jersey cubs fan

Young does not compare to Vick. Vick's name was everywhere for 2 years. Young's only appeared late in his last year. You don't think Young's name was out there after his amazing Rose Bowl performance the year before? The fact that he was one of the leading Heisman candidates from the beginning of his last year? I think it was quite the opposite. Vick wasn't a household name until mid-way through the season that he went to the title game. Young was a huge name the day he ran all over Michigan in the Rose Bowl, and then just continued to get bigger through his national title game winning season until it culminated in his huge win over USC (in a game that a lot more people cared about than the title game that Vick was in). No way. It wasn't even close. Vick was everywhere. He was the first next big thing. He was gong to revolutionize the position. Young had an amazing last game that vaulted him up draft boards, but before that he was not in the picture in terms of marketable QB talents. Even since being draft high, he's been a Madden cover boy and nothing else. There's been story after story about disappointments, but he's in a backwater NFL town, even in comparison to Vick, and he's quickly fallen off the marketability stage. It's not even close to the Vick story. Young is more like Daunte Culpepper with a better college story.

Young does not compare to Vick. Vick's name was everywhere for 2 years. Young's only appeared late in his last year.

I thought the speech was horrible. He even used the phrase "polly anas" I dont even know what the hell that means. Basically it translated to me like "meh, you guys are going to lose, but you should at least try". Hes already passed the 50% senile mark. And yeah, he would make a speech pathologist cry. To each his own I guess. I thought it was good. Sorry man, but that can't be to each his own. Those speeches are some of the worst things on television. You got chills? Were you standing in a snow drift?

Not even close. Vick was a multi year national star in college and was doing big things in the pro. Young isn't just "not elite", he sucks. He's not anywhere near as marketable. 99.9% of the country knows him from the Rose Bowl and nothing more.

It's New Years Eve, and if the season ended today, the Blackhawks would be out of the playoffs. There are 8 teams in the west with more than their 41 points, although they have 4 and 2 games in hand over the 8th and 7th place teams, respectively. Then again, STL is only a point behind them and has a game on them as well. They have scored the 4th most goals in the West and given up the 8th most. They've been a pretty good home team and a decent road team as well. I'd say they have as good a chance as anybody to sneak into the 7th or 8th spot in the playoffs. December was disappointing, in particular the 5 home losses. And now there is a string of 19 road games in 27 total contests before the leap day on February 29.

That's an odd sentence. It was expected for him to be bad, hence the strong running game. What does that even mean. I think he meant that the Titans built the team around the strong running game, including spending 2 2nd round picks the last 2 years on runningbacks because they knew that Vince was going to struggle. I think it makes a little more sense to assume they spent 2 2nd rounders on RB the past 2 years because they wanted those 2 RBs. I doubt they made a plan 2 years ago to draft Vince Young really early and then put all the attention on the running game because they knew he'd suck.

The Peter King restraining order?

That's an odd sentence. It was expected for him to be bad, hence the strong running game. What does that even mean.

The guy is 44 years old, not some dumb kid who made a mistake. I don't see how anybody could see anything about Leyritz that would suggest he seems like a pretty good guy.

I think he'll be fine in middle relief for the Yankees. The contract is practically no risk for a team like the Yankees. He'll be getting about 2% of the team's payroll while pitching around 4% of their innings. And they were a team that needed some bullpen reworking anyway.

What on earth are you talking about? He solved the leadoff hitter problem and found the much needed left handed power bat. And how about all those bullpen arms.......

I guess if you are assuming the former (offseason itself), 2007 might beat out 2004, but expectations were not all that high even with the improvements. And most everybody realized all they did was spend a ridiculous sum to just become respectable (plus, they mortgaged the hell out of the future). I think 2004 optimism, for both the offseason and the team as a whole, was considerably higher. I think 2006 is clearly at the bottom. 2004 2008 2007 2003 2005 2006

Rolen didn't start one of the 2006 playoff(NLCS?) games and was not happy about it. Whether that qualifies as TLR or Rolen starting it, I'm not sure. Well, seems to make me think it's Rolen who is the problem here. He had issued in Philly with Bowa but I figured it was just because Larry could be such a hot head. Now beginning to think that it is Rolen who is the prima donna causing all the problems. LaRussa is a self proclaimed genius though, and Bowa is a hothead that could piss off anybody, given enough time. I don't think there is a "starter", they're just all massively ego-inflated idiots. I'm sure it was easier to deal with Rolen's issues when he was good, now that he sucks, it's probably not worth it.

I would be shocked if they even considered blocking it. That would be incredibly stupid, and they'd have no right or justification. For goodness sake, it's named after an owner/corporation already.

I don't like polls that offer such limited choices. I would be a bit bummed if tomorrow it was renamed Caterpillar Stadium. It would be annoying even if it was Wrigley Field at Boeing Park. But it would be far more appealing than Wrigley Jr. out in Naperville, or many other options. The Cubs are in a great position financially, compared with other teams. But they still have several disadvantages. Their stadium sucks as a revenue source. The ad space is very limited. They can't go 90% night games like most teams. They don't have a monopoly on an enormous market like the Red Sox, or compare to the Yankees in terms of revenue. They are better than most, but well below the elite. It's kind of hypocritical of fans to expect the best from the team but also place frivolous limits on what they can do for revenue. The only reason the 2008 Cubs have any chance of contending is because they are blowing away the competition in payroll. What I want is to enjoy watching/going to Cubs games. First and foremost in that enjoyment is quality of the team. Secondly is where they play. You simply cannot beat going to an afternoon game during the summer at Clark and Addison. The name plays a part in that, but in my opinion, it's way down the list of things that matter. The occasional night game hasn't ruined anything. The bleacher exansion and naming hasn't hurt anything. The under armour ads haven't hurt anything. The little ads in and around the dugouts (Sears, Walter Smythe) are harmless, as are the small digital scoreboards. The green machine behind home plate is a bit of an eyesore, but no more so than the old guy in the pink hat. If the Cubs are good and playing where they are playing, I think they will be at least as enjoyable to watch as they are now, with an already corporate named stadium. Frankly, I'd prefer a corporate sponsor to naming it after the owner anyday, at least corporate sponsorship can help the team on the field, whereas ego stroking does nothing.

Good trade for the Rangers? They just traded pitching for hitting. Unimpressive pitching for hitting. It's not like Texas is some great juggernaut offense, they did have a sub 100 OPS+ last year as a team. And they had a sketchy OF situation.

How else are you going to grade a player, especially at the amatuer levels? I think it would make sense to stop pretending those are the 5 tools that matter, and implying they are of equal value. But one thing I've never understood is how somebody can be described as having the tool of being able to hit for average. I'm assuming that's just a matter of having hit for a high average in his career, but that's not scouting, that's looking at results. The hitting for power tool is self explanatory, you can see when a guy hits the ball he hits it far. Speed is easy. So's the arm. Defense is subjective, but I assume it's more or less watching a guy play defense and judging how good you think he is at it. Presumably, all those things pretty much translate, except for hitting for average. Anyway, how else could you grade a player? I don't know, but there has to be a better way. maybe by tweaking what is thought of as a "tool"? idk.. speed, defense, arm, power, and jersey cubs fan? Um, thanks.

No offense, but that's ridiculous. No ownership group is going to commit to 100% of any revenue source to be "reinvested in the team", nor should they.

agreed Gabe Kaplan is much dirtier fighter.

What exactly is a natural utility man? http://www.vincekeenan.com/uploaded_images/harrington-725920.jpg Scary that it took you only three minutes to think of this guy, find his picture and post it in this thread. Very scary... That show always creeped me out for some reason. FYI, a Mets outsider I know believes this trade has actually already been completed, and voided by the commissioners office. (take that with as small or large a salt lick that Mackenzie Phillips could handle)

I am not the least bit concerned.

Do you really care what the place is called? I think the implication that the name means nothing is absurd. I agree it would not be the end of the world, but the name "Wrigley Field" does carry weight, and is an iconic name. And when it's called Wrigley Field at Boeing Park, people will still refer to it as Wrigley. I'd be interested to see how WM. Wrigley Jr. Company handles these negotiations. I doubt they offer as much as some companies would to change the name, but they've been enjoying a free ride, so to speak, with the naming rights for several years. They may find it worth while to spend several million to keep it Wrigley Field plain and simple. And the Cubs may find it better to take a little less to keep it Wrigley Field as well. Zell is out there talking about selling things off bit by bit to drive up the total price right now. He's floating the idea of a name change as a way of giving the new owners a trial balloon to judge how hard it will be to pull it off. My guess is the new owner will buy the Cubs/Wrigley/Comcast for around $1B, and they will then sell naming rights while trying to keep Wrigley Field in the name. Frankly, I would much rather see them stay in Wrigley Field, and Wrigleyville, and have naming rights, increased ad sales, grandstand renovation and all the works, than see them move to some god forsaken megamall in the suburbs.

What exactly is a natural utility man?

How else are you going to grade a player, especially at the amatuer levels? I think it would make sense to stop pretending those are the 5 tools that matter, and implying they are of equal value. But one thing I've never understood is how somebody can be described as having the tool of being able to hit for average. I'm assuming that's just a matter of having hit for a high average in his career, but that's not scouting, that's looking at results. The hitting for power tool is self explanatory, you can see when a guy hits the ball he hits it far. Speed is easy. So's the arm. Defense is subjective, but I assume it's more or less watching a guy play defense and judging how good you think he is at it. Presumably, all those things pretty much translate, except for hitting for average. Anyway, how else could you grade a player? I don't know, but there has to be a better way.