UMFan83

2 in one week? Damn! :)

And yet, they have to be banking on that occuring, otherwise they wouldn't be trying it. Check out this article about Newsday in NY's trouble in getting subscribers to their pay site: http://www.observer.com/2010/media/after-three-months-only-35-subscriptions-newsdays-web-site Although in their paywall, they let the print subscribers get access for free while DH is charging them. I'm guessing a lot of their subscribers will be print subscribers.

PS, this is hilarious: So even if you subscribe to the print version of the Herald, you have to pay more money to see stuff online.

Because there's too much free content out there. I suspect you know this already and are just being Kyle. They seem to think their content is better than the free content. I agree it'll probably fail. But giving the product away for free will certainly fail. I'd rather see the industry take the hail mary than just kneel it out. How many newspapers have converted to a pay format in the last 3 years and are still afloat? I'm sure there are a few, but the 2 I can think of are both based in New York (the Times and I think the Daily News). I don't see a suburban Chicago newspaper competing against 2 much more established and nationally known Chicago newspapers who allow free access to their sites. This isn't a hail mary attempt, its like visiting Dr. Kevorkian after being diagnosed with a slow moving terminal cancer. Just speeding up the process, rather than continuing to lose money while waiting and hoping for something to come along and save them (and all other newspapers).

Some quick math has Cowboys at 234 pts over their last 8, and Packers at 267. Possible I'm wrong somewhere though, I did it in a hurry. No you are probably right. I heard it while I was doing something else. It was probably like top 5 over the last 8 games or something. 234 points over 8 games is 29.3 PPG, so that's gotta be in the top 5 or so in the league. Doing that with Kitna at QB, regardless of how meaningless the games were for them, has to count for something. Counts as a knock against Romo. I guess I can see how you'd think that, but in my opinion I think it means that the Cowboys offense is very good, and with Romo back, Felix Jones given the bulk of the RB carries, and Dez Bryant in his 2nd year, it is likely a better offense than it was over the first few games of last season.

Some quick math has Cowboys at 234 pts over their last 8, and Packers at 267. Possible I'm wrong somewhere though, I did it in a hurry. No you are probably right. I heard it while I was doing something else. It was probably like top 5 over the last 8 games or something. 234 points over 8 games is 29.3 PPG, so that's gotta be in the top 5 or so in the league. Doing that with Kitna at QB, regardless of how meaningless the games were for them, has to count for something.

who did they predict for the WC? Sorry I never answered this. Rosenthal has the Falcons and Cowboys. Florio has Saints and Eagles (with the Cowboys winning the division). Did the Cowboys add anyone to a 6 win team? How am I missing the sudden rise to playoff-caliber status? Romo being healthy is enough? More PFT staff picks.... http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2011/09/07/the-pft-postseason-picks/ Of the 5 that pick, 4 picked the Cowboys in the playoffs, and the one that didn't had the Lions. The Cowboys went 3-8 in games decided by 7 points or less last season. Add in the return of Romo and the fact they were a playoff team the year before and you could see why they are a popular pick to rebound. Also they were 5-3 after the coaching change last year. I think I read somewhere that no team averaged more points scored per game the last 8 games of the season than the Cowboys. And they did that all with John Kitna at QB. (and Roy Williams bogging down the offense ;) )

Another reason to keep 4 RBs. If Bell stays on special teams, the Bears are screwed at RB. Marion Barber is never healthy. Kind of sucks that we are in the position where Bell is taking potentially important carries for us. I understand that Bell is somewhat valuable on ST, and Barber looked much better running the ball than Taylor in the preseason, but I cant really be surprised that we have issues already We all wanted Taylor gone. We've had our backup RB's on special teams before. Weren't Adrian Petersen and Garrett Wolfe doing a lot of ST duties when they were backing up Forte? EDIT: I didn't realize till I looked him up just now, that Adrian Petersen never played again after the Bears released him. Yeah I didn't say I wasn't ok with cutting Taylor. Just saying it sucks that he's already hurt, but not surprising. I am personally not a big fan of Bell, even compared to people like Peterson and Wolfe.

Another reason to keep 4 RBs. If Bell stays on special teams, the Bears are screwed at RB. Marion Barber is never healthy. Kind of sucks that we are in the position where Bell is taking potentially important carries for us. I understand that Bell is somewhat valuable on ST, and Barber looked much better running the ball than Taylor in the preseason, but I cant really be surprised that we have issues already

Since this is like the 2012 Cubs 1B thread...from the Trib:

He's definitely being overexposed.

Marion Barber reportedly is out on Sunday. Kahlil Bell will back up Matt Forte.

Was Cashner supposed to pitch today? Asking because I went to the game tonight and saw Cashner throwing on the bullpen mound seconds AFTER the game. I am assuming that he was supposed to pitch in the game tonight but the opportunity never came so they are getting his work in after the game. Never seen that before, he was up there throwing while Go Cubs Go was still playing.

Wonder how he'll get the MVP Award now Wow thats a huge story. I'm glad I didn't gamble on him in the later rounds of any draft.

Not sure why you would say that. Guys resign from positions every year, and rarely do they spell out exactly why, especially the day after doing it. I guess, but it seemed like Amaro was being really weird about it in the press conference, and he did mention something about leaving to persue other baseball interests. He could be taking a lateral position but why leave a solid organization like the Phillies? And if he was going to leave baseball, he probably would have indicated as much.

What about that one guy who listed "Bears" as his first wildcard team? Nah, he meant the Cal Bears.

Self-toture is not good. Take off your tin foil hat. There is noting suspicious going on. Re-read my post. I didn't say there was a conspiracy going on. I said I am trying to link together 2 seemingly unrelated things into making sense. Makes no sense that Lamar would abruptly quit his position and reveal no reason why. Likewise, it doesn't make a lot of sense that Ricketts would extend Fleita and probably Wilken while he's searching for a new GM to make decisions on people like them. So my post was trying to find some link between the two....which I identified as Wilken and Lamar's previous working relationship. I doubt this is the case, but its fun to speculate at least.

Before you get too excited about having our own Ed Werder...this is Josina Anderson:

I was hoping he would play. Now Favre pretty much has his stupid ass record guaranteed for life.

The thing that scares me about a possible LaMar GM hire is the fact that we resigned Fleita and are rumored to be resigning Wilken. Is there any connection between those 2 things (lamar resignation and wilken/fleita resigning) The more I think about it, the more I can't believe that Ricketts would be dumb enough to lock up two important positions in baseball operations before hiring a GM, or having one in mind. It goes against all logic, no matter how you feel about those 2 people. What if you could have had Theo Epstein, but he doesn't want Fleita, so you are stuck with people like Chuck Lamar. So is it possible he decided on Lamar and signed Fleita and Wilken (who worked with Lamar in TB) in order to convince him to leave the Phillies and take the GM job. Before JH was fired it was rumored that Wilken was loyal to him. So is a benefit to hiring Lamar keeping Wilken? We already know Ricketts values Wilken, as evidenced by the unprecidented amount of money he allowed the Cubs to spend on Wilken's draft this year. I don't even really believe what I am saying, because as others pointed out, Lamar goes against everything Ricketts said he was looking for in a new GM a couple of weeks ago. But I am just trying to draw connections between a series of very suspicious moves (Fleita/Wilken resigning and Lamar abruptly resigning from Phi with no reason given)

???? I'm an idiot and refused to like Edmonds when he was here. I spent so much time hating him in St. Louis that I would have felt cheap had I embraced him as a Cub. I hated him as a person, not just as a guy who beat us up over his career, so I have a hard time just sweeping that under the rug just because he hits a few homers for the Cubs. Don't get me wrong, I settled on "I am pleased with what he did as a Cub" and if we had to do it again, I would be ok with the signing of course, but nothing he did made me like him.

John Grabow might be my least favorite Cub of the last 5 years. That's right, he surpassed Edmonds awhile ago.

He was the GM in charge back in the day when anytime someone was interested in a Devil Rays player they would ask for a ridiculous return for them, right? I know that had something to do with the influence of the owner but still.

John Grablow. The $5.5 million dollar man.

Pena career against lefties: .738 OPS Pena 2011 against lefties: .597 OPS