jersey cubs fan

Usually they like to have a former player/coach in the color spot. It's all politics what about a talk show host?

It's only tough if you are trying to do a Santo impression, which the next analyst should not do.

Is that because McCleod has already seen enough?

Well, he has leave to go for 72 hours so he's not AWOL. Although he's made it fairly clear he's not the least bit interested in getting back to the major leagues.

I don't think it helps his development that he's the centerpiece on a crappy team coming off a 100 loss year and on pace to lose 100 more. But he doesn't seem to have taken a step back, more like hit a plateau. It happens.

Hey that's not fair

You posted it for the upskirt

Oh it isn't, but if you were on board with the hire and after they said what the plan was, it's foolish to then jump off board in a year and a month after the plan starts. No? This isn't anywhere close to what they said the plan was.

Sure, but being worried and not seeing justification for promotion are very different.

Not let it out that team doctors cleared him to play. Defend his decision more aggressively. Say its partially a team decision. That sort of "keep it under wraps" stuff is fine for short durations. But this isn't a story about a guy missing a practice. Everybody knows what's going on. There are reporters all over the story and have been for months. There are two scenarios; he is healthy but doesn't want to play or, he had a serious setback. The only way to call off the dogs on the story is by saying he's suffered a setback but I don't think they want to do that.

That's an overly simplistic way of looking at things. If someone thinks being gay is a choice, and thinks being gay is a sin, and believes that God gave humans free will, it's a lot more clear as to why they feel the way Broussard does. Who's being overly simplistic now?

What do you want them to do? They have a player who is healthy enough to play but doesn't want to play. What can you expect a team to do in that situation?

It's not entirely clear, but your stance sure suggested you thought it was. I really don't see how the head would shoot back like that if he wasn't hit in the head. It's not necessarily dirty, but its' on the players to not hit heads. I also think it's pointless to point out hits that don't draw suspensions in response to ones that do. There are a lot of suspendable hits in this league. If they all actually drew suspensions rosters would dwindle in a hurry. I see nothing wrong with suspending a guy on a hit like that that draws an injury. You don't get in trouble for every crime/infraction you commit in your life, just the ones you get caught doing. If the guy you hit gets injured that's a good way to get caught. So keep blindly shooting your gun and we will not punish you until you actually shot someone? My bigger issue with NHL suspensions is not that they suspend the outcome as much as there is clearly a different standard for different players. But it would be best if they had a set standard for punishable hits that was easy to understand. Then a set table of suspensions for such hits/plays. Kind of takes out the whole wheel of justice perception that the NHL currently has. I said it earlier, Gryba got suspended more for his status as a player as for the actual hit. How do you get that out of what I said? It doesn't make any sense to point out instances of guys not getting suspended to defend against a suspension. That doesn't mean it's fine to do all that stuff until you kill somebody. The point is it is unreasonable to expect them to catch and punish every suspendable hit. You will always be able to find equivalent or comparable ones that didn't draw a penalty or a suspension. That does not mean a suspension on your hit is unwarranted.

It's not entirely clear, but your stance sure suggested you thought it was. I really don't see how the head would shoot back like that if he wasn't hit in the head. It's not necessarily dirty, but its' on the players to not hit heads. I also think it's pointless to point out hits that don't draw suspensions in response to ones that do. There are a lot of suspendable hits in this league. If they all actually drew suspensions rosters would dwindle in a hurry. I see nothing wrong with suspending a guy on a hit like that that draws an injury. You don't get in trouble for every crime/infraction you commit in your life, just the ones you get caught doing. If the guy you hit gets injured that's a good way to get caught.

hey looks, crooked numbers

what did he hit first? Chest. Gryba is a big boy. He made a play on a stupid pass as Eller's head was down. It is unfortunate but not dirty, illegal or even reckless. What is Gryba supposed to do? let Eller have an easy break out. I don't know how the head moves the way it does if he hit the chest first.

what did he hit first?

It doesn't need to be said. It's clear as day. It's his teammates that deserve respect. Not Rose. It doesn't need to be said, but just in case, that's about all you've said for 3+ pages of this thread. Because you keep pretending it is inappropriate to say it.

It looked dirty, but the more I see it the less certain I am that I could point out the dirty part.

hope he's not uncomfortable

I like sabrcat

A number that would be easily offset by the number that would not go because it's not in wrigley field. There is not some magical numbers of Cubs fans dying to attend Cubs games if only they were located somewhere else.

http://d3j5vwomefv46c.cloudfront.net/photos/large/765769149.jpg?1367602755

No it isn't, but not playing through non-injury is always the wrong move. I think the vilification has been way under the bottom. The excuse making has been astounding to me. I'm surprised he's getting such a free pass.

Our idiot media slayed Mark Prior and Kerry Wood for years. They were criticized for getting hurt in the first place.