Wilson A2000

OK Mike Murphy

I hope the Mavs win so he gives the Cubs an offer they cant refuse

There are too many advertisers. You gotta go straight at the orgnization. I don't want to mess around. Boycott's rarely work. Please put the Cubs up for sale to pay off the one billion you owe the IRS. Mark Cuban please help!

The Blackhawks are owned by one cheap old owner. The Cubs are owned by a huge corporation. Huge corporations don't like declining profits, especially ones that are already not doing that great financially. Unless they can still be profitable like the way Wirtz is. You don't think Wirtz is losing money do you?

I am just thinking this protest thing through. I don't want to turn out like the Blackhawks. No one goes to the games so the owner has no money to spend on players. It is a standoff until the team gets lightining in a bottle like the Sox. But a lot of it started with Ozzie. I don't trust the Cubs to get a good manager.

Didn't Sullivan indicate that it wasn't him who leaked the story? Regardless, I can only ask why? Why would either Hendry or MacPhail feel the need to do this? I mean, what where they thinking? Everyone who reads Sullivan know he's more gossip columnist then beat writer. And on top of all that, why should they care? If Jones is that fragile, if I'm Hendry I'm looking to get him out Chicago on the next flight to KC, Miami, or Seattle. holy smokes, this is bad. Real, real, bad. But it does explain a lot about the Cubs. Sullivan didn't say who leaked the story, but Sullivan wanted it to stay in house. He did say he always got along with Hendry and thought he did with MacPahail, but is still mad at MacPhail now. What were they thinking? They didn't want the company that owns the Cubs ripping the Cubs. The Score ripped this apart today. What purpose do you have as a writer if you can't be objective? You can't get rid of Jones. He is the Cubs hottest hitter, even though that aint saying much. Remember Sullivan misquotes Jones. Jones isn't as fragile as Sullivan made him seem. Walker is. The Tribune and the Cubs are only related because they are held by a sinlge mulit-national, billion dollar corporation. The tribune isn't Cubs.com. The job of Hendry and McPhaill is to put a winning product on the field. The job of Sullivan is to write about that product. I suppose Hendry & Co. have a right to their opinion but people in their position shouldn't do what they did. This is like Stonegate all over again. They are only making it worse for themselves. From your statement, I can only assume that you do not work for a large company, quite possiblby you work in the public sector or are in school. The relationship is far deeper than you describe, the Trib is a media company in the entertainment business and to have some contract worker hack ripping apart everything, everyday, well it just isn't good business. The Board will look at a 500 mill asset vs a $50k writer or editor and decide which is the more valuable asset to protect. It sure won't be Sullivan or McGrath. Just as Stone and Chip thought they were the product and found out that wasn't the case, so will Sullivan and McGrath. Cub fans aren't dumb anymore. If the Cubs don't produce soon, Chicago could become a Sox town cause Chicago is looking for a winner. It is in the company's best interest to obey Sullivan's advice if they want to remain profitable. Because the Sox won the WS, Cub fans want a winner now. If they don't get it, soone or later people will stop going and then the Tribune will lose money. Sullivan is right on. If the Cubs follow his advice it will be for their best interest.

Why would the Tribune Company sell the Cubs? The Cubs are a cash cow. If they sell the Cubs, they risk losing the Cub games on WGN. Yes the Tribune owes a billion in taxes, but as long as fans are coming, why do they care if they put a good produt in the field.

They had a vested interest in this story not going public. Fortunately it did. I wonder if Hendry knew it got out which is why he has been doing hordes of interviews lately.

Didn't Sullivan indicate that it wasn't him who leaked the story? Regardless, I can only ask why? Why would either Hendry or MacPhail feel the need to do this? I mean, what where they thinking? Everyone who reads Sullivan know he's more gossip columnist then beat writer. And on top of all that, why should they care? If Jones is that fragile, if I'm Hendry I'm looking to get him out Chicago on the next flight to KC, Miami, or Seattle. holy smokes, this is bad. Real, real, bad. But it does explain a lot about the Cubs. Sullivan didn't say who leaked the story, but Sullivan wanted it to stay in house. He did say he always got along with Hendry and thought he did with MacPahail, but is still mad at MacPhail now. What were they thinking? They didn't want the company that owns the Cubs ripping the Cubs. The Score ripped this apart today. What purpose do you have as a writer if you can't be objective? You can't get rid of Jones. He is the Cubs hottest hitter, even though that aint saying much. Remember Sullivan misquotes Jones. Jones isn't as fragile as Sullivan made him seem. Walker is.

Well then for that Sullivan and McGrath deserved a scolding, especialyl when they didn't put out a correction the next day and Jacque got ripped. But the meeting was over far more than that.

Not sure if this has been mentioned already. McGrath was on the Score today and said that the incident happened 3 weeks ago, not last week. Is he right? Sullivan was on the Score also, he actually phoned in, and he said the berating was not over the Jones quote alone, but over his whole career and "it got personal." So did Sullivan misquote Jones or not? McGrath must have bene wrong on when it happened, cause the Jones quote happened in the last week. Then I heard Bruce on ESPN and he made it seme like the lashing was just over the Jones quote or misquote. I guess he did not hear about the Score interview where Sullivan himself said it was over far more than that. Caplan on WGN came to the same analysis as did Miles so I guess the Score interview never got to them either.

Walgreens should give a hundred bucks every time a Cub walks someone if they really wNt to raise money

He is one of the Cubs' hottest hitters, but he has got to be benched. Dusty needs to make a statement. Now shoot who is going to play right?

I love the minor league team that had Lawyer Night and all the lawyers had to pay double

Dusty's gotta be fired soon. As soon as any GM gives his approval for the manager, the manager is usually fired the next week.

Is this the last year of Barry's deal?

A bad old Clines is still better than Blanco and Neifi. Clines could coax a walk. Neifi battles not to swings at intentional walks and hates to go to first after them.

Dude, you're making Darren cry. Or maybe Darren scolds Dusty every time Dusty comes home. But Darren scolds him as he makes Dusty a Scotch.

Highest paid baby sitter in the world

Yeah there is no reason to give a contract to Maddux now. Who knows what kind of year he could have. I hope he pitches great, but I'd still let it all play out. Here's my dream coaching team: Girardi, Maddux as PC, Ryno as HC, Bench Coach is Dawson, and the base coaches are Grace and Sosa (LOL!)

Can Dusty bat? He was a pretty darn good hitter in his day. The Sarge could too. So could Clines.

Not to start discension, but is that typical Morgan or does any of that factor into race?

I am not so sure that Stone thinks it would be a bad idea. Stone has a ton of good things to say about Maddux. Even as a fifth starter, you can't fidn much better. He would be pricey, but price should not be an option for this team. He would demand more than he is worth, but it is money well spent if he gets you 13-15 wins a season.

I'd like Maddux to become the Cubs pitching coach whenever he retires. I'd even sign him next year as a player/coach (if that's allowed) According to Stone, he does more for the pitchers than Larry

Nothing significant popped up on Google when I searched for "Is Neifi Perez married" but I did get a response from the admin saying "What the heck are you searching for this for?"