UMFan83

https://twitter.com/theaceofspaeder/status/1405192300276355073?s=20 Somewhat long thread pointing out all the non-Astros cheating that was going around. He made it seem like this big revelation but none of this surprises me at all.

I still remember back in 2005 there was a Sergio Mitre/Roy Halladay matchup when Halladay was at the peak of his abilities and I believe the Cubs won 1-0. Last week Jake beat Yu Darvish. Neither of those matchups are as lopsided as this one but you never know. Cubs did win both times they faced deGrom in 2019 after all!

I’m sure the 3B coach was thinking that Heyward would just GIDP if he didn’t send him

What an unbelievably poor send

I think its overwhelmingly likely Dalton starts week 1, and he's obsessed with repeating 'the Mahomes experience' but I definitely think the door is opened at least a crack if Fields destroys the preseason.

Still dont believe him but...

20 innings if I’m counting correctly. The Cubs only have 6 hits over that span too. Could be nothing (who starts a slump in the middle of a game while they opened it hitting well?) but with the Cubs offensive history of falling off a cliff I’m mildly concerned if it keeps up after this Mets series 5th through 8th is 4 1st through 8th is 8 1st through 6th is 6 4+8+6=18 You scared me, but you must’ve counted the 9th innings. I did. Because I'm stupid lol

What exactly is your concern? I guess just sample size. For someone to be the official all time single season BA leader with 130 ABs seems difficult to wrap my head around. But based on what I've read Negro leagues did not play long seasons. Like I said, I'm open to it and appreciate that this gives me the opportunity to learn more about the Negro Leagues. Just going to take some getting used to. That said, its really easy to look up stats and filter them by minimum ABs, etc if i want to.

Official memo from the MLB released a few minutes ago. This might be Manfred's finest work (if you assume like me that his intent is to destroy baseball) https://www.mlb.com/news/mlb-announces-new-guidance-to-deter-use-of-foreign-substances One thing I find interesting is that any suspended players will not be allowed to be replaced on the roster. Meaning if lets say 2 pitchers get suspended for 10 games for violating the rule, teams will have to get by with 24 players for those 10 days.

So baseball reference made the change to include the Negro Leagues as Major Leagues, which is awesome but it completely changes a bunch of the leaderboards. For example: Eugene Bremer now holds the single season ERA+ record with a 633 ERA+. He pitched in 6 games that season to set the record (albeit 50.2 IP). In fact, the top 14 leaders in single season ERA+ all come from the Negro Leagues. The top traditional MLB leader is Tim Keefe, and the top modern day record is unfornuately held by Trevor Bauer who had a 292 OPS+ last season. To find the modern day, non-Negro Leagues full season leader in ERA+, you have to go down to the 17th entry, Pedro Martinez who had a 291 OPS+ in 2000. I'm not necessarily criticizing the decision to include the Negro Leagues as part of the Major Leagues, though I am concerned with the apparent lack of sample size considerations for a lot of these rate records. Another record is the single season BA record is now held by Tetelo Vargas, who in his age 37 season in 1943 hit .471 in 121 ABs. Hugh Duffy formerly held the mark, hitting .440 in 1894 in 539 AB. It's going to make a lot of records look unrecognizable, though I'll take it as an opportunity to learn more about the Negro Leagues and get familiar with the names and faces of those who have been largely ignored throughout baseball history.

jerk couldnt even delay his next start by a couple of days after leaving the previous start with a forearm strain.

I don’t understand how your argument for “most of the regular season will be meaningless” is to continue with a system where even more of the regular season is meaningless. I guess this is where my perspective just differs from yours. I watch a ton of regular season college basketball. Every game is a chance to better your seed or better your odds of getting in. There’s conference titles, rivalries, etc. Like in February Illinois absolutely curbstomped Michigan in Ann Arbor. We’re illini fans like “oh that’s cool but i didn’t bother watching because we’re going to get a top 2 seed regardless?” The teams are not natural rivals, neither team needed to win the game as it only had somewhat of an effect on the conference title. But Michigan was being crowned by the media as the best team in the Big Ten and Illinois came in and destroyed them. Reading Twitter that night you’d think they won the title. That single game means 1/3 as much as a single college football game and yet people enjoyed it a lot. For the college football fan, I’d imagine something like 30% more games will be meaningful than in the current setup. Sure Ohio State might cakewalk through every game but they haven’t lost a Big Ten game in the last 2 seasons so it’s not like there is this constant threat of them being upset. When Alabama plays games against their closest ranked SEC team, It’s hyped up all week and then Bama wins 52-20 or something. Not really missing out on much there. I think you’ll be surprised at how little this actually takes away from the excitement of the regular season.

Hmm ok. If you wanted to keep it like it used to be, all the G5 schools should form their own subdivision and play for a title. A lot of things bug me about the college football setup but the fact that over half the teams have no shot to win it grinds my gears the most

20 innings if I’m counting correctly. The Cubs only have 6 hits over that span too. Could be nothing (who starts a slump in the middle of a game while they opened it hitting well?) but with the Cubs offensive history of falling off a cliff I’m mildly concerned if it keeps up after this Mets series

Mets pitcher that is completely dominating us last 2 starts: Orioles - 2.2 IP, 4 ER Diamondbacks - 0.1 IP, 5 ER

I guess I don’t understand how demanding season long greatness is attractive with 120+ teams. There’s no way to balance schedules to ensure you can accurately determine who deserves to be considered the best team and for about 60% of the league no matter what you do you won’t win or even challenge for a title. If you are great all season, you will make the playoffs with a bye and be in a great position to win a championship. Also Alabama wouldnt have made the 12 team playoff in 2019 so it’s not guaranteed* *I know..there’s no way the committee keeps Alabama out of the top 12 if that is the cut line for making the playoffs

Wow Jake completely falling apart

Ugh stupid 2 out runs allowed

Alabama is not going to hang a banner but I bet BC would, or Coastal Carolina. Just like some schools hang Sweet 16 banners while others only hang Final Fours or better. No a recruit is not going to decide to choose BC over Alabama because they made the playoffs as a 12 seed. But its an accomplishment that helps build the program. Right now you can't sell them on anything because Clemson is going to win every division and conference title, and they have no shot at making the playoffs. A team that is viable enough to make the playoffs gives you another selling point and helps build your program. For some of those fringe playoff caliber programs (think Florida, Penn State, Auburn, etc) they may actually be able to steal recruits from Bama or Ohio State based on their likelihood to make the playoffs if other variables favor that school. Najee Harris was so close to coming to Michigan that he was enrolled and had a dorm assignment, but ultimately stuck with his commitment to Alabama because he believed Bama would get him the exposure from being in the playoffs among other things. Plenty of other stories like that out there. I'm legitimately surprised there are so many people defending the current system..it seems terrible to me. Maybe my arguments aren't rock solid but I think the 4 team system is flawed and causing a consolidation of talent. Maybe opening up to 12 teams won't change that (though I'm willing to bet it helps at least a little bit) but doing nothing certainly isn't going to help that problem either.

Every time we play the Mets at Citi Field, we break these out. Given our relative recent success against the Mets, I'm going to assume it is largely because of this tradition: If anyone wants to turn this into a Mad Men gif game thread, I will not be against it.

Well I've always been a bigger Michigan basketball fan for whatever reason even during the 11 year tourney drought in the 00's. But think about what you mentioned above about Michigan playing in the national title game twice in 5 years. They were a 4 and a 3 seed in those 2 seasons, meaning they wouldn't have even made a 4 team playoff in those years. In fact last year was the first year they've been a 1 seed since 1993. Imagine the perception of the hoops program if they hadn't made the playoffs since 1993. Imagine if the 5 star players only went to UNC, Duke, Michigan State and Kentucky because they made the playoffs every year. It's not a perfect comparison because they are different sports...CBB plays 3 times as many games and has 3 times as many teams. So it makes sense that they would have a larger more inclusive tournament that has more games. But proportionately CBB has 17x more playoff teams than CFB, not 3x. Going back to the Michigan discussion, since I cant use tourney success for the basketball team to compare with the football team, just looking at regular season success, here is how Michigan has ranked in one computer poll for football (Congrove - easiest to find past years data) and basketball (kenpom): 2020: FB - 74 BB - 3 2019: FB - 17 BB - 16 2018: FB - 6 BB - 6 2017: FB - 34 BB - 7 2016: FB - 7 BB - 20 2015: FB - 12 BB - 50 Average: FB - 25 BB - 17 So like I said, a little more successful. And those Kenpom numbers include results from the multiple postseason tournament runs Michigan basketball went on, if we abruptly stopped at the end of the regular season the numbers would be even closer. The difference is that Michigan basketball won a Big Ten title during those years (just one...and didn't finish 2nd in any of those years so no Big Ten Championship game appearance equivalent to football) and they beat MSU and OSU (because they have more shots at them and possibly because talent is distributed better?) We'll see. My point is that ~3 college football teams are considerably better each year than all the other teams, and its hurt the sport for me. I don't believe the answer is to do nothing and hope it fixes itself. FWIW, I also don't think you should continue tinkering with things every few years to fix minor issues in the sport *ahem*Manfred*ahem* but in my mind college football is seriously broken and I think expanding the playoff will best case increase parity, worst case give secondary teams more enjoyment of the season.

This. Look Rizzo and Heyward have spent years building up credibility and are overwhelmingly seen as good character guys so I'm personally not going to start booing them, though their admission does change my perception of them quite a bit. They're still good guys I guess, they just seem ignorant and misguided. Maybe others disagree and cannot look past this when evaluating their character...I can understand and accept that way of thinking.

I'm fine with that outcome because it makes all the games up to that for Michigan exciting and more enjoyable. And increases my interest of College Football outside of Michigan significantly. This Athletic article sums up a lot of the reasons this is great for college football: https://theathletic.com/2649167/ This is it. As it stands, I don't think I've ever watched a Boston College game before. But in this scenario? I'm definitely following the game. You can say its just me and I'm not a good enough college football fan if I don't watch any of the the 99.5% of games that are utterly meaningless each year but I don't think I'm alone. And from a Michigan standpoint? I've always been a much bigger UM basketball fan than football fan, though I follow UM football fairly closely. That said, I lose interest as soon as Michigan loses a couple of games except for the first half of the Ohio State game until its a blowout. With this 12 team playoff, Michigan would either have made the playoff or have been in contention for the playoff until the Ohio State game in 4 of Harbaugh's 5 full seasons. I can think of all the games in late October or early November when I see like Maryland on the schedule and figure I'll just follow the game on my phone and will turn it on in the 4th if its close. In most years with a 12 team playoff I will wake up excited and ready to commit 3+ hours of my day to watching the game because it actually means something. Maybe this defeats my argument entirely, but to me its only somewhat about access to a championship. I just want to have more meaningful games late in the year, or the feeling of accomplishment that my team made the Final 12. That's a huge reason why I love college basketball. There are so many different ways to feel fulfilled after a season, even though my team hasnt won the title in 32 years. Honestly, in terms of relative ranking in their sport Michigan basketball has only been a bit more successful than Michigan football over the last decade, yet everyone is overwhelmingly positive about the recent history of Michigan basketball and the football team is a laughing stock. Why? Because making the Elite 8 or even Sweet 16 means something in basketball. Hell, in 2015 a very mediocre Michigan team went into the Big Ten Tournament, upset the 1 seed Hoosiers and barely got into the tourney in a First Four game, which they won. I probably rewatch Kam Chatman's 3 to sink the Hoosiers a couple of times a year. Do you know how many time's I've even thought about a non-MSU or OSU Michigan football game from the last decade? And that Michigan team was maybe the 50th best team in the country! (no I'm not suggesting a 68 team football playoff...12 is good) Maybe I just like basketball more, but I think the true answer is somewhere in the middle.

Sucks that the deGrom injury couldn't have even caused him to miss one start. That said the Cubs seem to do alright against him: 2019 G1: 6 IP, 8 H, 2 ER, Cubs win 5-3 2019 G2: 7 IP, 5 H, 4 ER, Cubs win 4-1 2018 G1: 7 IP, 7 H, 2 BB, 1 ER, Cubs win 7-1 2018 G2: 8 IP, 8 H, 1 BB, 1 ER, Cubs win 2-1 OK he's definitely dominated us for the most part but we do manage to get hits off of him and we've hung in and won the last 4 games he's started against us.

I didn't actually even read his quotes about this. I've lost so much respect for him.