WrigleyField 22

I usually have Ravens but will fill in wherever as well. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Random thoughts on increasing speed while still being reasonable, and other thoughts.... Not suggesting to implement all of these, but just throwing thoughts out there- Treat picks like the actual draft. If someone misses their deadline, we don't pick for him, but the draft goes on. If after about 4 picks still no pick is submitted then we can pick. 3-5 picks a day would be a pretty fair pace and if you can't check every 48 hours or so to get a general idea when to show up, don't sign up or understand the draft will keep moving. Honestly in many instances you'd probably still get your guy. Going along with the 48 hour idea, post a schedule every 2 days at some pre-determined time. The times posted on the schedule would be the last possible chance you can pick, meaning If we exceed the pace you wouldn't reset the clock. If you're pretty sure you won't be around when you're pick is up send your big board to someone as close as you can get. Sched could be variable to account for high traffic daysh/hours. Create a system of pairings to utilize consensus picks, even if it means doubling up. You could still have one main person who is the head and tie breaker vote, but if they aren't around the rest of the group could submit the pick. You could have groupings at random or forced pairings. For instance if you sign up for the #1 NFC North team you also get NS3, AW2, and AE4. Likewise the guy who signs up for AE4 gets that same group. Or just encourage posters to join 3-4 teams if they desire. Make the Bears picks 100% consensus. A majority here are Bears fans and may like to have the say in the form of a poll. Ask people to post every 48 hours to affirm their activity. A simple acknowledgement you are actively checking. If you don't post the board picks for you. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Whats this about the cubs strategy fitting Prior. He's hardly pitched what, in 6-7 years? And not at all in the majors. I don't care what injury examples you can show me from this regime, thats an extreme to a whole other level, and silly to think it fits their strategy. And also has nothing to do with distancing themselves from the last FO. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

While I understand that from Cutler's standpoint that doesn't make sense from the team view. If he gets you over the hump his cost will have skyrocketed. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Cut Hester, Garza, and Davis Contract extensions for Cutler and Tillman. Sign Melton to extension. Sign Branden Albert. Look for a value signing in the interior. Ideally draft Cooper in the first. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Because he's an 18-year-old pitcher. I'd rather go for quantity over quality at that age. But with the Cubs budget allottment, can't they kind of do both? Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Is there interest in another NSBB mock draft this year? Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Its okay, Prior will never actually be managed by Dusty. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

They're too Jewish. You're thinking of Wash U. SLU getting kept out of the new Big East would suck. Screw Creighton. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Also if they do go to Navy,I'd like to see them consider dropping the red. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I like Cubbie blue over Navy. I wouldn't mind an update to the aways though. Would they go Navy on new aways, but keep the current blue on homes? That'd be weird. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I like Cubbie blue over Navy. I wouldn't mind an update to the aways though. Would they go Navy on new aways, but keep the current blue on homes? That'd be weird. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yeah, but he's a borderline player as it is. If you're Jake Long, it's just weed. If you're J'Marcus Webb, it's a potential career threatening offence. He's more established than JT Thomas who saw a career upgrade the offseason following a drug offense. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Isn't the time zone thing more about tv start times and thus ratings/revenue rather than player travel issues? Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Someone like Welker is entirely a question of distributing assets. We'll get way more getting a WR to provide half the production at a fraction if the cost and putting that money elsewhere. Eddie Royal looked great with Marshall opposite and Cutler throwing the ball. With Alshon's potential added, we don't need to aim too high in WR to get a high marginal value. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Do they have a good RT? If not they could always draft Joekel and put one at RT. But them letting Albert go has always been a decent possibility. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The Bears need at least two OL and it really doesn't matter where. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

DJ Fluker might actually be BPA when we pick so that'd be pretty ideal. And I think people need to stop trying to think of ways to get us extra picks. No players we can part with will get us significant picks and the likelyhood of the top players at 20 also filling a position of moderate need are pretty good where the idea of trading down in the name of depth will probably be silly. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Also Lane Johnson was just .01 behind him. I know it shouldn't matter for an OL prospect, but I wonder if it solidifies him as a top 15 pick. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Had to look him up. But screw OL. With that size and speed turn that man a 3-Tech DT. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I don't know. Last year was pretty exciting. Got a W and played a good game against a high profile team and #1seed in MSU. Sweet 16 this year would be... Sweet I guess. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Why are we using the hypothetical 210m as the buyout number? Isn't the value of the buyout for CSN the amount they can charge in additional ad revenue minus the 210? In the current landscape a Cubs game is worth 2M and they're currently paying about say 100k per game (or whatever the figures are) I think the buyout the network would want is closer to the 2m per game figure than the 100k. Maybe figure out what non-live sports programming is worth in ad revenue and factor that difference, but from the sounds of it, thats meaningless. What motivation do they have to give up the games at the old rate when they're set to make many times that in ad revenue by riding out the contract. That is of course assuming thebuyout isn't pre-negotiated in the deal. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

SLU is awesome you fools, jump on. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Me neither, but given the insane numbers we've seen tossed out for the Dodgers and Rangers part of me thinks that whatever it would be would be really, really worth it. But wouldn't CSN know that too, and therefore ask for the moon? I really have little understanding of how this all works. And since they own 25% of it, how does that work? Is this basically just Reinsdorf's call (since, I'm guessing, he owns 50% or so of it)? I thought each team has 20, so 40 for Reinsdorf (with Comcast having the final 20 although that article says they have about 30 so not sure.) Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Do we know if the Trib was making or losing cash in the last few years? I could imagine they were okay taking cash losses in anticipation of selling the team for a huge amount in the short term. They're value was the net worth of the team, because they could count on realizing that increased value with a sale, and thus recouping that cash loss. But as new owners with a lot of debt, cash flow is a bigger concern, and an impediment to having a high payroll. Combine that with reallocating resouces, and possibly them holding back payroll for future periods, and the comments I think can all come together without thinking Ricketts is just taking it off the top for the ownership. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk