soccer10k

I did hear on ESPNews earlier today that the Seibu Lions would meet Friday to determine whether they would accept the high bid. I guess its Friday there now, right? Yes Maybe an announcement will come at noon their time (pure speculation on my part) Which would be 9PM central time. After drive time, that would give me approximately 4 hours and 45 minutes of time to either celebrate or drown my sorrows... Works for me. If you lived on the West Coast you would have 2 extra hours.

That was big. Pick by Rutgers and a TD on the first play following the INT.

no way. It is somewhat obvious that it is a "db" There are still people who are just first realizing that the ball and glove logo has an mb in it. You guys just blew my mind :shock: . I had NEVER noticed that. OMG I never realized that. :!: Chalk me up as one who didn't know about the Brewers hat.

Impressive drive by Louisville. 7-0.

Did you learn this from OleMissCub?

In Premium or Regular?

Exactly what I wanted to hear.

That was the thing with an undefeated Utah playing Pittsburgh in the Fiesta Bowl a couple years back. If Utah won, which they did, then it was because they were playing a team that wasn't very good (Pitt had 3 losses coming in and, as a note, this isn't a shot against the Big East). If Utah lost, then they obviously weren't that good. I really wanted Utah to play Auburn that year.

Yeah, I know. But I just couldn't help myself. I edited it out though.

They aren't bad. Nothing special but not horrendous.

Is it really that hard to grasp that Lee's numbers at Wrigley and the reason he likes hitting there is due to crappy Cub pitching and that if he came to play for the Cubs he wouldn't get to face that crappy Cub pitching when he plays in Wrigley? Then explain Moises Alou? Before Alou signed with the Cubs a few yrs ago, Alou had a career BA at Wrigley near the mendoza line. Maybe it's the "crappy pitching", but there are more variable of hitting at a certain park. Maybe as a hitter, he is really comfortable seeing the ball, etc, etc, etc. So I doubt the "crappy pitching" is the only reason why he seems to kill the Cubs. Obviously it's not the only reason but I think a team's pitching staff is a bigger thing than the park he's playing in.

I would probably immediately start worrying about whether the guy will truly live up to his billing. I would start a pool on how long it will be before he goes on the DL.

I'll wait to pass judgement until I hear how much Miller will be paid.

Lets hope. nope. i bet the angles offer at least 7/90. Why would he take less money?

Is it really that hard to grasp that Lee's numbers at Wrigley and the reason he likes hitting there is due to crappy Cub pitching and that if he came to play for the Cubs he wouldn't get to face that crappy Cub pitching when he plays in Wrigley?

If Hendry passes on 5/75 for ARam, he can go fornicate himself.

I'm gonna go out on a limb and say the Yankees won.

Hopefully we'll see a good game tonight. And by good, I mean Louisville wins.

Brees.

I knew I should have included the words "in the playoffs".

Just because USC beat them in Week 1? You're arguing that Arkansas going undefeated in the SEC doesn't deserve to be ranked above a USC team that lost to an unranked Oregon St. ? Every game matters. If two major conference teams both have one loss and Team A beat Team B, then why shouldn't Team A be ranked ahead? strength of schedule, conference record, when the game was, etc., etc., etc. Doesn't matter. Team A beats Team B. Do you remember the 2000 National Championship game between Oklahoma and Florida State? Well Miami handed Florida State their only loss that year but because it was early in the year and Miami lost later in the year, Florida State was incorrectly ranked higher in the polls. Miami should have played Oklahoma that year. USC should be ranked ahead of Arkansas if they both have the same number of losses. I don't really understand how there could be a better factor for which team is ranked higher under the circumstances (both with one loss) than the head to head result. In your 2000 thought process, you missed one thing. Florida State did lose to 11-1 Miami, but Miami lost to 11-1 Washington. Washington under that logic should have played for the national title, not Miami. But then they lost to Oregon... we could go on and on with this. There really is no way to solve it without guessing which was the best team at the end of the year. Ok, sorry. Bad example. But in 2006, USC beat Arkansas. USC lost to Oregon State, a team which more than one loss, so Oregon State is out of the equation. If USC and Arkansas both finish with one loss, you have to rank USC ahead of Arkansas because they defeated them. There is no string of teams like in 2000. It's plain and simple.

Just because USC beat them in Week 1? You're arguing that Arkansas going undefeated in the SEC doesn't deserve to be ranked above a USC team that lost to an unranked Oregon St. ? Every game matters. If two major conference teams both have one loss and Team A beat Team B, then why shouldn't Team A be ranked ahead? strength of schedule, conference record, when the game was, etc., etc., etc. Doesn't matter. Team A beats Team B. Do you remember the 2000 National Championship game between Oklahoma and Florida State? Well Miami handed Florida State their only loss that year but because it was early in the year and Miami lost later in the year, Florida State was incorrectly ranked higher in the polls. Miami should have played Oklahoma that year. USC should be ranked ahead of Arkansas if they both have the same number of losses. I don't really understand how there could be a better factor for which team is ranked higher under the circumstances (both with one loss) than the head to head result.

Just because USC beat them in Week 1? You're arguing that Arkansas going undefeated in the SEC doesn't deserve to be ranked above a USC team that lost to an unranked Oregon St. ? Every game matters. If two major conference teams both have one loss and Team A beat Team B, then why shouldn't Team A be ranked ahead?

Lame. It's the truth. Maybe if the Cubs actually had a realistic shot of contending next year I would me more excited about what offseason moves they make.