UMFan83

And to think when I made that original post I thought to myself "heh, I am so clever making an Anchorman quote in this thread"

http://images.wikia.com/cosbieshow/images/2/27/Theo-huxtable-then.jpg You were asking for it.

On one of the post game radio shows yesterday they had a TB radio guy on, and he said the theme of the week in Tampa talk radio land was that the Bucs would have an easy game due to: 1) the Bears waiting until Thursday to travel and 2) Brigg's comments about the team morale. Whoops.

Yeah the Colts probably have the best odds because they are 0-7 while the other 2 are 0-6

At SoSH, they are talking about whether Theo is really getting a promotion and one guy says "Would it be different if Luccino and Henry were brothers? Theo reporting to LL and JH is no different than Theo reporting to all members of the Ricketts family"

I'm actually surprised that nobody has since petitoned to change their screen name or subnic to LUMPY CRITIC. Wouldn't be worth the effort at this point.

That tweet is like several days old, isn't it? Edit: Yep, from Oct 17. Meh, it was at the top of my twitter and whether it was posted this week or last its pretty stupid sounding. We get it, Theo signed a couple of bad contracts and you're mad he "ran" away from them. Ah yes and Chicago has deep dish pizza. I think it was just a lame joke. I don't think he's actually nearly as bitter sounding as the people on SoSH are. Not at all....pure hilarity over there.

I don't know if I agree with that. The guys he mentioned are a step above role players. Epstein is a guy who should be able to change the face of a franchise for years to come. I know that he only had a year left with the Red Sox, and the relationship had expired, but it's all about supply and demand. Say you have a car you plan on junking. All of the sudden, some guy comes to you and says hey, I really want your car, how much? Unless it's a close friend, chances are you're going to try to get as much for it as possible, but hopefully not getting too greedy. It's reasonable to ask for a few thousand for it, assuming it's still in good shape, but if you ask for $10,000, then that's just greedy. What if your car told you he didn't want you to drive it anymore, and the perspective owner already filled out the paperwork to move the title into that new person's name, which is perfectly acceptable because you gave them permission to talk to the car.

Lets look at their chances of getting a win... Miami: @NYG, @KC, vs. WAS, vs. BUF, @ DAL, vs. OAK, vs. PHI, @BUF, @NE, vs. NYJ Comment: Ouch. The only winnable games there are KC, Was, Buf and Oak, all 4 of those teams you have to catch them on a bad day to beat. Legitimate 0-16 possibilities. Indy: @ TEN, vs. ATL, vs. JAX, vs. CAR, @ NE, @ BAL, vs. TEN, vs. HOU, @ JAX Comment: The AFC South is shitty and they still have 2 games left against the Jags who might be worse than the Colts. They also still have 2 games against really mediocre up and down Tennessee and a decent Carolina team. They will likely get at least a win despite them probably being the worst of the 0-fer teams. Rams: vs. NO, @ ARI, @ CLE, vs. SEA, vs. ARI, @ SF, @ SEA, vs. CIN, @ PIT, vs. SF Comment: Strangely enough, St. Louis has yet to play an NFC West team and doesnt for another 2 weeks. That says everything right there. 2 games left against Seattle and Arizona plus a game against Cleveland and another against Cincinnati (decent right now but still not sold that they are a playoff team). If they don't win a game they truely are the worst team of all time. So my prediction is St. Louis 3-13, Indy 2-14, Miami 1-15

That tweet is like several days old, isn't it? Edit: Yep, from Oct 17. Meh, it was at the top of my twitter and whether it was posted this week or last its pretty stupid sounding. We get it, Theo signed a couple of bad contracts and you're mad he "ran" away from them. Ah yes and Chicago has deep dish pizza.

BTW, record of Bears remaining opponents this season: 30-29. Take away the Packers 7-0 and the remaining 8 teams are 23-29

Is this supposed to be funny?

If the season ended today, the Bears would get a rematch against the Saints in NO as the 6 seed. It's looking like it will be 5 (maybe 6 if the Eagles get it together) teams playing for 2 playoff spots Lions 5-2. Haven't looked good in their last 5 games although they went 3-2 in that span. Lions history would suggest a 7-9 finish, but this team is still very talented. Matt Stafford has to stay healthy. Bears 4-3. Defense has played a lot better. Offense is as always a work in progress. Interesting team overall with an easier schedule the rest of the year. After the next 3 games (@ PHI, vs. DET, vs. SD) it gets fairly easy (@ OAK, vs. KC, @ DEN, vs. SEA, @ GB, @ MIN). Buccaneers 4-3. Who knows how good this team is or isn't. Bears hold the tiebreaker over them. Falcons 4-3. Same exact statement about them. Cowboys 3-3. Seem to be a really good team that makes key mental errors. They might end up being the East champs with the Giants replacing them in this list. So of the 4 other teams, the Bears have the tiebreaker over 2 of them, and none of the 4 other teams particularly scare me, although if Detroit gets it back together they will be scary. These next 3 games are critical. If we can somehow go 2-1 against Philly, Detroit and SD, we are 6-4 and looking pretty good. If we go 1-2, we are 5-5 and have major work to do. I say we go 1-2 in the next 3 and then win the next 4, lose to GB setting up week 17 in the dome, with a win getting us 10-6 and probably a playoff spot.

Courtesy of Garwilly: http://img87.imageshack.us/img87/9210/img3408n.jpg Was taken on 90/94. Very nice of them to include Jed.

Also, finish taking game 4 too.

Not necessarily because they agreed to a process to determine compensation. Who knows what that process is, but I would think it would have some sort of starting point for both sides comparable to what they were offering when talks broke off last week. I highly doubt the Red Sox would have agreed to this if they knew that they were giving up all their leverage.

November 24, 2008 at New Orleans is the last time the Packers have lost a game that wasn't close. You're going to win a lot of close games when every loss you have is a close game. That.....doesn't make any sense It wasn't worded the best way. What I was trying to get across is the Packers are either winning every game they play or very close to winning every game they play for nearly a 3-year period including postseason games. You (not you specifically) can't complain that a team wins a lot of close games when they have kept themselves within reach of a W for nearly 3 seasons worth of games. OK, that makes a lot more sense

This worked for me: http://chanfeed.com/7672/watch-chicago-vs-tampa-bay I'm watching on tv but found this one for you WAY LATE, I know, but thanks for the feed. Ended up not being able to watch though, had to do some house hunting. No worries, I figured someone could benefit from it at least. I was amused at how easy it was to find a link that worked.

For sure, but I don't really remember any horrible moments by the oline today, which is a good thing. There were a few times Cutler got pressured too quickly, but other than that 3rd and goal sack on that last drive, it was a decent day, and they did a really nice job of run blocking, especially the tackles.

Same. One of the bigger disappointments as a Cub fan for me. I was so excited about what Milton could do in the heart of our lineup and drooled every time I looked at his stats from 2008.

I was willing to give Ramirez the benefit of doubt for his HR in game 5 of the NLDS and his 2 homer game, including a 1st inning grand slam in game 4 of the NLCS. At that point, I remember reading that Ramirez played hurt all season in 2002 and was likely a major cause for the awful year. In 2001 he looked like an emerging star, and in 2003 up to that point he was just 'meh'. No one expected what he'd become. I liked the Choi for Lee trade because I knew Lee would likely be a defensive upgrade, and was more proven at that point than Choi. At worst he would have an .860 OPS with solid defense. He wasn't expected to be the 3 or 4 hitter, that was Sosa and Alou at the time, so he was a great piece to fit in the lineup instead of hoping that Choi would recover from his concussion and actually prove to be a capable MLB player. I did get worried when Lee started out really slow and got boo'ed in April and Choi started out red hot and was hitting tons of HRs. I remember one person on NSBB tracking the performances of Lee and Choi on their sig.

Geez I dunno if I agree with that. I didnt think it would be a top 5 offense but I thought it would be a good offensive team with the addition of Lee and a full season of Aramis, who I didnt think would have a .950+ ops of course but much better than Lenny Harris for most of 2003. Then a lot of people were at least somewhat high on Patterson coming back after his one good month in 2003. There were obvious issues with getting on base that of course tempered my expectations, but I didn't see the offense holding us back from getting back to the playoffs. Unfortunately, it did at times as that year's offense was so streaky, mostly because of their inability to get on base consistently. Here are the 2003 OPS+'s of our offensive starters coming into 2004: 133 - Sosa 131 - Lee 114 - Patterson 111 - Alou 105 - Ramirez 103 - Grudz 81 - Gonzalez 71 - Barrett Also, I was very excited about Lee. Not that I thought he could be a star like he was in 2005, but I figured he would be a great compliment to Sosa/Alou/Ramirez in the middle of the lineup.

Also, I wonder what Rawdog's thoughts are on this move. Or the guy who irrationally hates Ryan Dempster. I need to know these things!

FDBC

November 24, 2008 at New Orleans is the last time the Packers have lost a game that wasn't close. You're going to win a lot of close games when every loss you have is a close game. That.....doesn't make any sense