should take the most guaranteed money he can find in case his medical problems reappear. I don't see why that is being described as having to be crazy. He's already financially set for life. He can do whatever the heck he wants. And he could end up making a heck of a lot more than $24m over 3 years if he takes a 1 year deal and signs longterm after next season. It's a risk, but it's not a horrible risk or a crazy decision.

They are a speed line and have never overpower anybody. Ok...true...I guess I just mean that it seemed when they got to the QB, they were doing it as a result of trickery rather than beating their man. I could just be thinking of that one Ogunleye stunt though... They did do a good job of blitzing right into blockers again. I hate when this team blitzes.

They are a speed line and have never overpower anybody.

Bears open as 3.5 point road dogs. The division is completely up for grabs and this winner of this game stands a tremendous shot of taking the crown and eventually hosting a playoff game. In my mind the Bears have a bad reputation on the national stage, but recently they've played pretty well, including 2-0 already this year on Sunday Night. It's never easy to play in the roller dome and I don't see the Bears winning this game unless the defensive improvement shown yesterday lasts. If GB loses tonight, or next week vs CAR, they will be game behind the winner of this big matchup.

I feel guilty that I will be forcing my guests to watch this on the big tv Sunday. Must win.

I'd prefer a left handed bat, but he could platoon with Fukudome in right.

I think there will be plenty market for his skills. One year, however, might answer the question as to whether the switch to the bullpen was the trick to keeping him healthy.

Depending on who misses out on whom, he will get offers. 3/30? Who knows?