UMFan83

I say we unban CubsGM for a 5 minute span just before the last out of the game so that he can post "Season over" and actually be correct. :lol:

I just went surfing around some Lions blogs and some phrases I came across when talking about the game: Ok, ok I madet he last one up. But they seem to be getting a ton of confidence from winning 1 game over a bad football team. I am really hoping the Bears come out strong and dominate the Lions like they should. I'm starting to have a weird feeling about this game. Not that we are going to lose but that they might surprise us and keep the game very close, proving that their rebuilding plan is much further along then we think.

Huet looks mediocre, gives up 4 goals to Florida, and loses a shootout Niemi pitches a shutout against the same team... hmm...

Probably, but hope is a valuable thing to have. The Cubs have none right now and the Bears and Bulls have tons.

This is the end Beautiful friend This is the end My only friend, the end http://goabove.com/PAINT_WORDPLAY/This_is_the_end.jpg http://lineout.thestranger.com/files/2007/10/mourning.jpg http://img.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2008/05_02/funeral0505_468x308.jpg (Pretend it says Cubs at the top) http://i14.photobucket.com/albums/a345/BobaFett42/MarinersOwned.gif http://www.chicagotribune.com/media/photo/2009-09/49379633.jpg http://sportige.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/04/bulls400.jpg http://i2.cdn.turner.com/si/2009/writers/michael_farber/04/01/jonathan.toews/kane-toews.jpg

If you want some evidence of shady voting, you need not look farther than the vote totals. Not sure if anyone posted this yet but look at the first round totals and then look at the second round totals. In the first round, Tokyo garnered 22 votes. In the second round, Tokyo garnered 20 votes. So you mean to tell me that 2 people who originally backed Tokyo decided to switch allegiances between the first and second round? Also, no Chicago supporters switched their votes to Tokyo after elimination? Nope, those were likely Rio supporters who artificially propped up Tokyo's numbers in the first round so that Chicago would finish last. It's the same with Madrid...after the first round Madrid led the entire voting. Between round 1 and round 2, Madrid only gained 1 vote, meaning the Rio supporters once again voted Madrid in round 1 and quickly switched to Rio in round 2. In round 1, Madrid led Rio by 2 votes. In round 2, all the suddenly Rio gained 20 votes and led Madrid by 17 votes. Guys there were only 18 supporters for Chicago originally. Even if they all backed Rio after the first round, there are still people who randomly switched between rounds. Folks, this vote was decided long before today IMO. Not that it's illegal to do this, but it's extremely shady and demeans the entire voting process. If you guys wanted Rio, just say so....don't pretend like this entire experience is fair and just. I'm not saying Chicago would have won if this would have occured, the wheels were obviously greased in Rios favor. But it could have saved us the civic embarassment. In a way, this voting also weakened the power and influence of the President of the United States globally. Am I taking it too far? I don't know....

Yup...personally I want to see a 1 game playoff on Tuesday to close out the Metrodome (unless they win). I would prefer the Tigers make the playoffs, but I also want it to be as close as possible. That mean's I have to cheer for the White Sox grr.

Jim Hendry must be devastated. That was his BFF in the game.

I sat 7 rows from home plate at today's quasi game, on tickets I bought off stubhub for $35 (I think face value is $80). The best part is that since the game is canceled, I can get a full refund (I think). If for some reason, I can't I can still return them to StubHub for my money back which means I got to say my goodbyes to Wrigley for the winter, and sat in the best seats I've ever sat for a Cubs game for free.

I'll be sitting in Sec 24 Row 7. Only cost me $20 ($80 face). Only conditions I would goto game.

I agree that team was awful. But I don't think any team should be bad enough to win only 43 games with a grinding every day 162 game season. Meaning I feel like a combo of luck + catching people on their off days should have been enough to win more than 43 games. The fact that when their legacy and pride was at stake they managed to win 5 of their last 6 games, including 3 of 4 over their division's champs (albeit playing meaningless games) shows me the team was capable of more. I realize it's an unpopular argument, and I accept that I could be completely wrong in my argument as I didn't watch any Tigers games that season, nor do I know anything about how Alan Trammel manages, it's just what I've always thought. Basically I don't want to advocate elevating him to manager when Lou leaves unless no other options are available. Some people might just be better as assistant coaches (Tex Winter, Rod Marinelli, etc)

I know not all of it was his fault (or maybe most of it), but Alan Trammel did preside over the second worst baseball team in modern baseball history....

I think it also has to do with: A) Urlacher being out for the year, downgrading the defense in our minds B) Both of our wins are of the "could have gone either way" variety, and were both aided by multiple missed FGs by the opponent's kicker. Then again, I really don't know if the people that do these power rankings even spend more than 15 seconds evaluating each team.

Swept in a double header to the Pirates by a combined score of 12-2. Where's your pride guys? I'd like Lou to put out the A lineup one more time this year. I mean I know we have nothing to play for, but that doesn't mean you have to forfeit the games.

GraBLOW

More power rankings, SI.com has the Bears at 16, the worst of the 2-1 teams. SI of course is the same publication (but not same writer) that predicted the Bears to make the Super Bowl a month ago.

Hopefully he predicts that the Cubs win the World Series next year.

????

Maybe we'll score a run in the nightcap.... Anyone tried to goto any of the games this series? I am trying to see if I'd have better luck screwing over a scalper or just buying tickets for dirt cheap on StubHub. The cheapest I've seen is $35 for Club Box seats 9 rows behind the visitors dugout. I figure it's a good chance to say goodbye to the 2009 Cubs and summer all in one swoop, because as much as I've moved on from this years Cubs, I will miss them a ton over the dreary winter.

Or maybe that's his excuse. "I didn't throw anything at her. I was throwing something against the wall about 50 feet away from her and it ended up hitting her" *cues tape of Yankees days*

Damn, I didn't even realize it was 4-0. So much for Lilly's ERA finishing the year under 3.

First completely meaningless Cubs game since October 1, 2006. No playoffs to get ready for, not clinching still to take care of. Just meaningless baseball. A doubleheader sweep would give us 84 wins and put us in good position to finish with more wins than the 07 playoff team.

Cool thing to see....4 of the 5 Cubs starters (the ones that got the majority of starts) will end the year with an ERA under 4. The only one that has one over 4 is Harden with a 4.09. It's too bad he couldn't have 1 more start to get his ERA under 4. BTW, this is the second time in 3 years that this has happened (also happened in 2007)

If I could change only 2 things about scheduling and rules in the MLB, here are my choices: 1. Only 1 series a year against interleague rivals. First of all it helps reduce the schedule inequalities from within the division (i.e. no 6 Cards-Royals games while we play the Sox). Also, it will definitely increase interest, 6 games is way too much and completely takes the novelty factor away from it. Finally, it will guarantee bragging rights for one side. How stupid is it to hype up this battle for Chicago, and then it ends 3-3 half the years (which is likely with each team taking 2 of 3 at home and 1 of 3 on the road). I know the MLB would argue against this because its a guaranteed sellout for many of these cities that might not normally get sellouts, but still there's gotta be a better way. 2. Division series' will be 7 games. I think a lot about how different 2007 and 2008 would be if LDS series were 7 games instead of 5. I feel like a lot of the reason we got swept was the pressure of a short series. We lost game 1 and all the sudden we acted like our backs were to the wall. A 7 game series makes each game slightly less important, allowing teams to relax and play baseball. Plus I think it definitely reduces the crapshoot factor of the playoffs. People always say that the playoffs are a crapshoot, IMO that's incorrect. THE FIRST ROUND is the crapshoot. Sure there are counter examples of a team getting hot and coasting into the World Series, but those happen in every sport (Arizona Cardinals, Warriors, etc). Most of the time, once you get to the 7 game LCS, the better team tends to win more often. To prove my point, look no further than the Cubs the last 2 seasons. In 2007, they faced a rather crummy DBacks team that had an extremely lucky season (proven by their Pythagorean record). They went out and shellshocked the Cubs in 3 games, and then went to the LCS and got smoked by the Rockies in 4 games. Then the next year the Cubs faced the 83 win Dodgers and choked again in 3 games. Next they went to the LCS and faced the Phillies, and not even Manny Ramirez could help them as they lost in 5 games. I'm not saying this because I feel like it hurt the Cubs the last couple of years (heck we semi benefited from it in 2003). It just makes more sense all around. I realize that adding 2 more games to the first round might mess up the schedule a bit, but I'm sure theres a way to get it done and not play November baseball. Get it done.

Well 102 years now officially. Get to work Jim. Also, anyone notice how Jason Marquis went on another second half collapse, today's start excluded?