UMFan83

Sorry, not fraternizing with you. You guys ruined the greatest season in our lifetimes and I will never forgive you. I hope we play you the next time we make the playoffs and sweep you in 3 games.

Derrick Rose is back, and I won't get called out for all the negative things I said or times I doubted him, I can just enjoy it

From Simmons article: Maybe I'm being a homer but I'm surprised the Bears aren't on that list. -Storied history? George Halas pretty much founded the entire NFL, kept the Packers in business, coached the team in 40 of their first 47 seasons, won 6 championships. Overall the Bears have the second most championships in the NFL, the most wins in the NFL, the most Hall of Famers in the NFL, etc. Major points deduced for only 1 championship in the Super Bowl era, but "storied" goes well beyond just championships. Maybe he's heavily weighing on recent success here because the Steelers were the absolute laughing stock of the NFL until the 1970's If I had to rank the Bears with those other 5 teams and assigned a 40/60 weight to past/current success I'd say 1. Packers 2. Giants 3. Redskins 4. Bears 5. Cowboys (who don't even have a past success before the 60's) 6. Steelers -Recognizability of it's uniform/logo/name. Maybe not as recognizable as GB or Dallas, but certainly the Bears logo and uniforms are up there with the other 3 -Breadth/Passion/Support of a multi-general fan base and its weight/power/influence compared to the other local teams in its city. This is where the Bears should absolutely dominate. The Bears are Chicago sports. When the Bears are good, nothing else is talked about amongs fans/media. Bears talk dominates the airwaves pretty much all year. Many fans would take a Bears title over every other Chicago team (pick your preferred baseball team) winning a title that same year. Can you say the same thing about the Giants, whose fans are typically Yankees/Knicks/Rangers fans? Stupid to argue a freaking Bill Simmons opinion but since he doesn't allow commenting on his articles on grantland I wanted to respond here.

That is the quote I don't get in the article. So, the Sox are committed to bigtime spending by signing a closer and trading for a guy that they have a good chance of NOT spending money on (50/50 shot they lose Shark)... but the Cubs spend 155m on a bonafide ace and are hiding under the bed? They also signed LaRoche (2/$25) and Zach Duke (3/$15)

That's what I keep reading. And Kromer was shakey and expected to just make a statement and then everyone would ask him about the Saints.

Since Lester is in Chicago, do we have any idea when the press conference will be? I'm assuming he'll spend the weekend in the city and maybe a PC on Monday?

So the Cubs are going to be affiliated with CBS (780 AM), ABC (WLS), NBC (Comcast Sportsnet Chicago) and likely the Tribune Company (WGN)

Our new $155 million man was at Giordano's on Rush Street last night

How in the world is Valbuena valuable enough to be traded for Fister straight up? Wasn't Fister worth like 5 wins last year in ~25 starts? No, he was under 2 last year. Steamer projects them to be very similar next year, and Valbuena would fit perfectly with the Nats. WTF, I've never seen this much of a discrepancy between Fangraphs, who has Fister at 1.3 WAR last year and Baseball Reference who has him at 4.5

How in the world is Valbuena valuable enough to be traded for Fister straight up? Wasn't Fister worth like 5 wins last year in ~25 starts?

He probably wasn't even the source, he just wants off this [expletive] team.

Anyways, Barnwell speculates on a Cutler trade: Would you guys trade Cutler for Manziel and a midround draft pick?

This is kind of my view. He gets a D or F from me right now but I still see a glimmer of hope because individual things haven't been bad across the board. I wouldn't be heartbroken if he was canned too, but I fear the alternative for sure. I don't buy into the whole "tries to be smarter thing". Any GM is going to go against the consensus at some time. I wouldn't trust the job to crowd sourcing. Just because someone takes a risk doesn't mean they were out to prove something, just that their efforts led down a different road. So while you have to question how they reached their decision to me it just comes across as lazy fans moaning to assume it was reached because Emery or anyone goes against the grain just for the sake of going against the grain. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Trying to be smarter is picking a projected 3rd or 4th round undersized DE in the first round, or turning down the reigning coach of the year to hire a guy that spent the better part of a decade coaching in an inferior football league that was on absolutely no one's radar. Those aren't just little risks, those are career defining gambles.

Can David please change his username to "Davebot"? Pretty please?

Or MLB.tv if you know how to mask your IP Edit: I should read more posts besides the one I'm replying to.

And that he would consider waiving his no-trade clause. His agent says otherwise. http://nypost.com/2014/12/12/carmelo-anthony-will-consider-waiving-no-trade-clause-source/ Butler is cheaper and all around, a better player the next 5 years. Can the Bulls afford him? They can, you can go over the cap to keep your own players Yea but Reinsdorf said he doesn't really want to go over the cap much unless that player is a stud who really increases the chances of getting a ring. It's the luxury tax that he wants to avoid, and he went over it for Rip Hamilton, so I'm not concerned about whether he will pay for a 25 year old likely all-star.

I'm not ready to give up on Emery completely yet, but right now I don't have a particularly positive view of him. He has done some really nice things with this team and some spectacularly bad things. Almost every one of his gambles where he acts like he's smarter than everyone else has failed.

Just noticed PTR has his TV plugged into an extension cord that leads outside. Hilarious

or that Jackson thought that he could run the triangle through a player who hates passing the ball Uh....didn't he run the triangle with Kobe? And win several championships doing so? The Lakers had Gasol, who was great at passing out of the triangle, while the Knicks don't have the prerequisite "big man who can pass" And the Knicks will have cap space this offseason and reportedly are going after Marc Gasol, who I believe has a similar ability to pass as his brother. I think that was Phil's plan...Melo = Kobe, Marc Gasol = Pau

Noah was already ruled out I believe I heard. Not sure about McDermott but he's missed at least 2 weeks already.

So Kromer has to be gone. No way he can rebuild trust with this team. Tucker is almost certainly to be gone as per rumors. No buzz about DeCamilis but come on the guy doesn't deserve to keep his job. So I ask this: how many times has a head coach canned their coordinators of all 3 units and still kept their job?

As opposed to what option? Do you get regular WGN (not WGNA) in Bloomington?

Amazing that Kromer managed to make Jay Cutler a sympathetic figure nationally

I have to admit, usually when you try to recreate genius, for a 3rd time no less, it ends up disappointing. Absolutely not the case here. All hail to our new tree overlord

I agree with Bernstein. The McKaskeys are frugal and very slow to make changes, but they don't stand for their organization being embarrassed like this off the field. This is just one glaring case of a woefully overmatched coaching staff.