dalgreen

Seconded, I'm fairly certain they used to play 18 Conference games before Penn State became a member. Why not 20? Well 20 conference games is a lot. I'm not sure if there are any conferences that play that many games. You would have to eliminate the Big Ten Tournament for sure (which I wouldn't be in favor of) plus start the season before New Year's where there isn't nearly as much exposure and with all of the bowl games, you could really hurt attendance. It would equal much less money. I agree that I miss the round-robin schedule, but with Penn State in the mix it's almost impossible to still have that. I absolutely love the Big Ten Tournament, and all conference tournaments. And while some teams can cost themselves a seed or two, the teams that are beating them can easily gain a seed or two in addition to letting a team play it's way into the NCAA's. I really don't think they place that big of an emphasis on it during seeding though. In fact the Big Ten gets hosed because they have to play their championship right before the pairings are announced and basically while the seeds are set. The winner gets no bonus for winning the BTT. 20 conference games is only two more games than what they used to play. The Pac-10 plays 18 conference games. Speaking for Illinois, starting the conference season prior to New Year's wouldn't hurt attendance a bit. We sell out during Christmas against the Longwoods and Oaklands of the world. Knowing the Hawkeye crowd, I doubt a Big Ten game between Christmas and New Year's would hurt attendance. Again, it's just two more games than what used to be played. What really is the purpose of the conference tourney other than money? At least the ACC gives the regular season conference crown to its conference tourney champion, in addition to the automatic bid. I think what you do over 2+ months means more than three days anyway. Yeah just two more games than used to be played, but four more games than are currently played. If you don't enjoy conference tournaments than nothing I can say will sway you. I personally love them and think Championship Week and that final weekend is one of the best few weeks in the sports world. And I guess Illinois fans can sell out those games between Christmas and New Year's. Lord knows they don't have any bowl games to travel to. Other teams (like Iowa, OSU, Mich, Wisconsin) tend to travel anywhere from 20,000-40,000 fans to their bowl destination during that week, leaving a much smaller group back in town to attend a basketball game during one of the best football weeks of the year. But I guess it's not fair to expect you guys to know much about that, nor will you have to as long as the Zooker is at the helm. Some pretty good razzes there, Hawkeye. It's a good thing I don't take stuff personal on here, otherwise I'd ask when was the last time the Hawks played in a BCS bowl. I'd also say, if your state had more than 100,000 people then it could support its football team in a bowl game and its b-ball team playing during the same week. However, I do believe Illinois will be in a bowl game at the latest 2007, maybe even 2006. We have a nice group coming back. But that's just like a Hawk fan, talking football during b-ball season. Hey, is it true that Alford is going to get his doctorate in colonial sports in America like the almight Dr. Tom Davis did?

I disagree. I think that a number of long relief appearences by a young pitcher can serve as a good opportunity for evaluating whether or not that pitcher can be an asset in the rotation. Why not put the guy in the rotation to evaluate him? I guess that would be too simple. If that's the chief evaluation tool one would use, then a guy like Rich Hill would be given up on. I'm not even close to giving up on him.

Do we really have excellent instructors? I'm probably one of the minor league instructors biggest critics. It's getting real old hearing how good so and so is yet seeing guys not reaching their potential. Guys like Choi, Hill, Kelton, Dubois Jackson, etc. I'm still seeing nothing really extraordinary from Harvey. So, our instructors are considered excellent based on.....? I was under the impression that the DJAXX had really good coaches. I think they do. Why doesn't the talent in the minors translate in the bigs? I think there are several reasons. Most are not under the organization's control, but some are. For example, I don't think it does much good to platoon a player until he demonstrates he cannot produce. Yet the Cubs want to platoon young guys. I don't think it does much good for a guy who is use to playing every day and sit them on the bench only to give them infrequent starts and pinch hits (Choi, Dubios, Hill) . It doesn't help a guy to yo-yo him from the big club to the minors, especially a pitcher who might go from starter in AAA to reliver in the bigs (Cruz, Z, Hill, Farns, etc). It doesn't help a young player by batting him in the 1 spot for a month then 2 then 6 then 7th then back to 1 (Patterson), One of the reasons why I'm so high on Matt Murton is because he didn't come through our system. I have a feeling he's going to refute your theory about how platooning a young player can mess with his development. I think he's going to be a very fine player even after platooning last year.

Do we really have excellent instructors? I'm probably one of the minor league instructors biggest critics. It's getting real old hearing how good so and so is yet seeing guys not reaching their potential. Guys like Choi, Hill, Kelton, Dubois Jackson, etc. I'm still seeing nothing really extraordinary from Harvey. So, our instructors are considered excellent based on.....? I was under the impression that the DJAXX had really good coaches. And they might. However, I don't get all giddy about our minor league teams winning their division. I want the Cubs winning theirs, and with some of their farm players. I just find it hard to believe that with so-called great coaching and talent, there is not one position player brought through the Cubs system who is making an impact in the majors ---and I don't consider Hinske an example of an impact player. But maybe I'm too hard on the Cub instructors, but that's my feeling on them.

Seconded, I'm fairly certain they used to play 18 Conference games before Penn State became a member. Why not 20? Well 20 conference games is a lot. I'm not sure if there are any conferences that play that many games. You would have to eliminate the Big Ten Tournament for sure (which I wouldn't be in favor of) plus start the season before New Year's where there isn't nearly as much exposure and with all of the bowl games, you could really hurt attendance. It would equal much less money. I agree that I miss the round-robin schedule, but with Penn State in the mix it's almost impossible to still have that. I absolutely love the Big Ten Tournament, and all conference tournaments. And while some teams can cost themselves a seed or two, the teams that are beating them can easily gain a seed or two in addition to letting a team play it's way into the NCAA's. I really don't think they place that big of an emphasis on it during seeding though. In fact the Big Ten gets hosed because they have to play their championship right before the pairings are announced and basically while the seeds are set. The winner gets no bonus for winning the BTT. 20 conference games is only two more games than what they used to play. The Pac-10 plays 18 conference games. Speaking for Illinois, starting the conference season prior to New Year's wouldn't hurt attendance a bit. We sell out during Christmas against the Longwoods and Oaklands of the world. Knowing the Hawkeye crowd, I doubt a Big Ten game between Christmas and New Year's would hurt attendance. Again, it's just two more games than what used to be played. What really is the purpose of the conference tourney other than money? At least the ACC gives the regular season conference crown to its conference tourney champion, in addition to the automatic bid. I think what you do over 2+ months means more than three days anyway.

Oh absolutely. I'm not going to say that the B12 deserves a ton of bids right now, I just think it's great fun to follow because of the parity. I understand your point regarding parity. But shouldn't there be another word used instead of parity (and I don't know what that word would be)? Because to me, parity is when the bottom teams have gotten better to compete with the upper tier teams. In the Big XII the traditional haves have fallen down to the traditional have nots. That's when it's bad. I wonder what KU would be like if that idiot Giddens hadn't gotten himself kicked out of school?

Forgive the hyperbole, but with 40 teams in the Big East they should get a bunch of bids. I think a 16 team conference is ridiculous.

Do we really have excellent instructors? I'm probably one of the minor league instructors biggest critics. It's getting real old hearing how good so and so is yet seeing guys not reaching their potential. Guys like Choi, Hill, Kelton, Dubois Jackson, etc. I'm still seeing nothing really extraordinary from Harvey. So, our instructors are considered excellent based on.....?

Back to the discussion on "competing" vs. "contending", there is a huge difference. A team can be competitive just being. 500, but you won't contend being a .500 team (okay, maybe in the NL West). One of my big complaints is the culture. I will never, ever forget back in 1995 after the Cardinals were sold, I heard Mark Lamping (Cards President) at his press conference state, " Any year we don't contend for the division title will be considered a failed season." At that time, the Cardinals had come off of four or five bad seasons. Then, this year, I heard one of the ownership members saying, "Our goal is to not get to the World Series but win it." My question is did Hendry, Baker or MacPhail make any of those kind of statements at the convention last weekend. In fact, I rarely, if ever hear the word contend out of any of their mouths. I hear "compete" all the time, but Milwaukee competed last year and finished third with no real shot at the division or wild-card. There's a big difference between the two.

By the way, Illini fans get on my nerves with the "Warr-en Car-ter" chant. Just like Cub fans grated my nerves with the "Au-gie, Au-gie" chant. Also, be glad you're not inundated with Big XII basketball like I've endured over the past ten years living in St. Louis and now Kansas. Big XII basketball has no personality to it (as I await a rebuttal from the artist formerly known as CPATT 20 and why Mizzou should be a top 25 team) just like the Pac-10. I love the B12 this year. Aside from Texas, there's no one that's really that great, and aside from Baylor, there's no one that's really that terrible. I can see why you'd think it's boring, but as someone with an interest in one of the teams the parity makes it pretty great. Oh, and Mizzou is 6-1 since the Illinois game(the one loss coming on a buzzer beater), beat ranked OU on the road, and is in second place in the B12. And Thomas Gardner shoots 3's for a better percentage than JJ Redick. :D I didn't see the Mizzou/Kansas game but let me guess. Fans rushed the court, right? Yes, I know all about the rivalry, but neither team is ranked and both teams are average in a very average conference. What was the point in rushing the court if they did? Oh yeah, the tore down the goal posts after beating Nebraska, too. Glad to see expectations are high in Columbia. Just remember, I told you last summer I'd be razzing you a lot because of my hatred for Mizzou. I still predict they'll win their home games and lose a bunch on the road (I know about their OU win on the road, but losing at home against Colorado?). They rushed because it's our biggest rival(something like the 2nd oldest in college basketball) who we just beat in overtime after being down 7 with 30 secs left. The atmosphere lent itself to it, see my sig for more. Colorado was disappointing, but they're not a bad team, and they lost on a buzzer beater like I said. Just curious, has Quin realized that Jimmy McKinney isn't a point guard, or is he still running point? Let's keep it real, though. Mizzou lost a game on a buzzer beater, but KU lost that game more than Mizzou won it, and didn't Mizzou beat OSU on a buzzer beater? I guess I'm trying to figure out which is the real Mizzou team.

By the way, Illini fans get on my nerves with the "Warr-en Car-ter" chant. Just like Cub fans grated my nerves with the "Au-gie, Au-gie" chant. Also, be glad you're not inundated with Big XII basketball like I've endured over the past ten years living in St. Louis and now Kansas. Big XII basketball has no personality to it (as I await a rebuttal from the artist formerly known as CPATT 20 and why Mizzou should be a top 25 team) just like the Pac-10. I love the B12 this year. Aside from Texas, there's no one that's really that great, and aside from Baylor, there's no one that's really that terrible. I can see why you'd think it's boring, but as someone with an interest in one of the teams the parity makes it pretty great. Oh, and Mizzou is 6-1 since the Illinois game(the one loss coming on a buzzer beater), beat ranked OU on the road, and is in second place in the B12. And Thomas Gardner shoots 3's for a better percentage than JJ Redick. :D I didn't see the Mizzou/Kansas game but let me guess. Fans rushed the court, right? Yes, I know all about the rivalry, but neither team is ranked and both teams are average in a very average conference. What was the point in rushing the court if they did? Oh yeah, the tore down the goal posts after beating Nebraska, too. Glad to see expectations are high in Columbia. Just remember, I told you last summer I'd be razzing you a lot because of my hatred for Mizzou. I still predict they'll win their home games and lose a bunch on the road (I know about their OU win on the road, but losing at home against Colorado?).

Eckstein still scares me as a leadoff hitter. Yes, he'll continue to get on base, but just as important he will continue to make pitchers work. I hope Pierre can do the same. I already see him seeing at least 8-10 pitches each at-bat versus Zambrano and Prior.

Even if they lose those three road games, and if they do the nearly impossible and lose a home game this year they'll still finish 12-4 in the conference. Plus, there's no shame in losing at Iowa, OSU and MSU. Exactly, they're on the fast track to win the conference, part of that being because they don't go to either Assembly hall. Yep. Got a lucky break this year. Can't complain, IU had the easy schedule last year, but didn't have the team to do anything with it. Wisconsin has a shot to go deep. They have had less talented (albeit more experienced) teams go far in the tourney. Illinois has a shot with defense. MSU has a shot with talent. IU has a shot with shooting ability. The conference is strong this year. The B10 tourney should be fun this year. It should be fun. But I don't know which one I'm more sick of, MLB interleague play or college basketball conference tourneys. With so many good Big Ten teams, the tourney may hurt as many as three teams' seeds in the NCAA tourney. I can easily see a team going from a #3 seed to a #5 seed in the tourney with an early exit in the confrerence tourney. Plus, playing three games in three days kills a team that relies on the jump shot.

By the way, Illini fans get on my nerves with the "Warr-en Car-ter" chant. Just like Cub fans grated my nerves with the "Au-gie, Au-gie" chant. Also, be glad you're not inundated with Big XII basketball like I've endured over the past ten years living in St. Louis and now Kansas. Big XII basketball has no personality to it (as I await a rebuttal from the artist formerly known as CPATT 20 and why Mizzou should be a top 25 team) just like the Pac-10.

You can't take it personal. Most people who criticize Illinois are just haters, anyway. I can't stand Seth Davis (CBS studio guy) and he predicted Illinois would lose to UW- Milwaukee, Arizona, and Louisville during the tourney...only to finally be right with his North Carolina pick. The problem is people think this team is supposed to be nearly as good as last year's team and we may never see a performance from an Illinois team, let alone any team like that ever. Anything more than two losses this year and some will look at it as a failure.....ridiculous. Looking at the schedule before the season, I had them 3-1 at this point, so their just a game off. I'm a lot more confident with them on the road based on last night's game. The only other real tough banger left this year is Terrance Dials (other than seeeing Killingsworth again) of OSU.

he's definitely one of the best defensive players in the country. however, he has no shot whatsoever, this limits his ability to get into the lane consistently. if he works on his outside jumper, he could be a POY candidate when he hits his senior year. Good point, he does need a jumper by the way, has Marcus Arnold ever made a shot as an Illini? Thus far, all I've seen from him is shot that's either a little short or an air-ball. Brian Randle will be a beast next year after working on his jumper in the off-season. Remember, Luther Head couldn't hit air with his shots his freshman year. Brian Randle can still take the ball to the hole and get to the line. He probably can live without hitting a jumper this year, but he's got to be aggressive and active like he was last night. As far as Marcus Arnold goes, I think his role is to take up minutes and hopefully use up fouls that normally Augustine would get. I'm still disappointed in Augustine's total play.

Even if they lose those three road games, and if they do the nearly impossible and lose a home game this year they'll still finish 12-4 in the conference. Plus, there's no shame in losing at Iowa, OSU and MSU.

Anybody saying that Wisconsin is not a good team is just hatin'. Do I think they'll win the Big Ten, maybe, but maybe not. However, Bo Ryan is a damn good coach and I'm an Illinois fan. They have had good success primarily having only one stud player on the team over the last few years. They are good and will continue to be good because they are well coached, disciplined and play good defense. I still hate the Big Ten scheduling. How difficult is it to start the Big Ten season one week early so that you can have a round robin schedule?

I've always thought Dee Brown was overrated. He's a very good player, but he was hardly the team's best last year as many were saying. He's fast, plays good defense and hits the open three (in Champaign, at least), however, my complaint with him is, and continues to be, he doesn't create his own shot. If he's not given a screen, he'll put up an awful shot. I do like how he contributes to a game even when not scoring ( tonight had 11 assists even though he went 1-9 from the floor). I still don't consider him a leader, though. I was, for the first time this year, impressed with their low post play. I think their first twelve points came from the paint. If they can continue to get production from Pruitt, I like our chances to go far this year. Two games behind Wisconsin isn't good when you only play them once this year. I'll be rooting for OSU against Wisconsin this Thursday.

I appreciate the follow up. I still think this whole thing was blown out of proportion. But did you really think those steadfast that it wasn't a direct quote would come out and say they were wrong?

I was rooting for Vaden to make that last free throw because the worst thing was to have to go full court in under four seconds. Plus, Richard McBride is one of the last players I want taking a last shot for us. Too bad Augustine didn't have enough time to find Jamar Smith instead.

Somebody on this thread or the Big Ten thread asked who was more useless Pruitt or Warren Carter. I think the question was answered tonight. I think Shaun Pruitt has finally realized how to play the post. Great job by him tonight and if he and Brian Randle can play like this the rest of the year, we will go far in the tourney. Free throws and the start of the second half is what cost us the game tonight. Funny, how Illinois started to play with much greater passion after Frazier was almost knocked out on a screen.... stupid Warren Carter. He's got to be the dumbest player (no basketball intelligence) I've seen at Illinois since Richard Keene. By the way, I have always hated the Big Ten schedule since they got rid of the round robin schedule. Wisconsin doesn't play in Champaign nor Bloomington this year.

I am a huge Cubs fan who spends an inordinate amount of time and a good chunk of change every year to see them play on TV, as well as in person, in Chicago and several road cities (but to be fair, when I see them in NY it's free 95% of the time - and better seats). But I have never once had any interest whatsoever in going to the convention. It seems to me to be a celebration of 100 years of failure (or at least the past 40-50 of those years of failure) with no real information coming from the team or serious discussion on what can be done to improve the team. It's a giant PR event. Oh, don't get me wrong. I love the Cubs (like we all do). I'd have to love them to be willing to put up with the verbal thrashing I get on occasion from my new wife for the time spent watching them, and then on this site following them. I would only go to that convention to ask a tough question, or be part of a group of tough questions. I want to hear answers to questions that absolutely baffle me. I want accountability. I have no use for autographs, or any of that other junk. I want a winner, and won't celebrate a century of losing. I'd bet any tough question will be given a bs answer. I wouldn't doubt if they've gone through a run- through of every possible question and what response should be given. After all, it's hard for me to believe that even with a tough weekend of questions those two bullheaded men would change their philosophies.

I wonder if Walker fell out of favor with Hendry when he stated, "I hope they don't pick up my option then trade me. I would prefer them not picking up the option then I could pick my own team." Or something to that effect. He had to fall out of favor for something since he's the only returning Cub everyday position player from last year not to have a job for 2006.

I hope I'm wrong, but I expect similar style questions this weekend as was the case at last year's convention. There may be a few people who ask tough questions, but for the most part I think Hendry and Baker will have relatively easy questions. Like Goony, I've never had any desire to attend the Cubs Convention.