UMFan83

No but hypothetically coaches are supposed to have their teams fundamentally sound and prepared to play the game. So when your team fumbles 3-4 times in a game, or your WR runs the completely wrong route as the ball sails way over his head a couple times, it reflects on the coaching. Of course the players play a huge part, but (again hypothetically, I'm not a coach nor have I ever been coached in football) coaching has some responsibility for that

Yeah, but you can't count on the Packers finding that guy. I sure as hell hope they do, but it's not a guarantee. This week should certainly be interesting, personnel-wise for the Packers. Sure they can....lose your franchise QB, oh here's another one down on your depth chart. The Packers always find that player they need. It's weird that you said that after referencing 2005 when they went 4-12. I didn't say it always leads to victories. Also funny you reference my reference when its one of only 2 losing seasons the Packers have had in the last 18 years.

Yeah, but you can't count on the Packers finding that guy. I sure as hell hope they do, but it's not a guarantee. This week should certainly be interesting, personnel-wise for the Packers. Sure they can....lose your franchise QB, oh here's another one down on your depth chart. The Packers always find that player they need.

Yeah I don't think it will be a huge loss. Heck even in 2005 they were able to find Samkon Gaado off the scrap heap and he was somewhat effective.

Generally it's one or the other, I believe. 03 - Opened in NY, closed at Wrigley 04 - Opened in Cincinnati, closed at Wrigley 05 - Opened in Arizona, closed in Houston 06 - Opened in Cincinnati, closed at Wrigley 07 - Opened in Cincinnati, closed in Cincinnati 08 - Opened at Wrigley, closed in Milwaukee 09 - Opened in Houston, closed at Wrigley 10 - Opened in Atlanta, closing in Houston 11 - Opening at Wrigley, closing in San Diego So in 6 years it was one or the other, 3 years it was neither.

5 runs allowed in the last 5 games. That's insane. Even more insane that they managed to lose one of those 5 games.

Sweet, I love those rare years when the Cubs start at home. Makes opening day that much better. Why do we always close on the road though? We haven't closed on the road since 06.

He's right. They obviously don't need a good Jeter in order to make the playoffs.

Someone get me off the ledge and tell me that Shonn Green wasn't a completely wasted pick.

This is 2006 all over again. Sucked ass all year but somehow had an insane ability to beat the Cardinals. I'm gonna have to ask that the Cubs stop this crap immediately after this series. Mike Quade's resume is looking a little too good at this point.

Dammit. Let's hope the other 4 main LBs can stay mostly healthy. I really don't want to go looking around the LB scrap heaps like last year.

It really doesn't make sense. You don't care about it in the NFL but even though you realize it doesn't make much of a difference you care about it in MLB. I do care about it in the MLB. With a schedule that's 10 times longer in the MLB, you have a much better opportunity to makes things fair and get the 4 best teams in each league into playoff spots. In the NFL even if every team plays the other 15 teams in its division, due to sample size, and the fact that the schedules still won't be fair because of home/road games, its still going to lead to a level of randomness that can't be removed. In baseball you can make a 174 game schedule where you play each of the other 29 teams 3 games at home and 3 games on the road, or a 154 game schedule where the 14 other teams in each league (1 NL team moves to AL) play each other 5 times at home 5 times on the road. It's still not going to make everythign 100% fair but nothing really will, we can only try to get as close as possible. I'm not in favor of this, like I said, I'm about finding a middle ground between fair and exciting. Playing the Pirates 15 times a year at the expense of the Mets and Phillies and Dodgers, is not what I consider exciting.

I don't get up in arms about the NFL unbalanced schedule because to me sample size is going to play a huge part of things anyways. Every year there are 1-2 playoff teams that are probably worse than 1-2 non-playoff teams, but because of unbalanced scheduling, flukes caused by sample size, the high injury rate of the sport, and tiebreaking rules, these things happen all the time. You are right its not about making it 100% fair, its finding the middle ground between fair and most appealing to the fans. Fans want to see every team have an opportunity to play every other team, thus we have to include interconference matchups. Fans want to see division races, so the schedule is fixed so each team plays their 3 division foes 2 times a year. Baseball, over a 162 game season, has the potential to get things a lot closer on the fair side by simply balancing the schedules. Sure there will still be inequity, but a lot of the randomness (injuries, trades, prospects coming up) gets worked out over the course of 162 games. It will never be fair, but I believe that it's necessary especially when you have teams from all divisions in a league playing for 1 playoff spot. I think its nearly been proven that really good teams from a really tough division can still compete for the wild card spot. It doesn't affect their record as much as you'd think, but still even if playing in a tougher division makes you one game worse than playing in another division, is it fair for that team to lose the wild card by 1 game to a team whose division allowed him an extra win over the "average" division? Sorry that got confusing in that last paragraph, hopefully what I said makes sense.

They will probably push them back even if they aren't ready after the crap that went on last week. Can't wait to waste our former draft pick again...

Don't worry sneaky....according to Roy Williams you were really close to putting up 40 points on us the other day. Did you see the video on the last page of last weeks game thread? Yesterday was payback for 2004, so we're even. Edit: Go blue

Is that the same reason that Steve Smith was left single covered by our 2nd or 3rd best cb all game during that playoff game 5 years ago?

Check out this doozy of an article: http://bleacherreport.com/articles/438659-josh-hamilton-is-the-reason-that-cubs-gm-jim-hendry-should-be-fired Things that are dumb in the article: -As we all know, Hendry did not draft Hamilton and then decide to trade him. They agreed to give the Reds their slot in the draft, and were not told of who they were picking until it was time to pick. Sure Hendry could have decided before the draft to take Hamilton, but so could several other GMs who picked before the Cubs. Should they all be fired? -He starts ripping on JH for not finding nuggets. He says KW got John Danks for nothing, making it seem like he stole an unhearlded player from the Rangers. They traded one teams top prospect for another teams basicallly. One was more major league ready, while the other had a higher ceiling. -Also on the topic of finding nuggets. He says the Cubs never find nuggets, yet the 2008 team had afterthoughts like Jim Edmonds, Reed Johnson and Mark DeRosa playing huge roles for the team. I know Bleacher Report is full of garbage like this but its still funny to point stuff like this out.

Can anyone explain to me why, with a runner on 3rd, 1 out, and a 4 run lead, the pitcher was allowed to bat for himself. 3 runs allowed in the last 4 games by the Cubs. Impressive especially considering some of the starters in the streak were Coleman and Samardzija.

He's better today and hopes to play next Sunday. http://www.wralsportsfan.com/panthers/story/8283607/ Doesn't he have to pass some sort of test before he can play due to the new concussion rules?

Can't believe we got Garcia, Wainwright, Carpenter in this series. At least they seem to be doing well tonight.

If you want to win week one, yes.

Of course it does....thats how statistics work. Manipulate them to go in your favor :) (there were 14 teams that went .500 in the preseason. The 13 that have played so far went 9-4. There were 8 under .500 teams, the 6 that have played so far went 3-3. You caught me)

They hadnt moved the ball 1/2 on the other 3 plays. There were multiple games last year where we couldnt punch the ball in from with 1-2 yards. Our offensive line does an awful job on run blocking in general. Most likely the Bears could have forced a 3 and out, but if they don't you could be looking at a situation where they knock 6-7 minutes off the clock with a long drive. That point is the hardest to counter. But by passing up an opportunity for the lead with 8 minutes left in the game is the riskier call in the game. If the Lions werent moving the ball at all against the Bears, then they shouldnt have even worried about the Lions getting into FG range after taking the lead. Your third point was proven by the Bears being unable to move the ball following the 3 and out. As well as the other 2-3 times in the game where the offense stalled right there at the 40 yard line. Like I said before, I'm normally aggressive minded in these situations, but in this one I find it really hard to pass up taking the lead.

For those that think preseason means anything. Another stat to show how meaningless the records are. Teams that had an above .500 record in the preseason went 2-7 in week 1 Teams that had a .500 or worse record in the preseason went 12-7 in week 1 Most people know there is no correlation but every year we hear people get excited over a bad team's 3-1 or 4-0 preseason.

Apparently, the offense had the most total yards in a game since 1997. That's crazy.