dew1679666265
-
Posts
20,547 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Joomla Posts 1
Chicago Cubs Videos
Chicago Cubs Free Agent & Trade Rumors, Notes, & Tidbits
2026 Chicago Cubs Top Prospects Ranking
News
2023 Chicago Cubs Draft Picks
Guides & Resources
2024 Chicago Cubs Draft Picks
The Chicago Cubs Players Project
2025 Chicago Cubs Draft Pick Tracker
Blogs
Events
Forums
Store
Gallery
Everything posted by dew1679666265
-
The Browns and Mike Holmgren have come to terms for him to become the team president.
-
They only hold the tiebreaker over Miami and Houston if they don't tie with them and another team. So, the Titans will make the playoffs at 9-7 if no team other than Miami OR Houston finish 9-7, but not both of them. Well, they have the tiebreaker over Houston regardless. But Miami is a different story. And there are lots of scenarios that could possibly involve the Dolphins. They could win the division, which would be bad for Tennessee as Tennessee cannot beat NE in any 2 or 3 way tiebreaker. They could possibly beat Denver or Baltimore in certain tiebreakers which would then cause Denver or Baltimore to eliminate Tennessee. So if either Denver or Baltimore win their 9th game the Titans also want them to win their 10th game just to avoid that scenario. And NE beating Jacksonville would be very helpful for the Titans because it not only gives the Jags a loss it also makes it impossible for Miami to win the division. This is all very confusing.
-
They only hold the tiebreaker over Miami and Houston if they don't tie with them and another team. So, the Titans will make the playoffs at 9-7 if no team other than Miami OR Houston finish 9-7, but not both of them. That confuses me. If we hold the individual tiebreaker over both of them isn't that the key? If not head-to-head and conference record, what is used to break 3-way ties?
-
Let me see if I've got this right. There are currently 6 7-7 teams in the AFC. The Titans hold the tiebreaker over 2 of them: Houston and Miami. Thus, for the Titans to make the playoffs, this all must happen: Ravens or Broncos lose out (to go 8-8) All of the Jets, Steelers and Jaguars must lose one of two Is this right? Or does more need to happen?
-
Congrats NC. You well deserve the win. Just shows how much of a crapshoot fantasy football is from week to week. Last week my team was rather putrid (third lowest score) and you would have easily beaten me, but I was fortunate to be up against the team with the second lowest score. This week against better competition my team steps up to the challenge. They remind me of the Colts in the sense that they frequently do just enough to win. I was the top 1-2 scorer (over the course of the season) in all three of my leagues and I went a combined 1-3 in the playoffs. I hate fantasy football sometimes.
-
His last two games' ratings: 79.4 and 73.2.
-
After Week 7, being able to even mention playoffs is a great feat right now. This is very true.
-
Congrats NC. You well deserve the win.
-
That was a nice win for the Titans, but as soccer10k mentioned, it's unlikely CJ will reach the 2,000 mark. As for the really slim Titan playoff hopes, the Broncos losing helped a little, but that awesome pitch and catch by Big Ben and Wallace negated that help. Then the Ravens mowing over the Bears didn't help either. Still looks really unlikely, but there's still a tiny chance.
-
You also have to factor in the time as well. Because of the short field, the Packers gave the Steelers 2 minutes to drive back down the field. Had the Steelers forced Green Bay to drive 80 yards, the Packers likely would have just kicked a game-winning field goal. This is true. Still though playing the percentages I would still say kicking it deep would have been the better move. I don't know that it's a great call, but I agree with it. Neither defense played very well at all, so I like the idea of ensuring that your offense - the strength of your team - has a chance to win the game. It's all about leaving the game in the hands of your strongest unit.
-
They don't have faith in their defense and felt they could catch GB off guard with an onside kick, I guess. It was a crazy call but it was a yard from working. It's always a yard from working. Either a guy gets it 9 yards from the spot of the kick or a guy is one yard short from being able to grab it in the air before a defender can or it goes out of bounds 11 yards from the spot of the kick. I look at it like this. Onside kicks work IIRC 10% of the time so Tomlin was essentially saying he believes his defense had less than a 10% chance to stop GB from taking the lead. I think we can all agree Pittsburgh would have stopped GB at least 1 out of 10 times in that situation speaking hypothetically obviously. You also have to factor in the time as well. Because of the short field, the Packers gave the Steelers 2 minutes to drive back down the field. Had the Steelers forced Green Bay to drive 80 yards, the Packers likely would have just kicked a game-winning field goal.
-
With Slaton down, they don't have one good one. Even when Slaton was healthy, they misused him rather impressively. Yeah, Kubiak didn't like his fumble issues. That's what happened today. He said that Foster guy was going to get more touches. He fumbled on a catch in the first and hasn't been seen since. Arian Foster had his fumbling issues in college. Kubiak hates fumbles more than any coach I've seen. Not a good mix.
-
With Slaton down, they don't have one good one. Even when Slaton was healthy, they misused him rather impressively. Yeah, Kubiak didn't like his fumble issues.
-
With Slaton down, they don't have one good one.
-
CJ's waking up.
-
It'd have to be really cheap, I think. Davis had a really nice year last season, but it was propped up by an abnormally high BABIP (.366 vs a career .332). He only had 29 walks last season, so most of his OBP was because of hits - and that would drop if his BABIP decreases. His defense in center is nice (12.0 career UZR/150), but I think I'd prefer to keep trying for Nyjer Morgan.
-
Unlikely, but possible. He's a great defensive center fielder, though - 35.8 UZR/150 in center last year and 39.0 career in center. For comparison, Mike Cameron was a 10.8 UZR/150 guy in center last year. He's only a 69% base stealer, though. If he came cheap (prospect wise), this would be better than Pods or Ankiel and I might prefer him to Byrd as well. That all depends on each player's price, though.
-
They do get way overexposed. They seem like the Red Sox/Yankees of football. Anytime they play each other, they're on national, primetime tv somewhere.
-
Even if awarding it is predicated on team success, there's absolutely no way the Titans are close to 6-7 without CJ. He won't win it on a non-playoff team, but I really think he should. I think he wants to hit 2,000 and I don't think Fisher will pull him or anything. The offense is so reliant on the running game and CJ's contributions anyway that I don't think they'll have to call extra runs or anything like that. Even if we lose another game and are officially out of the playoff race, I still think CJ get his carries. I doubt Fisher will give him 40 in a game or something, though.
-
I had Manning ahead of Brees before this game and I still do after. How? There is no logical argument for this at all. They both lead undefeated teams and Brees beats him in every stat save 80 fewer yards (on a lot less attempts though). The only people that support Manning support him because he has an undefeated and is Manning. Sorry but this year there is another who has an undefeated team and doing better in practically every statistical category. Chris Johnson should be in the debate, especially if we're only looking at raw stats. He's having one of the greatest years a running back has ever had.
-
I'd have preferred to take Burrell and keep him, honestly.
-
That's what I wonder about. Were the Mariners not interested in this a week ago or did Hendry still believe he could get something better? This wouldn't be that bad a trade if we could still upgrade from Bradley to Cameron.
-
Miles is saying the Cubs NET $9M? Aren't they technically grossing $9M and then netting the difference after the salaries are offset? In other words... he makes it sound like we're saving $9M... that's not right, is it? They probably gave us $9 million in addition to Silva's contract. So we save $9 million off his contract, not Bradley's is my guess.
-
Bruce Miles:
-
Slightly. So we saved about 4-5 million roughly. $6 million, according to Sullivan.