Chisoxfn

Just want to point something out. Honel last pitched on August 31st with the Barons. He was the starter in that game and went just 1.1 innings. He gave up 6 walks in the game. He didn't make another appearance after that. However there season was pretty much over than and the playoffs were on the verge. He could have very well been injured in that game, but I've not ready anything on it. I did google searches on Honel having surgery and all that good stuff. JD mentioned he knows he had surgery. JD's a top notch poster and has info so I assume he had the operation. Considering the timetable that he pitched on August 31st, that tells me he didn't have the surgery till September (early September at the earliest) and I'm sure the Sox and Kris were careful. So how well he's throwing, my guess is not very well at all considering its been at best 4 months since the operation.

QUOTE(Rex Hudler @ Jan 5, 2006 -> 09:32 PM) Ok guys, recovery from Tommy John surgery is 12-18 months. IF Kris had Tommy John this offseason, then he is not throwing full steam now and won't play this year. I'd say best case scenario for someone that had Tommy John right after the season is a July return. Exactly. He wouldn't even be in the throwing stages. So since I assume he did have the surgery, my guess is you'd be lucky to see him late late next season since I'd assume he had the surgery in September (late August at the earliest). However, all odds if he did have the surgery would have him out for pretty much the entire baseball season.

QUOTE(Heads22 @ Jan 6, 2006 -> 09:06 PM) If he'd get on base as much as Mr. Ricks, I would've picked him too. What the hell are you talking about. Heath = pitcher

QUOTE(Heads22 @ Jan 5, 2006 -> 09:03 PM) Worst part for you, is, well, it just gets worse with the next game. Is that the Illini one or who do we got next? I know we play the Illini pretty soon and I said we are going to give them there first lost and I'm not backing down from that stance. I just remember looking at the big 10 schedule and we have a hell of a start to it, which is probably a good thing cause than we can at least take our big 10 season start dump against good competition. Steve and Brian know its coming

QUOTE(Heads22 @ Jan 5, 2006 -> 09:01 PM) They were winnning for the majority of the first half....then they forgot how to shoot in the second stanza. Ya, I was able to see part of the game at the restaurant we ate dinner at. Than I also got to see them take a total s*** and my dad and I were all huffed about it. Made our meal taste that much worse, haha.

Sounds cool. I'm thinking we can use it for football during the off-season and than during basketballs in-season any basketball recruiting stuff can go in the basketball thread? That or one big old generic recruiting thread. Only one rule...make sure to keep me updated on Iowa and ND's recruiting since I don't follow much in terms of recruiting Make the post and I'll pin it

QUOTE(Heads22 @ Jan 5, 2006 -> 06:38 PM) Iowa with two baskets so far in the second half, 5:30 left in the game. What a shocker...Iowa takes a s*** in the big 10 opener. No surprise there.

QUOTE(Soxbadger @ Jan 5, 2006 -> 02:48 PM) Cheat, No clue every Big 10 back that is in the top 5 gained a significant amount of yardage against non top 25 teams. But on that same token, so did Reggie Bush and Deangelo. I mean should Calhoun be penalized because unlike Young he put up good stats against the teams he was supposed to dominate? He's referring to Albert Young. Ie, the Hawkeyes sophmore running back who led the big 10 in rushing (in actual conference games).

QUOTE(Heads22 @ Jan 5, 2006 -> 02:46 PM) LOL...I'm just in this to hear some reasoning from the Bears fans. Shove it...plenty of us gave you reasoning. Whether you agree with it or not, thats another story.

QUOTE(RockRaines @ Jan 5, 2006 -> 02:39 PM) Whoa dude, did you just say Hart for Heisman?? Whoa...

QUOTE(White Sox Josh @ Jan 5, 2006 -> 02:35 PM) HE WAS HURT LAST YEAR! AVERAGE THE NUMBERS WHEN HE PLAYED HEALTHY (5 games) he averaged 125.2 yards. Put that up for 12 games and it is 1502 yards. Look at his first season when he had 3 consecutive 200 yard games. Well Young led the conference in rushing (in terms of in big 10 play). Sutton (Freshman) was a freaking monster for NU and we all know what Maroney can do. Hell, I say Russel (Minnesota's new starting RB) will be better next year than Hart. There are at least a handful of Rb's that are better. Case closed as far as I'm concerned. By the way in no way shape or form do I think Young will be the best RB in the big 10, but he's got a far better shot than Hart at doing so and I actually think Young will have a very good year once again. That said Iowa's problem is going to be on the defensive end. They shore up that defense and they'll be dangerous. They weren't able to do it this year and it bit em in the ass.

QUOTE(RockRaines @ Jan 5, 2006 -> 02:31 PM) Going forward huh? SO you see next year Hart being the top RB in the big ten? I don't. Albert Young and Calhoun will each be better. Minny still has depth at RB despite losing Maroney and there system is very strong when it comes to rushing the ball. Josh has a Michigan hard on and over-rates anyone that played for the Big Blue. Although he does underrate Henne since he blames him for everything. Look at how long it took Brady Quinn, its rare to see young QB's come in and excel at a very high level from the get go.

QUOTE(White Sox Josh @ Jan 5, 2006 -> 02:16 PM) I don't think Sutton is better and Maroney=He Gone. Sutton has a problem with fumbling the ball. He is an explosive runner but I don't think he is as proven as Hart. Maroney was the best in 05 but he entered the draft. Mike Hart when he was healthy gained 626 yards in 5 games. He is an impact player. He also hasn't fumbled the ball in like 363 rushing attempts. Albert Young is as good of a college running back as Hart. Just look at the numbers he put up. And no I don't think Albert Young is a great running back. Just saying Hart isn't this special back you make him out to be. I also agree that Calhoun, among others in the big 10, are better RB's.

QUOTE(Soxbadger @ Jan 5, 2006 -> 01:34 PM) Yah but personally I think Calhoun is the best RB Wisconsin has had in the last 7 years, and that includes Dayne, Bennet, and Anthony Davis. I also would say that Sutton and Maroney are better than Hart. Maroney and Barber both were better than Hart. Josh over-rates anyone that plays for Michigan.

QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Jan 5, 2006 -> 12:36 PM) Yeah like Jas said, Bull=Jim Bullard. I think Baj's only other nickname is his screenname "manhands". Thats correct. There are a few others that are registered here and a couple that have made a couple posts, but those are the two well known ones. Cotts, Haig, Heath, Bmac and some others are other registered members on this site (although neither of them post much).

QUOTE(SoxFan1 @ Jan 5, 2006 -> 12:47 PM) I don't think you can discount it at all. It was 1st team vs 1st team. Record's mean nothing in pre-season, in any sport at that. And you also can't say "Well, their offense wasn't in gear." They didnt get any less practice or game-time than any other team. If you compare situations, then the Colts were "rusty" in the pre-season and you could onyl expect them to be "rusty" in the post-season after they havent played a real game in 3, soon to be 4, weeks. I don't think you can discount any head-to-head meetings. Every freaking team beat the Colts. It means jack. Just like our poor spring training record this year meant jack and if anyone based there predictions on how our starters looked against other starters (not just pitching, all the way around) you'd have picked us to finish with Detroit and KC.

Cool found 355 bucks worth of stuff for my dad in Ca.

QUOTE(tonyho7476 @ Jan 5, 2006 -> 12:05 PM) The Bull is Bajenaru, right? Jim Bullard

QUOTE(WCSox @ Jan 5, 2006 -> 11:53 AM) Agreed that the Church's rules about contraception are silly in some ways, but most of the Catholics I know use them anyway. And, as I said, it's not like the Catholic Church has their own secret police who survey that goings-on in bedrooms in Africa. Africa's problem isn't one of birth control. It's one of behavior. If women were treated like human beings over there, rather than possessions and sexual objects, the HIV epidemic would be much less severe. I agree completely with you. Whats going on in Africa is totally disgusting and insane but it doesn't stem over missionaires over there. It stems with there beliefs and behaviors which are downright deplorable if you ask me. Women have absolutely zero say and can't even imply to use contraception and if the husband finds out they used some sort of contraception they will likely be beaten and potentially murdered. All this the husband is out there cheating at will and even if the wife is loyal she still has a good shot at getting HIV. There is a lot wrong in Africa but the Catholic church is not it. Could they do things better, sure, I think they'd be smart to sometimes adjust things when things change around the world (ie birth control is developed and it can protect things for those that don't follow the rules of being abstinent till marriage). However you should do what morally write and tell people if they are going to have sex they should be smart and protect themselves. Africa is a total mess and its a situation I don't see being solved in a long time. The men over there run around like savages and the women are essentially left helpless only to eventually get HIV and die. Its sad and pathetic.

QUOTE(LowerCaseRepublican @ Jan 5, 2006 -> 11:34 AM) I bash people who proclaim to be the moral font for the world (i.e. the Catholic Church) when they've got some of the bloodiest hands on the planet. Thats like still blaming the US and Europe and everyone else still for the slave trade. Religion in general has led to more deaths and more wars than any other cause. Its not right, the crusades weren't right. That said, in more recent times, Religion has done far more good than bad. You can't tell me about what something as old as organized religion did a few hundred years ago to base how you judge them, but you base it on what they've done more recently and more recently for the most part they've done a lot of good. Like anything there has been some bad things, but when you are talking about a group as large as the catholic church or any major religion for that matter, your going to have those small minorities of people that have done wrong and created harm. Was the catholic church wrong in how they handled all the pedophiles. Your damn right they were and they still are. They need to come out and admit the problem and take care of the problem. That said to bunch them all up as doing no good and being pedophiles is completely ridiculous. But to go on and ignore the good things churches have done would be ignorant. I'm not a religious person but I do take offense to those that actually slam the concept of religion and the fact that in general if society based things off the 10 commandments or most major religious doctrines and beliefs, that our world would be a far better place. The problem is you have those groups that take things to the extremes. I can't speak for much but my aunt happens to be a minister and I've seen all the good she's done for people in her church and the community in which the church is in. They don't just help out christians they help people that are in need and for that I commend her and the church.

I just want to add to what Southsider said here. We are working on figuring out just what exactly the lines are on this forum. Obviously we created this forum and you all were going to have more rope. We don't monitor this forum much and there will obviously be times where you see something you totally hate and disagree with and eventually you'll have to walk away from it and ignore it and move on to another discussion. Thats just a fact of life in the filabuster. Where we stand on this forum, what are the limits, we don't exactly know. However, there are two ways we can go with this: 1. We can get more strict and tone things down which could essentially take away from the point of this forum (which was to encourage all out debate and at times people may go totally off the deep end; and while that comment may be totally wrong in most of our opinions or overly harsh it could in fact stirr up quite a bit of other side debate and intelligent debate). 2.We could keep things very loose and essentially keep this a free-reign forum. The obvious pro is that pretty much all discussion is allowed (aside from porn) or anything that would get this site or an indvidual in trouble but at the same time you will have the occasional comment or topic that totally goes against what you stand for (whether religious beliefs, politcial beliefs, or on what you feel is the proper sexual orienatation). Whether you guys like to admit it or not, there isn't a middle ground on this issue/forum because once we start going in and modding it turns back into a cesspool and it will basically further prove the original point I had when I essentially dumped political topics (the fact that people can't ignore their own personal agenda's for 2 seconds instead of listen, respond and end it at that; All too many times people take it too far and obviously that happens but in this new forum you all can do what you all, which is basically what you wanted in the first place.

QUOTE(LowerCaseRepublican @ Jan 4, 2006 -> 12:31 PM) I tried (and obviously failed) to open it back up. So much for writing first thing in the morning. I've been trying to splice out some of the argument thread that caused SS2K to close it & then re-open. LCR wanted to splice out some of the heat and reopen the thread for the valid discussion in it. That was his attempt. It wasn't to get the last word in.

QUOTE(Spiff @ Jan 5, 2006 -> 07:59 AM) That doesn't solve anything; you're paying for 8 and only getting what, 7 1/2 tops?! As a side, has anyone else noticed that a cheeseburger costs 99 cents at McDonalds but a double costs a dollar? The logic of this operation is far beyond my comprehension. I You

QUOTE(YASNY @ Jan 5, 2006 -> 10:38 AM) Whatever. I don't have any affiliation whatsoever with with Leinart or USC. I don't think he did anything out of line at all. We'll just have to agree to disagree. I'm with ya Yas and I freaking hate USC. I may be in the LA basin but I hate all that has to do with LA. I hate that freaking place. Only one team I'll semi root for in LA and thats the Bruins (only in football too). Yet I slammed the Bruins all year cause i thought they were over-rated, lol.

QUOTE(Palehosefan @ Jan 5, 2006 -> 10:32 AM) Thats a nice thing to do, but its a bit like a friend saying nice things to your face and then talking crap about you behind it. Everyone knew USC was favored in the game, and probably should have won. So I feel that the comment was redundant and unnecessary. He has said how Texas played a great game. At the same time he's telling his guys that he thinks they are a good team. Thats his job to talk up his team and not one guy on his team would tell you that Leinart is a smug arrogant bastard. The guy was their leader.