vance_the_cubs_fan

I'm not a ND fan, and I'll say I have no problem with them trying to score as much as possible. During the LSU game, I got pissed when Arizona got the field goal on 2nd and 3rd teamers on defense. When they got on LSU's side of the fifty I was screaming for Miles to put the first team defense back in. My only issue is that I don't think ND has any entitlement to the second spot in the polls. I won't be upset if they get that spot, but it could just as easily belong to a handful of teams.

It's not going to make that big of a difference. The players you have make the lion's share of difference, not the manager. Batting order is largely inconsequential anyway. The GM, ownership, and talent acquisition departments judge the worthiness of an offensive player, not the manager. I doubt Dusty cost us 5 games this season. I may be wrong, but it appears, that at least with Dusty, Hendry gives his manager some input with roster moves and decisions. If so, I think Dierker would have a greater input than we might imagine on face value. Have you heard Hendry and our scouting department on the value of bunting, stolen bases, and walks? Dierker would be talking to a brick wall. They all think they know more than he does about baseball. After all, all you have to do is watch the game and you'd know that sabermetrics garbage is for fantasy geeks. (heavy sarcasm) 1) Dierker will never be hired by the Cubs. 2) If Dierker was hired, no one in the baseball operations department would pay attention to him. It's going to take a change of upper management, including Hendry and MacPhail for there to be any serious impact on this organization. I agree that Dierker likely would never be hired. That difference in philosophy is why I want Hendry gone. On the other hand, Dierker has had success as a manager and is a former player. That could help him in Hendry's eyes. I don't think Dierker will get hired, but I highly think he should be hired. Until a manager replacement is named, I'll keep making that point and touting my reasons for it.

It's not going to make that big of a difference. The players you have make the lion's share of difference, not the manager. Batting order is largely inconsequential anyway. The GM, ownership, and talent acquisition departments judge the worthiness of an offensive player, not the manager. I doubt Dusty cost us 5 games this season. I may be wrong, but it appears, that at least with Dusty, Hendry gives his manager some input with roster moves and decisions. If so, I think Dierker would have a greater input than we might imagine on face value.

OSU gets a huge win. That loss could be very costly for Texas. How far should Texas fall? I'd rank a number of unbeatens ahead of them now. I'd probably drop them to 8 or 9.

I'm looking forward to the LSU-Auburn game next weekend. That's going to be one hellova game. I'm hoping LSU can pull off the tough win on the road, but either way, I'm expecting a good game.

I'm thinking it would be nice to have a manager who can utilize a run expectancy chart and have some idea on how to judge a valuable offensive player.

Notre Dame dropped two spots because they very nearly lost that game, not because the margin of victory was small. If they'd been in control of the game most of the way and won by a TD, that would've been different. That is crap and you know it. Notre Dame controlled the entire second half especially on defense, but since they didn't score enough, the pollsters dropped them. And they should correct that by moving them back up to 2 after this one. Why does ND deserve the 2nd spot over other unbeaten teams like Auburn for example? They don't necessarily, but I have a hard time telling you that Auburn, who has played nobody, should be ranked 2nd over ND, who has played a good ACC team on the road, and absolutely plastered a good Big Ten team at home. Auburn plastered a conference opponent. The fact is, the polls are bogus at this point. It's too early to tell how good these opponents are. Who's to say Penn State is good. Their win was against Akron. Does that one win make them a quality opponent? The truth is that Notre Dame has done nothing to prove they are any better than Auburn, LSU, Flordia, West Virgina and some others. Neither of those teams have done anything to mark them better or worse than the other. I know polls are a necessary evil, and it's part of why I have trouble getting into college football as much as I do the pros, but you're acting as if ND has some "right" to that second spot and if someone else is in it, it's a slap to ND. If so, it could also be a slap to all the teams listed above. Each of those has just as much right to that spot as ND.

Dierker wouldn't solve all our problems, but we'd be better off with him than without him.

Notre Dame dropped two spots because they very nearly lost that game, not because the margin of victory was small. If they'd been in control of the game most of the way and won by a TD, that would've been different. That is crap and you know it. Notre Dame controlled the entire second half especially on defense, but since they didn't score enough, the pollsters dropped them. And they should correct that by moving them back up to 2 after this one. Why does ND deserve the 2nd spot over other unbeaten teams like Auburn for example?

That's not a bad game for McNeal. He's a good kid. He played HS QB but was converted to WR at ULM.

You only beat ULM by 2! That's not good. BTW, how did Cardia Jackson do for ULM? I taught him as an 8th grader. Shockingly, the game wasn't televised here in Chicago, :wink: so I'm going off the box score. I don't see his name. Offense or Defense? As for it being not good...well, at KU, a football win is a football win. But no, that's probably not a good augury for the rest of this season. Still, we're young, and hopefully we'll get better. He's a freshman linebacker. Do you see a McNeal in the box on offense?

A friend of mine spent the summer performing in a theater in Wytheville. She's back home in Fort Worth right now while she awaits her next move.

You only beat ULM by 2! That's not good. BTW, how did Cardia Jackson do for ULM? I taught him as an 8th grader.

I'm thinking three.

So you would take Freel or Clark over Wells? I think you guys are getting to caught up with the whole OBP. I would take the guy who hits around .300 with 30HR and 100RBI a year, over a guy like Freel or Clark who will only put up a .370 OBP. Wells does not hit .300/30/100 a year. And considering the costs, I probably would take Clark and especially Freel. I said around .300 with 30HR and 100RBI. The cost would be Barrett and someone else. Then you sign Bengie Molina. However if you could Freel or Clark without giving up Barrett, we'd be better off. Freel + Barrett > Molina + Wells.

LSU's defense has smothered Arizona. 45-0 LSU. Geaux Tigers!

I'm sorry I'm not watching, but LSU is playing...and playing very well.

So you would take Freel or Clark over Wells? I think you guys are getting to caught up with the whole OBP. I would take the guy who hits around .300 with 30HR and 100RBI a year, over a guy like Freel or Clark who will only put up a .370 OBP. :lol: I guess im the only one who would take the better player. While Wells has been better this year, it's debatable whether he is the better player. Freel was better in 2004-2005. Wells has a better slugging, but Freel's numbers have been remarkably consistent. The same can't be said for Wells. Wells will hit around .300 each year, he will hit close to 30hr a year, and drive in 100 runs a year. He is the better player. Wells is entering his prime. I think he could repeat his numbers next year. It'd be much more accurate to say he will do those things twice every five years. I'm agreeing with a Sox fan! What's the world coming to! :lol:

So you would take Freel or Clark over Wells? I think you guys are getting to caught up with the whole OBP. I would take the guy who hits around .300 with 30HR and 100RBI a year, over a guy like Freel or Clark who will only put up a .370 OBP. :lol: I guess im the only one who would take the better player. While Wells has been better this year, it's debatable whether he is the better player. Freel was better in 2004-2005. Wells has a better slugging, but Freel's numbers have been remarkably consistent. The same can't be said for Wells. Wells will hit around .300 each year, he will hit close to 30hr a year, and drive in 100 runs a year. He is the better player. Wells is entering his prime. I think he could repeat his numbers next year. You keep saying Wells will hit around 300 each year. On what do you base that? He hit 269 last year and 271 the year before. Sure he can hit 300, he also could hit 270. His OBP is BA dependent. Freel has maintained around the same level for three straight seasons. Freel is a safer bet; Wells could give you a great season or he could be Jacque Jones. Wells may be a better player, but it is far from a certainty. He's the more athletic player, but that doesn't always equate into more productive...see Freddy Bynum.

So you would take Freel or Clark over Wells? I think you guys are getting to caught up with the whole OBP. I would take the guy who hits around .300 with 30HR and 100RBI a year, over a guy like Freel or Clark who will only put up a .370 OBP. :lol: I guess im the only one who would take the better player. While Wells has been better this year, it's debatable whether he is the better player. Freel was better in 2004-2005. Wells has a better slugging, but Freel's numbers have been remarkably consistent. The same can't be said for Wells.

fixed

So you would take Freel or Clark over Wells? I think you guys are getting to caught up with the whole OBP. I would take the guy who hits around .300 with 30HR and 100RBI a year, over a guy like Freel or Clark who will only put up a .370 OBP. :lol:

Elaborate, plz.

Alley Broussard scores a TD! 24-0 Tigers. Geaux Tigers!

Russell to Hester! After the PAT, 17-0 Tigers!