Magnetic Curses

ku is obviously better coached, though ut is far more athletic. You serious? Because I'm not seeing in this game where that's being shown at all. Tennessee's had terrible hot/cold streaks throughout the game. If they were a bit more consistent hitting their shots then this would be a much closer game. ku shouldn't be beating ut this bad for any reason. tennessee should be able to get to the hoop on a consistent basis against this young kansas team. i should also mention that i hate tennessee and i hate their stupid headbands even more. And their stupid coach most of all? :) Not that I'm still bitter. But I am. yeah, well, that too.

ku is obviously better coached, though ut is far more athletic. You serious? Because I'm not seeing in this game where that's being shown at all. Tennessee's had terrible hot/cold streaks throughout the game. If they were a bit more consistent hitting their shots then this would be a much closer game. ku shouldn't be beating ut this bad for any reason. tennessee should be able to get to the hoop on a consistent basis against this young kansas team. i should also mention that i hate tennessee and i hate their stupid headbands even more.

ku is obviously better coached, though ut is far more athletic.

throw

What would it be that you like about him? i think his entire career he's been dying on the vine. if he got a chance to be a regular starter in the NFL, i think he'd be rich gannon. I tend to think he's been dying on the vine because he's not very good. He's never posted a better than 59 completion % (save for his first year, when he played two games) and his rating has never been better than 90.4. Granted, it's all in extremely limited playing time, but this is one area where I'll trust the "football people" (I guess that's what they're called). Though his best numbers did come last year, when he played in seven games and started four. you're talking yourself into liking him, too.

What would it be that you like about him? i think his entire career he's been dying on the vine. if he got a chance to be a regular starter in the NFL, i think he'd be rich gannon.

ya know who i like? chris redman.

kramer's still better. And he is, but that's besides the point yeah, not so much.

kramer's still better.

Just curious, but did they show a different angle of that play? Everytime I saw the replay, it was from the original angle, from which it looked like it should have been Purdue's ball. That is pretty much the same angle the broadcasters had, so they didn't really have a better view of things than anyone watching the game on TV. I'm open to the idea that it may have been the right call, but from the one view they kept showing, it certainly looked like it should have been Purdue's ball. i never saw the ball hit mccamey at all. The original angle showed Johnson throw it off his leg. The only question I had was whether it then hit Johnson again before it landed out of bounds. iirc, neither angle shows it actually hit mccamey, you just assume that it did. however, johnson's legs were all flailed out, so there's no way to be sure. even if it goes back to purdue, they were still down.

are you kidding me? this is exactly the kind of crap i'm talking about. "you guys won, but we would have if we wouldn't have beaten ourselves". ridiculous. if not for all the ticky tack fouls, the illini would have won in regulation.

Just curious, but did they show a different angle of that play? Everytime I saw the replay, it was from the original angle, from which it looked like it should have been Purdue's ball. That is pretty much the same angle the broadcasters had, so they didn't really have a better view of things than anyone watching the game on TV. I'm open to the idea that it may have been the right call, but from the one view they kept showing, it certainly looked like it should have been Purdue's ball. i never saw the ball hit mccamey at all.

Thank you. If you go to Mackey you can probably say that to them in person because they are likely shooting free throws right now. yeah, because the refs are still calling fouls on the illini. The game was called fairly. not really. Eh, there were some questionable calls both ways. The only really bad call was the foul at the end of regulation on Davis. Typical B10 game other than that. i was just making a comment on how many more free throws purdue shot than the illini. the fouls looked even at the end because of the 7 fouls purdue had in the ot period. plus, purdue didn't lose the game, they were beaten. Just because one team shoots 10-15 more free throws doesn't mean the reffing was bad. Watch the game with open eyes and you will see the game was reffed well. Purdue shot more free throws because they had their guards driving a lot and JaJuan was getting great position. Ilinois was getting open jump shots from 10-15 feet out all game. Those are great scoring opportunities but you won't get a lot of free throws with jump shots. you should take your own advice, your one of the biggest homers here. purdue would get the ball on the block and get the foul every time, regardless of if they were touched or not. tisdale gets pushed and his hand gets tangled up in someone's baggy jersey and he gets called for a foul for grabbing. the free throws really speak for themselves. i think they just called another foul on tisdale, really. it's awesome though, if someone disagrees with you, that's generally your only response. just because no one agrees with you doesn't mean they aren't "looking at it with open eyes". I'll say the foul on Tisdale that Kramer got hurt wasn't a foul and just a smart move by Kramer, but the Foul underneath he was grabbing his jersey to try to stop him from getting the board it was totally and foul. A lot of players get away with that down low and it's just matters if you get caught and he did...Believe me Purdue had the same type of game with the differential in FT against Oklahoma though it's frustrating, but when your shooting jump shots the whole game your not gonna get to line as much. it wasn't really frustrating for me, though. the illini won, so i can't complain all too much. i CAN complain about folks talking about how the illini didn't win the game, but that purdue simply lost it.

Thank you. If you go to Mackey you can probably say that to them in person because they are likely shooting free throws right now. yeah, because the refs are still calling fouls on the illini. The game was called fairly. not really. Eh, there were some questionable calls both ways. The only really bad call was the foul at the end of regulation on Davis. Typical B10 game other than that. i was just making a comment on how many more free throws purdue shot than the illini. the fouls looked even at the end because of the 7 fouls purdue had in the ot period. plus, purdue didn't lose the game, they were beaten. Just because one team shoots 10-15 more free throws doesn't mean the reffing was bad. Watch the game with open eyes and you will see the game was reffed well. Purdue shot more free throws because they had their guards driving a lot and JaJuan was getting great position. Ilinois was getting open jump shots from 10-15 feet out all game. Those are great scoring opportunities but you won't get a lot of free throws with jump shots. See the game Purdue played against Oklahoma...We shot like 7 free throws all game and they shot over 30....But Good game only questionable call in my book, but maybe I couldn't see it well from the angle they showd...What happened on the play where it went out of bounce and Johnson threw the ball off of McCamey's leg? Did it hit the line first? Why'd the ref make the call so quickly it looked like it bounced off his leg?.....Regardless though good game and impressive win by you guys they showed the replay and it was the correct call, the announcers gushed about the call for like 5 minutes.

Thank you. If you go to Mackey you can probably say that to them in person because they are likely shooting free throws right now. yeah, because the refs are still calling fouls on the illini. The game was called fairly. not really. Eh, there were some questionable calls both ways. The only really bad call was the foul at the end of regulation on Davis. Typical B10 game other than that. i was just making a comment on how many more free throws purdue shot than the illini. the fouls looked even at the end because of the 7 fouls purdue had in the ot period. plus, purdue didn't lose the game, they were beaten. Just because one team shoots 10-15 more free throws doesn't mean the reffing was bad. Watch the game with open eyes and you will see the game was reffed well. Purdue shot more free throws because they had their guards driving a lot and JaJuan was getting great position. Ilinois was getting open jump shots from 10-15 feet out all game. Those are great scoring opportunities but you won't get a lot of free throws with jump shots. you should take your own advice, your one of the biggest homers here. purdue would get the ball on the block and get the foul every time, regardless of if they were touched or not. tisdale gets pushed and his hand gets tangled up in someone's baggy jersey and he gets called for a foul for grabbing. the free throws really speak for themselves. i think they just called another foul on tisdale, really. it's awesome though, if someone disagrees with you, that's generally your only response. just because no one agrees with you doesn't mean they aren't "looking at it with open eyes".

Thank you. If you go to Mackey you can probably say that to them in person because they are likely shooting free throws right now. yeah, because the refs are still calling fouls on the illini. The game was called fairly. not really. Eh, there were some questionable calls both ways. The only really bad call was the foul at the end of regulation on Davis. Typical B10 game other than that. i was just making a comment on how many more free throws purdue shot than the illini. the fouls looked even at the end because of the 7 fouls purdue had in the ot period. plus, purdue didn't lose the game, they were beaten.

Thank you. If you go to Mackey you can probably say that to them in person because they are likely shooting free throws right now. yeah, because the refs are still calling fouls on the illini. The game was called fairly. not really.

chet's line: 1-3 fg 7 boards, 7 assists, 1 turnover, 0 fouls, 41 minutes. nicely done.

Thank you. If you go to Mackey you can probably say that to them in person because they are likely shooting free throws right now. yeah, because the refs are still calling fouls on the illini.

chase and cj stand so far behind center that it feels like a pass.

No, not true. Relying on turnovers in this scheme is simply relying on athletes making things happen. It is essentially playing for luck. It is not outscheming or outcoaching the opposition. that's not luck, that's a personnel-contingent defense. the bears are good at what they do, and that's getting turnovers by stripping the ball, i just wish they were better at rushing the passer. however, with aging personnel, lovie's going to see diminished returns in the turnover department.

please. i've had my disagreements with him on plenty of accassions, but goony is not a meatball.

lovie's not going anywhere, and i don't think canning babich will do much of anything. the line couldn't get pressure and with our aging second and third-level personnel, that means disaster. we need a couple players up front who can get around or through a fat boy.

pretty much agree with all of this. as i've said before, we need a pass rusher first and foremost, the best available either through free agency or with our draft selection. generally the bears do not make big free agent acquisitions, and when they have in the past, it's moose. i hope angelo isn't dumb enough to waste cap space on housh when there are guys out there that can improve the core of this team and not just polish the brass on the titanic. what about haynesworth? he instantly makes the front four formidable, and could free up our existing ends to rush the passer as well as getting it himself, he makes the line better and would definitely make tommie harris better. if we signed him, there would be no need to upgrade the line in any other area. this would also allow us to draft a player like maclin, a plug-and-play #1 receiver. there's always terrell suggs but he's a 3-4 end, a gimmick end, and he's played for coaches with a little more imaginations than ours. that said, we need to upgrade the o-line and simply having chris williams step in for jsc isn't gonna do it. i don't know if drafting another tackle in the first 3 rounds and then shifting tait to guard would help, but i don't think it could hurt too bad, considering how bad tait has gotten at preventing a speed rusher from sprinting around him and blowing up orton. we could possibly compete next year with the players we have if we make the right moves.

what about albert haynesworth, whom the titans cannot franchise? he would take pressure off of the ends, and allow more of an outside pass rush. plus, maybe harris could return to form beside a guy like that.