soccer10k

Longest game thread since June 2 (1381 posts). Wow to that and the game tonight.

For me, it's all about Saturday's during the fall. Don't get me wrong, I enjoy the NFL. But I like college football a bit more.

I could maybe see him sitting Jones a couple games but Pierre has played every single game this year. Baker won't sit Pierre to play Pie..

Cantu and his .301 OBP this year (.313 career) can stay out of a Cubs uniform.

Cubs won't get involved if that's the price tag. Wow. That's $20 mil per year for 5 years if you divide up to cost for his rights over the duration of the contract. Yeah, no way he's coming to Chicago. Have fun in New York Daisuke.

He'll be 34 before next year and has a $7 mil club option with a $0.5 mil buyout for 2007. Assuming the Padres buy out his contract, I would only offer a 2 year deal at most for around $3-4 mil per year. If he wants a longer deal then let him go somewhere else.

I don't have the source that cheapseats is talking about but it has been mentioned on the board before and I believe is a BP study.

I try to control my optimism for the Cubs because each year I end up disappointed.

I like both the pinstriped home uniforms as well as the blue alternate uniforms. I also like having the names on the back. The grey uniforms shouldn't be used and I'm indifferent on the BP blue uniforms.

Not even the last few weeks, the VERY last week. They led the Wild Card race with one week remaining in the season. The downfall started with Victor Diaz's home run on September 25. The Cubs finished the year 2-7. Finishing 5-4 would have tied them with Houston for the Wild Card.

Congrats Fred!!

The Cubs need to give Marmol some time to develop. He is only 23 and at times has shown the ability to become a solid big league pitcher. Let him try to fix his control problems before jumping all over him. Also, don't forget that Carlos Zambrano has been walking a ton of people this year but he is still a very good pitcher. Don't get me wrong, Marmol still needs to cut down on his walks but if you have great stuff, you can make up for that.

Only a matter of time til Cutler beats out the horrible, Jake Plummer. 34-11 in 3 years with a 90% Passer Rating sure is horrible huh. What does a 90% passer rating mean? I've honestly heard of or seen that stat before. 34-11 just means he's had good teams. Kyle Orton was what? 11-3? the addition of the % was a goof on my part, but if you're questiniong the actual term passer rating http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Passer_rating You can't be considered horrible when you lead your team to 3 straight playoffs, regardless of the result in sed playoffs. Of course. The reason the Broncos have made the playoffs 3 straight years couldn't be due to the fact that they have averaged the 2nd, 4th, and 2nd most rushing yards per game in 2003-2005 could it? but are you still trying to push plummer = horrible because you should know that with someone like kordell stewart under center, they would not have made any playoff berths. Plummer is a decent, and at best above average QB at the moment., and he looks to improve for the 4th straight time under shannahan. Kordell Stewart is the definition of a horrible quarterback. Plummer is an average QB but all he has to do is play within the system and limit his mistakes for that team to be successful because they like to run the ball.

Derrek Lee being out since April 19 is the real cost of not getting Furcal.

How can you be maligned when you make the final four?

Only a matter of time til Cutler beats out the horrible, Jake Plummer. 34-11 in 3 years with a 90% Passer Rating sure is horrible huh. What does a 90% passer rating mean? I've honestly heard of or seen that stat before. 34-11 just means he's had good teams. Kyle Orton was what? 11-3? the addition of the % was a goof on my part, but if you're questiniong the actual term passer rating http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Passer_rating You can't be considered horrible when you lead your team to 3 straight playoffs, regardless of the result in sed playoffs. Of course. The reason the Broncos have made the playoffs 3 straight years couldn't be due to the fact that they have averaged the 2nd, 4th, and 2nd most rushing yards per game in 2003-2005 could it?

I was close with my prediction for Z on the mound. I would like to apologize to Z for thinking he would actually give up a run.

Marmol needs to cut down on his walks period before he can be an effective major league pitcher where that is as a starter or a reliever/closer.

Thank you Buster Olney for pointing out what a lot of people here having been saying the whole year.

Anyone they hire will be welcomed by the fanbase. The Cubs have floundered with 2 big names: Don Baylor (who was highly thought of at the time) and Dusty Baker. The marketing will be young team, young manager. Agreed. Obviously there are some people that aren't going to be a fan of whoever the Cubs hire. Also, that person is coming into a decent situation because the Cubs have been so bad this year so any decent improvement and show of looking to the future will be welcomed.

Happy birthday 4-3.

8 IP, 5 H, 1 R for Z tonight and he goes 2-3 with a HR at the plate.

There is almost no reason at all for a team that loses a Heisman finalist to be ranked in the top 5. Maybe they will be fine, but it's ludicrous to put them that high. Hell, USC lost TWO Heisman winners and are ranked 3rd. Just because a team loses a Heisman trophy winner or finalist doesn't mean they shouldn't be ranked high in the polls the next year. USC lost Carson Palmer going into the 2003 season and ended up winning a share of the National Title. Last year USC returned both Reggie Bush and Matt Leinart but their downfall was their defense. Oh, I don't disagree that teams can turn out to be just as good without their Heisman finalist/winner. I just don't believe that you can assume that said team will be just as good by ranking them so high. I'll probably be saying this again next season when ND is ranked way too high in the preseason polls. I think another part of it is the fact that there aren't any clear cut favorites to make the national championship game this year like USC in the past couple years, Texas last year, Oklahoma a couple years ago, etc. All of the potential contenders have serious question marks. Ohio State is replacing 9 defensive starters. Texas is replacing Vince Young. USC with Leinart/Bush/White. Notre Dame's defense. Oklahoma was replacing a big portion of their offense and have now lost Bomar. The SEC teams all seem to beat up on each other and none of them stand out. West Virginia plays in a weak conference and should be cautious because Louisville was expected to roll through the Big East last year. I actually don't have a problem with the rankings at all and I don't think anybody was ranked more than a spot or two higher or lower than they should have been.

While ND is the specific example used in this thread, I wouldn't say this is "separate thread"-ish. I think examining where traditional powers are helped out by polls and nontraditional powers are hurt is a valid discussion on all counts. True, but you guys who have huge wood about the upcoming season can barely keep it in your pants now. Just think what's going to happen once the season starts. I think a separate ND thread is a very good idea. Notre Dame fans have a right to be excited. They're return 16 starters and have a quarterback that is a favorite to win the Heisman Trophy. If their defense (where they return 9 starters which is very important) improves a bit, they are going to be tough to stop. That is the question mark and I like their chances going into year 2 of the Charlie Weis era. I don't blame Notre Dame fans for being excited about the upcoming year. Wow. I can't believe I just defended Notre Dame and their fans. I must be in the Bizarro World right now.

There is almost no reason at all for a team that loses a Heisman finalist to be ranked in the top 5. Maybe they will be fine, but it's ludicrous to put them that high. Hell, USC lost TWO Heisman winners and are ranked 3rd. Just because a team loses a Heisman trophy winner or finalist doesn't mean they shouldn't be ranked high in the polls the next year. USC lost Carson Palmer going into the 2003 season and ended up winning a share of the National Title. Last year USC returned both Reggie Bush and Matt Leinart but their downfall was their defense. The thing that should matter when it comes to Texas losing Vince Young is the fact that the team's offense will be radically different this year without him as quarterback. Young had so much leeway in the offense and was able to do things that few other quarterbacks can do. Texas will have to get rid of a good number of offensive plays (re: virtually every play that involved Vince Young running the ball or given the option of running) because the new quarterback can't do what Vince did. It's much more likely that USC will be able to have another quarterback step in to replace Leinart without missing a beat (much like Leinart replacing Palmer) than Texas replacing Young without missing a beat. Another thing that favored Texas, and favors them even more now, is the Big 12 not being a great conference. With Bomar out, I expect Texas to run the gauntlet and finish at least 11-1 going into the Big 12 title game. The winner of the Texas-Ohio State game will be an easy pick to make the National Title game.