soccer10k

Defensive end. He'd kill QBs. And his sack dance would be crazy. great now I'm sad we'll never get to see the Big Z sack dance, you're right it would be incredible I'd bring back the Farns just to see him spear a few more suckers right in the gut with a ferocious charge. I was just going to suggest that. If Briggs leaves the Bears should look into bringing Farnsworth in for the OLB job.

And look what happens when they finally decide to do that, a goal. Amazing how that works isn't it.

Lucky goal for the US. First, the foul on Denmark was probably outside the box and then the keeper got a hand on Donovan's PK and should have saved it. Either way, it's 1-1.

Usually. I don't know the specific rules for this match but typically substitution rules are pretty relaxed in an int'l friendly. Also, somewhat awkward having Bruce Arena broadcasting the match. Oh yeah. Didn't Wynalda rip into Arena during/after the World Cup as well or am I thinking of somebody else?

A guy I played soccer with, Heath Pearce, is on the roster. Are they allowed more subs in a friendly match than the 3 like in the World Cup, Champion's League, etc.?

Hendry has to give Z what he wants and he should.

Such a great play.

I still think Mike Martz is going to end up being their new head coach.

Excellent, thanks for the info.

In the thread in Transactions, Raisin said he was the best pitching prospect in the Cubs system now. He excluded at least Guzman and I would assume Hill as well.

Can a mod combine this thread and the one in Transactions?

#1 (not counting Guzman). Higher ceiling than Veal. If that's true it will make it so much easier to root for a former Notre Dame guy.

Who would have a better chance to beat the Saints on Sunday, the Bears or Mini-Ditka?

Damn, he'd look good in a Cardinals uniform, wouldn't he ??? Based on the Cardinals history of acquiring a player and watching him, all of a sudden, reach levels he had never previously reached in his career up to that point, I will have to respectfully disagree with you.

I don't get the whole "Saints are a hot team in the playoffs." They went 3-3 in their final 6 games (The Bears went 4-2 over the same period). And after their Bye Week, the Saints went something like 5-5. And they beat the Eagles by the same score the Bears beat the Seahawks, and yet the Saints "are hot", and the Bears are "playing inconsistant." I just don't understand the double standard. The Saints, IMO, are playing more inconsistantly then the Bears. And if it wasn't for Bush/McCallisters, the Saints would have NO OFFENSE, whatsoever. Atleast with the Bears, they can match up the 2 RBs against the Saints two, not to mention the Bears have a couple of WR who are playing well (Berriand and Davis) and they should be favorites. But when the Bears win Sunday, the NFL, and America will be disappointed. Ok, I understand the beef about the Saints being the hot team and America's darlings. I get that and believe me, I'm tired of it as well because it get so annoyingly repetitive after a while. But don't let that cloud your judgement. The statement "if it wasn't for Bush/McCallisters (sic), the Saints would have NO OFFENSE, whatsoever" is flat out wrong. You have heard of Drew Brees right? You know, the guy who threw for 4418 yards this year? Also, if you look at straight rushing ability, then yes, the Bears are probably a bit better. But Bush provides exceptional receiving ability as a running back and that can't be discounted. Factoring in that, I would take the Saints' running backs over Chicago's any day.

I love the blue jerseys. As far as I'm concerned its 1. Blues 2. Pinstripes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1314350974260. Those hideous gray road uni's. Werd. If they could put the gray ones through a bit of a redesign I might like them more. However it's not all that likely. I just think gray is a terrible, terrible uniform color. Agreed as well. I have two Cubs jerseys, one pinstripe and one blue and love both of them. I don't prefer one over the other. But I can't stand seeing the gray uniforms and would never even think about buying a gray uniform for myself or even asking for one as a gift.

I'm rooting for New Orleans for 2 reasons. 1. I picked them to reach the Super Bowl (though I think they're going to win anyway) and I have to stick with my picks. 2. My dad is a Bears fan and it would be insufferable to have him celebrate a Super Bowl title (although not as bad as if the Dodgers won the World Series). Now before you Bears fans suggest I should root for the Bears and be happy for my dad if they won, let me just say one thing: He pulled for the Marlins in 2003. He didn't laugh when the Cubs lost but he wasn't the least bit sympathetic. ETA: Although I am starting to sort of question my pick of the Saints considering all of the so called NFL experts are picking them to win. I never like it in the playoffs when there isn't a big difference between the two teams but all of the "experts" are picking one of the teams. Not a good sign. Frankly, I trust the Vegas oddsmakers way, WAY more than most of the analysts on TV or online. Vegas has the game essentially as a pick em (Bears favored by 3 but they're playing at home).

5 of 7 CNNsi writers pick New Orleans. Here's to Don Banks keeping his perfect record intact. Although if he does pick one wrong I hope it's the Bears game.

I'm sure that Mavericks fans can sympathize with you on the insane Dwayne Wade foul call.

This thread is going to be longer before the game even starts than virtually all of the Cubs full game threads this year.

I saw this post about 10 minutes too late. Fortunately I made up for it by picking the under 82 on total points in the second half. They only combined for 75 points in the first half but only 57 in the second.

Oh god.. remember "Cubs 2003 NLCS Champions" sweatshirts? Or the Boston Red Sox painting the World Series logo at Fenway Park before Game 7 against the Yankees in 2003.

I know it's inevitable that it'll happen, but I don't like when the pollsters put a team higher just because of their schedule for next season. What does that have to do with how good the team actually is? That logic got West Virginia starting off in the top 5 last year which IMO was very suspect at the time. I'm willing to bet their high ranking to start the year was due more to WVU beating Georgia in the bowl game and returning Slaton and White.

Pretty funny what one guy coming back can do. ESPN listed Louisville as 25th for 2007, but that's when they assumed Brohm was leaving. I understand that two different guys are making these polls, but that's a pretty drastic difference (4th and 25th) There is a lot of uncertainty around Louisville. Brohm coming back is huge and we won't know how big of a blow Petrino leaving for the NFL will be until the season starts. With Brohm Louisville will have the potential to be good but I'm don't think they'll be better than WVU and might not be better than Rutgers. It all depends on how they adapt to the new offensive strategy Kragthorpe brings in. Speaking of West Virginia, I don't see how you can put them outside of the top 10 and could make a serious argument for top 5. With Slaton and White coming back, when the season starts I think they'll get a lot of talk about contending for a National Title.