RedFlash

When did the Boston recieved New York's unbelieveable frakkin' luck. Unbelievable.

Regardless of what Olney says, I seriously doubt the Padres will trade their franchise pitcher to the rival/hated Dodgers for anything less then Kershaw/Kemp and/or Either. As for the Braves I don't know how they can afford him anyways? There'll just trade him in a yr or two and get less value then what they will part with (ie Tex part 2). These two early teams will fade from the race quickly, IMO, and I believe the race for Peavy will come down to the Angels/Cubs and Cards (sorry ElCaballo, I think the Brewers are more apt to target the Cain for Fielder trade then go after Peavy, which makes more sense for the Brewers). But I think the Angels will eventually become the frontrunners for Peavy.

:-k What's a musical group of the 80s doing in a movie thread? 8-)

Tallon won't be here if the team doesn't improve quickly. I am surprise Tallon wasn't fired first, only because he's the one that signed two average goalies to above average contracts, traded a solid 2nd line centre and had to send down a young talented DMan to "clear cap" to fit Huet and Habby into the salary cap. The Hawks are still an immensely talented team, but it was Tallon he put the Hawks behind, not Savard. Look Savard isn't a great caoch, but for the org to "scapegoat" a Hawks legend like they just did reminds alot of the olds days of Wirtz/Pulford. If the Hawks don' turned it around then Tallon will be gone.

Did he just stop coming to the site, is that what you are referring to?

Or something similar could at least get the Padres to the table. Thats lacking a major arm from the Cubs. If you add Rich Hill (and they value him decently), that might get you to the table. I also think they might like Theriot over Cedeno and would probably ask for Fontenot as well (since Antonelli sucks). Maybe but atleast it would give the Cubs/Padres a jumping off point. You don't offer the moon at the beginning of the negotiations.

They're not missing Manny at all. Manny wouldn't be doing in Boston what he's doing in LA had he not been traded. I disagree. Without Manny, teams can and will pitch around David Ortiz whose career was made by hitting before Manny. Say what you want about Manny, but he added a swagger you don't see with the Red Sox right now. And I promise with Manny, they wouldn't be down 3-1. Would Manny be able to magically improve Ortiz' health? If he's hurt then why is he playing? But unless it's a major injury to his wrist, or knee or something like that there is no reason why he shouldn't hit. So you may blame it on him being injuried (which is an excuse, IMO and not a legit reason) but I think it's because you lose Manny, you lose any reason to pitch to Ortiz. http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/players/splits?playerId=3748 Look at the "By day/month" catergory. After July his numbers got progressively worse, when historically he really hits from July on. So, I don't by him being injured. Teams pitched around Ortiz.

Or something similar could at least get the Padres to the table.

They're not missing Manny at all. Manny wouldn't be doing in Boston what he's doing in LA had he not been traded. I disagree. Without Manny, teams can and will pitch around David Ortiz whose career was made by hitting before Manny. Say what you want about Manny, but he added a swagger you don't see with the Red Sox right now. And I promise with Manny, they wouldn't be down 3-1.

care to elaborate? I think there was one website, or publication that compared Brendan Harris to Albert Pujols due to their minor league numbers.

Methinks Boston and especially David Ortiz is missing Manny Ramirez more then they are letting on. Jason Bay is a fine player and has play well for Boston since the trade, but Jason Bay is NO Manny Ramirez and because of this fact TB has been able to neutralize Ortiz. And without Ortiz hitting, the Red Sox offensive is simply mediocre despite some intriguing talents. I won't say this series is over, because of last yr, but if Ortiz don't start hitting then BoTox season will be over soon.

Same here. Not because he is untouchable or anything, but if the Cubs view him as the successor to Wood as closer, I much rather keep him now and let Wood walk. And I sure as heck would not want to trade both Marmol and Shark in the same package unless it was for a bonafid everyday superstar player.

Oh...........hell yes. I likee....

I disagree. By not executing the squib kick, you put the Bears D on the backpedal in that they have to defend the pass, which means the defense get passive and Matt Ryan exploited. Kick the ball deep and trust your coverage team. If the Falcons are going to win it by a field goal make them earn, which the Bears did not make them do. So no, the squib didn't lose the game itself, but it started a series of plays that lead to the winning FG. You simply CANNOT squib the ball when you have a one point lead. This is the case of the Bears playing NOT TO LOSE, instead of PLAYING TO WIN. I agree. This defense reeks similarily to the Greg Blache D in the senss it's a "bend don't break" defense, and we know this defense plays better and meaner when they "pinned the ears back" and get after the QB. Nonetheless, Babich is very bad, and imo he isn't an NFL caliber DC.

clearly you think that 1) IF we resign Edmonds and IF he sucks, THEN the storyline will be similiar to the Gaetti storyline 2) Edmonds will suck next year as long as you're maintaining premises 1) and 2) as separate claims, you haven't made any errors of logic...others could dispute your premises but not your reasoning from them on the other hand, if you're trying to argue that premise 1) constitutes evidence for premise 2), you're out of your mind I don't even understand what you said, but what I am arguing is bringing back a 38-39 yr old CF is not a smart business decision. People on this board bemoan the fact that his range is clearly lacking due to his age. Which was inevitable. Not to mention the chances of him duplicating what he did for the Cubs this yr for next yr is very remotely. To bring him back is not something the Cubs should do. Cause we all know Edmonds will struggle next yr which in turn will get the fans to turn on Edmonds and booed, and quite frankly I want to remember Edmonds as a Cub fondly, and not like he is white man Jacques Jones. Felix Pie will put up similar numbers in 2009 as Edmonds did in 2008, with an added dimension of being able to play a full CF. Anybody who wants to bring Edmonds back are only doing it for sentamental reasons as to see if he can do it again, and that is not a smart way of running a team. So thank you to Jim, wish him good luck in his future, and let him leave with his head held high from Chicago.

No I wouldn't. I would pouch it I read this, got confused, wondered what else I don't know in football, and finally realized you meant "pooch" Yes, this.

No I wouldn't. I would pouch it

Squib kicks should NEVER be a part of a kickers arsenal, period. If the Bears were up 3 or 7, where the end product of a squibber that the Falcons tied it up is one thing, but when you a nursing the slimmest of slim leads let in the game you can't give them a workable field and they took advantage. Calling for a squib kick is "never a good idea" regardless of the situation. But there are situations in which it is serviceable, but a one point lead is NOT one them. Kick it deep, kick it far. A big return still takes a good 5 or more seconds off the clock, which makes getting into FG range and then kicking it very remote. It was a stupid decision, and it's these kind of decision is why the Bears are 3-3 and not 6-0. also the bears really aren't that good, that's another reason why the bears aren't 6-0. Good enough to be in position to be 6-0.

Agreed. And if your special teams can't keep their special team from making a big play, then perhaps you need a new special team unit.

Squib kicks should NEVER be a part of a kickers arsenal, period. If the Bears were up 3 or 7, where the end product of a squibber that the Falcons tied it up is one thing, but when you a nursing the slimmest of slim leads let in the game you can't give them a workable field and they took advantage. Calling for a squib kick is "never a good idea" regardless of the situation. But there are situations in which it is serviceable, but a one point lead is NOT one them. Kick it deep, kick it far. A big return still takes a good 5 or more seconds off the clock, which makes getting into FG range and then kicking it very remote. It was a stupid decision, and it's these kind of decision is why the Bears are 3-3 and not 6-0.

OK, it was a bad call but nowhere near as bad as Marty Mortingwig or whatever his name is. The worst call I've seen Lovie make is to call a TO with 1 second left in the playoff game vs. Seattle, thinking they would punt to Hester, which obviously all it did was give Seattle 1 play to attempt a game winning hail mary. A bad call is a bad call period. Both decisions are directly tied into the game's final score. Both were moronic decision. I don't how you can say it was "nowhere near as bad." Lovie's decison clearly is as bad as Mornhinwege's decision. The Mortywig call directly gives the ball to the opposing team in a sudden death opportunity. The squib kick could have easily bounced all the way to the 20, or the returner could have easily been tackled by Hillenmeyer. Even after that decision was made, they still had to make one play of at least 25 yards within 6 seconds and stop the clock for it to hurt anything. Yet the squib didn't bounce the way the Bears needed it to, and the Bears did the Falcons a SERIOUS favor by cutting the field in half which lead to the lucky pass by Ryan which lead to the kick. It was Marty espque bad, no matter how you spin it.

OK, it was a bad call but nowhere near as bad as Marty Mortingwig or whatever his name is. The worst call I've seen Lovie make is to call a TO with 1 second left in the playoff game vs. Seattle, thinking they would punt to Hester, which obviously all it did was give Seattle 1 play to attempt a game winning hail mary. A bad call is a bad call period. Both decisions are directly tied into the game's final score. Both were moronic decision. I don't how you can say it was "nowhere near as bad." Lovie's decison clearly is as bad as Mornhinwege's decision.

Lovie Smith with a Marty Mornhinwegesque decision. Lovie needs to be roasted for the "Squib decision."

So you tired of hearing of one comparasion means there are not valid comp? Sorry Constable. Just because you don't like the comp, doesn't make it less valid. It's a valid comp in terms of what to expect from Edmonds if you bring him back next yr. There will never be a 100% perfect comparasion of two situations. But the Gaetti .v. Edmonds is a goo dmatch regardless of the varibles that are not related to baseball. Chose to ingore the comp if you want, but the comp is valid.

Alabama should be ahead of Texas, but those two should occupy the top two spots as of now. As I was discussing this on a Alabama fan site (not to dissimilar to NSBB) I don't think a team on an off week should ever be punished by having teams below them jump them in the standings. In my eyes, that's beyond comical. And yes, I was upset GA was jumped by USC earlier this season. But without knowing what will happen tonight, I would Ala/Tex/Miss/LSU/OU right now. BUT we know both Mizz and LSU can screw up these rankings and lose tonight. So write this top 5 in pencil only.