Chisoxfn

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Oct 19, 2016 -> 07:05 PM) Chris Wallace taking no s*** from anyone is my favorite part. Wallace was fantastic tonight. And by my Trump standards, this was by far his best performance and he still lost.

QUOTE (Quinarvy @ Oct 19, 2016 -> 09:16 AM) Journalists more likely to donate to candidate that isn't talking about altering libel laws to sue them. Historically what had this stat looked like? Say without Trump running? This number seems staggering.

QUOTE (raBBit @ Oct 19, 2016 -> 09:05 AM) I can't even name one disagraced official in Trump's Campaign. Clinton's Campaign officials have been dropping every month. The guy who had to resign last night, Bob Creamer, is a felon who has met with the POTUS over 200 times at the WH this year. Paul Manafort?

Rabbit - Not sure if it was in this thread or not, but I wanted to point out that Anderson Cooper spent quite a bit of time last night talking about the DNC video that you claim wasn't talked about. Cooper went as far as to say while the journalist isn't all that reputable, you can't deny the statements made in the video, etc. Just want to point out since you had been chiding against CNN covering it.

QUOTE (knightni @ Oct 19, 2016 -> 08:07 AM) If this movie does one thing, it's to teach people the correct spelling of the word, "rogue." How would a lot of people spell it? Realize it is odd coming from me of all people, but I couldn't even think of another way to spell rogue.

QUOTE (BigSqwert @ Oct 18, 2016 -> 10:51 AM) How about no Thursday games in weeks where there are no byes? Of course they'd never do that because of the money they'd be losing, which is ultimately all that matters to them. I think the other counter which was add an extra week and thus you have two byes weeks and therefor anyteam who plays on Thursday is coming off of a bye week (and for those teams that play a Thursday in weeks 2/3/4, sure their is a little disadvantage to having the bye that early, but reality is with two bye weeks, you are likely to have one early in the season and one late anyway (and reality is depending on injuries, you might actually benefit from an early bye if you had guys banged up in preseason or early in a game). I can't think of a scenario for why you wouldn't expand the season and add an additional bye week. It makes too much sense. More money, no more games played, extra rest for players. Players and owners both get more money and players get more rest (no one plays more games...I guess players have an extra week of practice, but probably easily worth the additional money).

QUOTE (LittleHurt05 @ Oct 18, 2016 -> 10:38 AM) Make the season 18 weeks. Each team gets two byes, one is mandatory the week before the Thursday night game. Problem solved. I have zero problem with extending the season and adding the second bye week. I wouldn't think the league or players would as well. Extra week of games on TV is more money for everyone and more rest for players, etc. I honestly see no reason it wouldn't be supported. And the quality of football should be better because I would presume you'd have less people miss games (thanks to the addition of an extra bye week).

QUOTE (BigSqwert @ Oct 18, 2016 -> 10:32 AM) Couldn't agree more regarding Thursday night games. The games typically suck and it's complete hypocrisy from the league and their player safety mantra. I don't get why you don't set it up so that teams who play on Thursday do it after the bye week. I realize that gets a little difficult the first couple weeks of the season when there is no bye, but there is no reason not to do that during those bye weeks.

QUOTE (Y2JImmy0 @ Oct 17, 2016 -> 12:07 PM) I think his net average is the worst in the NFL actually. It was last week. I was going on my pure eye ball test, but it seems like he had been doing a good job. I wonder how much of that net average was impacted by that big return in the Lions game (given small sample size) where our entire unit massively failed. I had read a few things the past week highlighting that he had become a pretty good punter as well (which seemed to validate my eyes).

QUOTE (iamshack @ Oct 17, 2016 -> 09:55 AM) Yeah, they are just awful. As much as Cowherd was obnoxious and elitist at times, at least he talked about some thought-provoking things once in awhile. The only good thing about Lebatard's show is the segment they do with "Tom" Kirkjian about what certain sports personalities look like. See, I always liked Colin cause while he could get obnoxious at times, I always thought he was pretty intellectual and could bring up a lot of thought provoking stuff. He clearly had an ego, but I could deal with it cause the general topics, guests, etc were all interesting. I don't think I've heard but a few interesting segments yet on Lebatard (and I gave him a legit month to month and a half and would still flip when Dan Patrick was on a commercial break). Used to be I was split 50/50 between ESPN / Dan Patrick in the AM (really dependent on what each area was talking about and somewhat of a who happened to be on commercial when I started my commute). That has totally changed (and normally I listen to ESPN on my drive home so ESPN generally got the bulk of my radio dial in the AM). The new show I get as a Lebatard replacement is okay, but being a non local fan, prefer the national shows because I get a better feel for the overall news day vs. the local talk about the Dodgers / Lakers which I don't really care that much about.

QUOTE (Ezio Auditore @ Oct 17, 2016 -> 09:53 AM) They're dead last in points per game (by a comfortable margin) but thank God Hoyer has 4 straight 300-yard games and hasn't thrown any picks! I think they threw up a stat during the game that said we were second in yard per play in the NFL. Interesting how good we are on a per play basis yet how ineffective we are at scoring. I don't think it is fair to put it all on Hoyer and do think some of it comes down to making plays in the redzone and getting better playcalls in the red zone. That said, there probably is a part on Hoyer as well as the arm strength / play making becomes more critical when you are in the red zone and the field is shortened. Defenses have less area to cover and the already small windows get smaller.

QUOTE (KyYlE23 @ Oct 17, 2016 -> 09:46 AM) I understand how some could feel the show is at a lull right now, but i am fascinated by it. They are establishing the different storyies that hosts have experienced and showing how they are starting to recall previous events and have feelings about these events(ie the host killing all of the people in the bar because he held a grudge against them from previous stories, where they all killed him). Delores killing the guy about to rape her was crazy. I cant wait to find out who is really messing with the code, Hopkins seems too convenient I guess part of it is, I don't even care about any of the characters. And the stories don't seem that interesting either (yet). But maybe it just isn't for me. I tend to be a sci fi guy though. Just a lot of random s*** that is garbage in isolation and who knows if it means something else. They better get it going fast. I might have two episodes left in me before I quit (and again, I haven't watched the 3rd episode yet).

I haven't yet seen this weeks episode, but i've fallen asleep during each of the 1st two weeks episodes (I was tired when watching, but not a great sign for the show in my eyes). Trying to stick with it hoping it will catch its groove, but I can't say that it is must watch TV yet.

It took a couple of years, but I feel like O'Donnell has turned into a pretty damn good punter.

Interesting stat (courtesy of Dan Patrick), but the last three rookie QB's to win in Lambeau are: Dak Prescott, Matt Ryan, and Cade McNown Didn't expect to hear Cade's name mentioned with anything good. Believe this might have been the "Walter Payton" game.

The sooner they pull that monstrosity that is Lebatard, the sooner I will begin to listen to ESPN radio again in the mornings. Just pure awfulness. In fact, it got so bad that LA pulled the plug on them a couple weeks back and now I at least get Keyshawn and some other guy during my morning commute. Lebatard show is so godawful. Yes, I am one of those people they always make fun of who doesn't understand their stupid schtick. What do I know, felt the same way about Rome.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Oct 16, 2016 -> 04:29 AM) Smell sucks but at least he can nail a 3 once in a while. If MCW was going to play heavy minutes, I could understand this trade, but for a guy who might play 10-15? They need shooters. Shooters are the new craze. GarPax will try to buck the trend. I don't mind the move. I agree we need shooters, but MCW can play defense and maybe a change of scenery will help him. This is a solid guy coming off the bench (we aren't asking him to start). I agree this is an era where you need shooters, but hey, you don't have to do what everything else is doing to win. I think this was just one of those, lets move Snell while we can and get a youngish asset who still has talent and could potentially help. Technically, we could have used MCW a lot if Rose was still our point guard.

QUOTE (RockRaines @ Oct 16, 2016 -> 04:39 PM) That Elliott pick doesn't look so bad does it? I think I was one of those that said if Elliot was there when the Bears picked, you had to take him.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Oct 16, 2016 -> 02:03 PM) The Bears won the turnover battle +2, had more yardage than JAX, and more first downs, and managed to lose. That isn't easy to do in the NFL. Well, when you can't get touchdowns in the red zone and you consistently sputter close to field goal range, it is pretty easy to loose those types of games. We also rarely have much of a pass rush.

QUOTE (bmags @ Oct 17, 2016 -> 08:12 AM) The thing about coaching is...I don't feel like bears are more talented than Jags. At all. I dont' actually think there is a team aside from Browns we are more talented than. I think our offense has some legitimate talent on it, but the defense not so much. We are giving lots of young guys chances. I do think if we start getting embarrassed as the season goes on, my opinion on a year 3 might change, but right now, I'm still in the let this thing run its course and then we better start to see some improvement late this year and next year we definitely better start to see the arrow pointing up (probably with exception to QB which we should just assume we will be bad with a rookie QB, but we should see everything else starting to come together).

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Oct 16, 2016 -> 01:43 PM) So, I'd still say give Fox more time next year, but you're starting to see the Fox Hunters circling. It is no secret the media does not like John Fox, so when things turn (and they are pretty bad), they are going to bounce on him. To me, Fox has proven that he can coach, so I'm less concerned about that and more concerned about finding a lot of talent. I also don't like the message we send if we can a guy like Fox so quickly (I don't think that will win us any favors / help us long-term in finding the next candidate). If Fox was coming off of the Lovie era, I'd be more open to going quicker, but given all the recent turnover, you need to have some stability, and we ditch another coach in two years and what is next, we are turning another GM after next year. That is not a way to win and really quickly we could turn into the Browns and where the Raiders were for a long long time (until the Raiders finally developed a trust and actually gave guys a chance to show whether their system / plans worked). Heck, even look at the Cowboys. Garrett was fired by the media many times, but he's clearly not some turd of a coach. Jones was patient and it seems to largely be working out fine.

QUOTE (bmags @ Oct 16, 2016 -> 01:04 PM) Yeah, and cherry on top was losing due to falling from turf I thought that loss was about perfect and summed up the team nicely. We don't have playmakers to get touchdowns in the red zone and in the end we don't have enough talent to disrupt on the defensive side of the ball either. I would have hated a garbage win and it was an acceptable loss (I.e., we didn't get totally burried). The coaching definitely resulted in part of that loss. I don't know what the hell we were doing in that two minute drill at the end of the first half (did we think we had all the time in the world...that was really poorly executed). What was going on with Howard getting a lot less attempts? Just more about Carey playing well in some spurts (other then that costly drop on 3rd down).

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Oct 17, 2016 -> 07:52 AM) It's from people who think any tie to the White Sox means they can't do what they will be hired to do, although many want Dave Martinez to manage. He played in more games for the White Sox than Chris Getz. People would rather have an idiot with no White Sox ties, than a bright guy like Getz just because he played about 120 games for the team. It's ridiculous. For all intents and purposes, Chris Getz is an outside hire. All of his management training has come from the Royals. I agree with you. I'm not going to rip on the guy when I have no basis for whether he'd be great or not. None of us know how many people the Sox talked to or the views from the Royals about him. Clearly the Royals thought pretty highly of him from the short time he spent with their franchise to offer him a position in the front office (at one level below what the Sox just hired him for).

For those of you who say that is why Cutler is a starter or way better. I'd just throw the flipside that Cutler hasn't exactly led any dynamic offenses during his time with the Bears (despite having quite a bit of talent). At this point, Jay is what he is and he isn't a guy who leads win, but I still believe you can win with him. He clearly is not going to be with the franchise next year and I don't think that is a bad thing (as we need to turn the page). What we can't have happen is people to have some false reality that Hoyer is anything more then a good guy to have around to help groom whomever the young QB is (and I actually think Hoyer would be a pretty solid mentor).

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Oct 11, 2016 -> 08:52 AM) Do not forget why so few people have "unendorsed" this disaster - because this remains what a very large fraction of their base wants. He surged to the lead because he told them it was ok to publicly hate certain groups of people because of how they look and who they are. Trump was actually right that Mitt Romney had to kowtow to him in 2012 - because he was the leader of the birther movement and that party's base is people in that movement. They cannot stop being who their party is. Just a reminder, that you make this statement, but there are a hell of a lot of republicans who have been very vocal against Trump. I don't think you ever saw me say anything kind about him and I've mentioned on multiple occasions how embarrassed I am. I also don't think you can just lump everyone voting for Trump or putting a vote his way or who supported him at any time as racist persay, you could absolutely lump almost all of them as being "frustrated" with the process. Now there are definitely a fair share who fall into the camp of "nutjobs / crazies", etc, and that doesn't just mean race, but plenty of other things.