Soul

I think it matters, but I don't think we're arguing the same point. I'm not saying they need to be baseball insiders, but that it would be better if they actually CARED about baseball, and I see nothing in the members' backgrounds that would indicate they give a damn beyond the financials. Guys like Reinsdorf and Steinbrenner? Their backgrounds yes, I agree. But those guys bleed baseballs and their decisions are affected by that. I dunno, maybe there's some Carlyle guy who lives & dies with baseball and would be put in overall charge of the Cub financial decisions. When I look at the roster @ Carlyle past & present though, I don't see that. I see a whole lot of D.C. insiders who's desire for baseball likely begins and ends with how much exposure they can get by making an appearance at an Orioles or Nationals game.

Bears are underdogs, and I believe rightfully so. I'm not complaining about it like I was when people were picking the Seahawks over the Bears. I really believe Chicago will have to play its best game of the year to win this one. Indy has the edge going in. If Manning pulls it off, you're going to see gushing over him like crazy. So if the Bears pull off the upset, would it be bad that they would receive praise?

Another thing I don't understand: why are so many of you continuing to suffer with cable? Seriously----if you're a sports fan, DirecTV is way better and has been for many, many years. And it's cheaper. Latest stats I have seen say less than 10% of the people in the US can NOT get DirecTV due to blockage. Even some of those could get it by making a few yard adjustments, etc. The numbers are very small.

Greenburg clearly understood the point being made and made the point that neither of those guys were on teams that were going to do anything whereas Grossman was on a team that could and did make it to the Superbowl. The Bears had a lot more to lose if Grossman sucked and that's why he got more criticism. I thought that was a very fair point. Golic almost always misses the point. Too many hard hits in his playing days----the mind's not all there anymore. People, people. Just because someone uses stats from a hall of famer to suggest a point does NOT mean they are saying a player is CURRENTLY on par with those hall of famers! LOL, I love when people try to make that argument. It's the ultimate Red Herring. If the Governor of Illinois can outwit Golic on sports, then what does that say about Golic :P

This is the crux of my stance. DirecTV's MLBEI will be much better than what's available now. The problem with this stance is that it doesn't have to be mutually exclusive. You can have DirecTV access and cable access...that's the way its always been. Now it may be better for DirecTV subscribers who have High Def cabablity...but that # is sooo much smaller than the people who were able to get it before that its a net loss. I think of it as turning an entire stadium into luxury suites...no regluar seating available for anyone. You can't argue that the suites are "nicer" to sit in...they are, and they get better service and have more features...but you can argue quite effectively that the arrangement is NOT better for the guy who always had season tickets in the upper deck and doesn't have any way to upgrade to the suite. EI was already an exclusive package, even on Cable. What we're talking about here is more akin to 2 groups of luxury suite owners, one of whom will now have to park in a different parking lot and walk a little further to get to the gates. And in return, they'll get a better service in the form of more HD games. Big deal. Sounds like a fair trade to me. As far as the # of HD subscribers being small, that is true. But the number is growing.....and will continue to do so. I seriously doubt a company like DirecTV is going to make decisions based on a static view of today's reality. They're going to look to the future-----and the future is HD.

Bulls may have done alot to douse the fires of Pax by beating the league's best last night, but I still think once Shaq is healthy the Heat will roll down the stretch and be the favorites. I'd love to see PJ play like that more often though. I've never seen him do things like post up on Dirk twice----both times getting baskets, and big ones too. The Bulls are still missing a consistent, tall, inside scorer. They're going to have to prove they can win it without that element----people aren't going to automatically assume they can; they're going to do what they're doing now---doubt the Bulls can keep the hot shooting going all the way to the finals.

Because he has little upside and #3 QB is really the place where teams take chances on a guy who hasn't been quantified yet.

Haha, you just suggested Neifi has value 8-)

But would you trade Deng, Tyrus, one other non-Gordon/Hinrich player for Kevin Garnett-----as Reggie Miller suggested last night? Reggie, though he's obviously not a GM or anything, seemed to think McHale would jump at such an offer... I think we'd immediately be a favorite to win the East. Yeah, you lose Deng and that's bad. But Garnett is so much more uber.

When the Bears were conducting the head coach search that ultimately resulted in hiring Mike Ditka, Halas made it clear that whoever was hired had to be willing to work with Buddy Ryan as defensive coordinator. Similarly, when the Cubs hired Dusty as manager it was clear that whoever was hired would have to accept Rothschild as pitching coach. It may be similar with the Cowboys; the new head coach may not have any choice but to work with Garrett. Also, the Dolphins hired Dom Capers as D coordinator before Cam Cameron. It happens quite a bit. I know. It just seems to offend the sensibilities though. Most prospective head coaches are going to want to bring in their group of guys. It could limit the choices that are available. Still---that doesn't mean it can't work.

A big reason why the Bears are going to the Super Bowl this year instead of washing out in the first game is because Orton has faded from view. And that's the bare bones truth baby. Say what you want about Rex. Orton (or Griese for that matter) don't make those deep throws to Berrian or bring us down the field on their arm alone when the team needs a score. There's a pretty good chance Kyle's going to be cut at the roster trim-downs next Summer, so I hope you enjoyed your last look at him :wink:

It's pretty hard to argue this signing makes little sense. I guess KW is trying to recapture old Erstad glory? That was like 2001-2002 though---ancient history. He doesn't need more "veteran leadership" on that club, or anything like that. It's puzzling. If Erstad works out, it'll be another of those so-called lucky KW signings. edit: makes little sense..

Nah, he's got over 20 games under his belt now, plus playoff games, plus 4 years in an NFL system. Rex is no rookie. That said, I maintain his youth and relative inexperience give him upside you won't find with many 4-year vets.

Someone should block this. The devil with the rules.

I thought this was funny, but George Soros is/was associated with Carlyle and he doesn't really fit the mold. There are also several former Clinton administration people who are associated with them. They're DC all the way. The Cubs would be an interesting little plaything for them; they probably know less about us than the average Cardinals fan. This is a disaster of epic proportions if it happens.

Because a newspaper company would know anything about baseball? Many owners of successful sports teams come from backgrounds completely unrelated to sports. Oh really? Which World Series winning franchises are currently being run by a group of investors from D.C.? Are they planning on at least moving to Chicago? Or would they rather run the Cubs from remote than make the extraordinary effort of entering "fly over" country to check on their investment?

But what if you dont believe that this happened, much less is possible? It always bothers me when people say something like this. It doesnt matter if you dont believe it, it offends the people that do believe it, which there are 2 billion of. Oh, but it does. I'm going to guess that there are a lot of things you do on a day-to-day basis that would offend a follower of Islam, which has almost 2 billion members as well. Are you going to cut out all of that? Why not? Excuse me for being late to the party, but would someone mind explaining to me what this has to do with the Floyd signing?

Bears are #1 in the league vs Tight Ends. I really don't remember a tight end doing a lot of damage to the Bears this season. Yeah-I don't see Clark making a large dent in the passing game, but I do think he can clear out some of the crossing routes for the WR's (by going deep and drawing one of the linebackers out) or for Addai on swing routes out of the backfield, which has been a staple of the Colts passing game as well. It's just too hard to complete a pass on one of those linebackers, as they are really good in pass coverage. Teams have been holding TE's in to help with pass protection----that's why there haven't been many big time TE games against the Bears this season. If the Colts can get away with sending TE's out, it could be an advantage. I don't know if they will need to hold them in or not. In fact, I just have no clue whatsoever what is going to happen in this game.

Oh well that finalizes it then. Owns Dunkin Donuts? Wow, intense evil. From D.C. too----strike 2. Knows nothing about baseball? YER OUTTA THERE...

Take that, goat!

Like who? Esteban Loaiza comes to mind. Pods was good the WS year. Uribe was steady that season, at least defensively. Marginal players that worked out good for a year. Rowand dropped off after he left the South Side. KW finds a few guys. I don't know if Erstad is one of them though. I hope not.

He's so solid, despite his age. You can trace the turnaround of the Bears back to when Angelo acquired Tait, Brown, and Freddy Miller. Before that we had trouble blocking anyone.

Case in point - the playoff game against the Seahawks...although his rating in that game was more below average than terrible. Bears scored 3 TDs in that game, only one was a called TD pass. Another team, such as the Colts for example, call passes on those downs and it turns out to be 3 TDs passing and the QB rating goes way up. But the end result is the same. Bears aren't going to call passes in alot of situations, because as a team we are likely to have more success running the ball. Our line is better at run blocking, or TEs are primarily fantastic run blockers as opposed to pass catchers----our receivers are not pro bowlers. The QB passer rating should really be called the Team Passing Rating.

Isn't Wade Phillips kind of a.....you know....blah choice for Jones? I dunno, Wade's just never really done anything for me. Maybe I'm missing something here.

There are many who believe Dilfer, for example, would have had much better career numbers if he would have been placed in a passing offense. He was almost always expected to manage a run-first offense, and he did it reasonably well. Nobody ever took notice of the fact that Dilfer actually had one of the stronger arms in the NFL----because it was just plain seldom used. Grossman can obviously sling the ball anywhere on the field, as could Dilfer. It's not the Bears style, nor should it be, and the fact that the Bears are capable of completing a 70 yard drive solely with the running game does not mean Grossman would not be capable of running a pass-first offense. The QB rating itself is one of the most overrated statistics in the history of sports. It says nothing about team strategy, team philosophy, what happened in the key plays that decided the game. You can literally post a terrible QB rating and be the primary reason your team won the game. That makes the stat useless.