soccer10k

I agree completely. If Rutgers runs the table they should absolutely be in the National Title game for the exact reason you stated.

It's like the stupid preseason polls during the season. I'm not saying the Big East is the best but it's just as good as any major conference. I was listening to Mike and Mike and they were saying since Miami and the others left everyone assumes the conference is weak and they just brush it off. It's like we have to wait for 4 to 5 years for them to prove they belong while IMO they already have. This conference has 2 losing teams out of 8 or 75% of the teams in it. No other conference can say that. I think almost everyone else on this board would disagree with this. The Big East is the most underrated of the six major conferences. They're definitely better than the ACC and they're likely better than the Big 12. That puts them 4th out of 6 at the worst.

As per Cot's - adding 2007 option ($7.5M player, $14M club) - $5.5M 2007 player option ($3M buyout) (increases by $1M each for 180, 190 & 200 IP in 2006) - $12M 2007 club option ($3M buyout) (increases by $2M with 180 IP in 2006) - performance bonuses may increase 2007 salary to $14M Based on that I would think that both the Mets and Glavine have options for 2007 but not for 2008.

I think that depends on how badly the OSU/UM loser actually loses. If Louisville ends up undefeated, I think they'll end up in the National Title game. Rutgers? I'm not so sure but this will be moot when Louisville beats Rutgers next week.

ESPN.com poll: Should an unbeaten Big East team play in the BCS Championship Game? Right now 58% say yes and 42% say no. The states in which a majority of the people said no are Texas, Louisiana, Arkansas, Alabama, Mississippi, Georgia, Tennessee, Indiana, Michigan and Ohio is split 50-50. Hmm, I wonder why? For the record, my vote is yes. And I do realize that includes Rutgers.

Louisville should move up to #3 in next week's BCS standings.

Too bad Steve Slaton can't play defense.

It's turning out to be exactly what people thought it would be. The 17 point lead might be a little bigger than expected, but each team's offense hasn't disappointed one bit.

WVU marches right back down the field - with Steve Slaton - for a TD. WVU goes for two but couldn't take advantage of UL only having 10 men on the field as they fumble the snap. 37-27 Louisville.

Punt return for a touchdown for Louisville and it's now 30-14. On the replay, horrible punt. The WVU coverage was all on one side of the field and the punt went to the other side of the field. The returner only had to beat one, maybe two players for the TD.

3 turnovers in the first 3 minutes of the 2nd half, 2 by WVU and 1 by Louisville. Should be 23-14 Louisville following the review.

I like Louisville's all black uniforms and the blackout the fans are doing.

Predictions anyone? I'll take Louisville 38-31.

Pass on Sarge Jr.

I was considering making a "no" argument because he seemed like a similar player to Palmeiro - very good but not great. But then I looked up their stats and Bagwell's line (.408/.540/.948) trumps Palmeiro's (.371/.515/.886). Yes Bagwell is a HOFer.

Louisville-WVU tonight.

Did anybody else watch the Arsenal game today? I swear based on the number of great chances Arsenal failed to capitalize on that the match was fixed. It was almost like they were trying not to score.

Week 8: vance: 6-8 Mark: - ndistops: 5-9 soccer: 6-8 Ryan: - Truffle: 6-8 UMfan: 4-10 rawaction:- ChiCubsFan:- Overall: vance: 53-56 Mark: 31-39 ndistops: 53-56 soccer: 54-55 Ryan: 27-27 Truffle: 29-23 UMfan: 25-52 rawaction: 23-26 ChiCubsFan: 25-26 Note: There have been 5 ties overall (2 in Week 3, 2 in Week 5, 1 in Week 7)

We are the Cubs. So that means we get neither.

Just to play devil's advocate, you don't know how DLee would have performed if ARam broke his wrist and had to miss the same time that DLee did. And frankly losing either of those two players this year would have been a HUGE blow since the rest of the team wasn't very good. ARam can only control the hitting aspect. ARam wasn't responsible for the Cubs having the 24th best ERA in the year or for the Cubs giving up the fifth most runs in the league. Nobody was producing, that includes pitchers as well, early in the year when DLee went down.

Wouldn't hurt to inquire. Re-sign ARam, put Soriano in CF, Young at SS, and all of a sudden your offense looks a whole lot better. Then you go after the pitching problems. IIRC, his natural position is 2B so we could put him there also. His production would be very nice at either position though. No he is a SS and not to bad a glove guy that can hit a little bit. He switched to 2B when the Rangers picked up ARod. Before that he was the Rangers SS of the future and pretty well thought of by the BA folks. That's right. I knew he switched between the two but couldn't remember which was his natural position. Thanks for the correction.

Yeah, I'm guessing he just really wanted to stay there. It was a team option so Dye didn't have a choice.

I don't really care if a pitcher has all the confidence in the world if he doesn't have the talent. I don't believe Jeff Weaver has talent and I don't want him in a Cubs uniform ever. You can go ahead and like players based on the amount of confidence you perceive them to have but I'm going to stick to the stats to tell me which players I want to sign. You also must factor in that, because of the 2006 postseason, Weaver is likely to command much more money than what he is actually worth.

Not if we could get Bonds for a reasonable price. I like Murton as much as anyone. I was one of his fans when he was plying his trade in AA. Djaxxfan can attest to that. However, Bonds had an OBP over 400 last year. His OPS was over 1000. If you can get that for the middle of the order, Murton can be a cheap bench/platoon option for one year. Replace Murton with Carlos Lee? No. Barry Bonds? Hell yeah! Sorry to nitpick but Bonds' OPS was .999 last year. It was the first time since 1991 that his OPS was under 1.000. But I understand your point.

Time to grow up. You're sounding like an immature high school student. Someone who you just want to punch in the face. I thought CubsBullsBears got banned already. Apparently not. I dont know what I did to be even considered to be banned? Someone has been pushing my buttons over something really stupid. Maybe if that source would stop, I would stop. He is the one bringing up the Weaver thing in seemingly every thread now. Because you are saying you want to punch Vance in the face. Well, I just find it annoying that he would continue to bring up the whole Weaver subject. Its over with. Just drop it. When somebody (and by somebody I mean you) is so obviously wrong and yet refuses to admit they are wrong, it is hard to drop. Either way, you don't say you want to punch another poster. How was I wrong? I am just asking you. I am not trying to push this subject any further. All I said was Weaver was a better pitcher in the post-season than Verlander was, and I would have taken Weaver over Verlander in the playoffs. The way Verlander was pitching in the playoffs, I would have taken alot of other guys over him too. It was just my opinion. I dont see how I could be wrong if that's my judgement. You were right in that aspect but anybody could have looked at the stats before Game 5 and seen that Jeff Weaver had pitched better than Justin Verlander in the 2006 postseason. That's not the issue that people, including myself, have taken exception to. It's the fact that going into the postseason, nobody would have taken Jeff Weaver over Justin Verlander. Nobody. Jeff Weaver sucked this year and was even DFA because of it. He also had no success in the postseason before 2006 (not that 8.1 innings is a good barometer anyway). So there is no evidence out there to show that Jeff Weaver was going to pitch well this postseason. Then you went and said that because of his success in the 2006 postseason, you said that he is a good pitcher which is absolutely ludicrous and wrong. Five postseason starts do not make or break a pitcher. It's called sample size and is basic statistics. He's made 240 starts in his career and has a career ERA+ of 96 which is bad. Three out of the last 4 years he's had an ERA+ under 100, which means he is worse than the league average. His WHIP this year was 1.51. The guy is, flat out, not a good pitcher. And that is what you don't seem to be able to grasp.