Chisoxfn

I'd actually feel better if the health issue is related to Shields and there was something more that he's pitched through but is impacting him (and would have changed our decision).

QUOTE (shipps @ Sep 13, 2016 -> 07:22 AM) I have a cedar siding home and I have had a long running issue of birds pecking holes into the siding. It started on one side of the house. I patched it up and they came back leaving more holes for me to patch. I then put one of them toy hawks in the shrub to scare them away. That didnt really work because they still poked holes just not as frequently. Now they have graduated to the other side of the house and are putting holes there. I googled how to handle this issue but everything seems to be just using scare tactics which the birds dont seem to react to. Do any of you guys have any experience with this? What the hell can I do before they eat my house? Well, if I asked my wife, she would tell you to move (as she is deathly afraid of birds).

QUOTE (Heads22 @ Sep 12, 2016 -> 05:11 PM) Sounds like it was the floor that was rented out for 800-1000 fans. OU does have the fact that they know they have to run the table now to have any shot. Norman at night is a lot of fun. Big 12 needs the win, as well. --- In other news, Iowa impressed me this weekend a lot more than they did last year. Might be a better team but have a worse record. I was waiting for your Hawkeye / Clone related post. Who knows what they will do, but they absolutely took care of business.

I think we should trade Cutler to the Browns. Just saying.

QUOTE (Y2JImmy0 @ Sep 12, 2016 -> 06:37 AM) Hampton basically blamed the game on them starting Whitehair. I completely disagree with him. It's the only option. He's the future. There is no better time than now. He was saying that Larsen should have started since it was on the road and against Wilfork. Ted Larsen sucks though. Kreutz said something similar. These same people would have said Larsen sucked and they should have played the rookie if it were the other way around. Coaching staff had a rough game but that outcome was determined by Houston having more good players than the Bears do. The Bears won't face another defense like that for awhile. Tough first matchup. Houston had more playmakers and won. All that said, I expect them to learn from this, but we know this team lacks playmakers, the goal is to start developing some (and we don't have a lot of guys with the potential to be one, but we do have some). Then we need to keep adding some more while building up.

QUOTE (bmags @ Sep 11, 2016 -> 12:48 PM) Well. Seems like we are a team that is hard to blow out because we play bend don't break defense and run a slow pace on offense, but the games aren't close because of talent. Need 2-3 more playmakers, especially at S/CB Pass rush was inconsistent and that is where it all starts, imo. We are improved on defense, but improved still just means mediocre (in the sense we have a lot more "solid" players). We don't have a special player on this defense and we need to get some of those. On offense, we have one guy who is well above average and that is Alshon (did have a costly drop). Yet, that is the guy everyone wants to run out of town.

QUOTE (fathom @ Sep 11, 2016 -> 11:43 AM) White having a very bad game He should have had a first down earlier in the game (the play before that 4th down where Cutler fumbled) and then that interception where he gave up was brutal. The whole game was pretty brutal on offense. Horrific oline, dropped balls, etc. Defense was okay, but still lacks playmaking (need bigger pass rush). Tackling was pretty sound by and large and at least we had one turnover.

QUOTE (bmags @ Sep 9, 2016 -> 11:43 AM) I know know, Chisox. Keenum has now played 16 games in the NFL. He's completed 56.7% of his passes for 3000 yards, 15tds, 9 interceptions and 8 fumbles. He is clearly better than, say, Jimmy Claussen, but that is replacement level production, not far different from Blaine Gabbert last year or Josh McCown. Goff may be worse now, but probably not THAT much worse, and to spend that much to get him, you ahve to believe he'll be better soon. But instead you are basically ensring he gets no real or practice reps, putting him at 3rd string. That's just poor Just because he is inactive, doesn't mean he isn't getting a lot more reps then your typical 3rd string QB. And when you are a borderline playoff team with serviceable QB play, the drop-off between that and where Goff is today (he just isn't ready...if they thought it was minimal, clearly Goff would be starting) is pretty significant. If they were in full blown development mode, I think the answer would be different, but they believe they have enough talent at other positions to win and they still feel long-term, they can develop Goff. If they go 0-4 the next few weeks, then they will immediately just let Goff take his lumps.

QUOTE (bmags @ Sep 9, 2016 -> 11:03 AM) LOL didn't realize Goff was inactive. So, he needs more reps, he is your future, and you make him 3rd string and inactive. That org is so crazy. Watching hard knocks you forget about all of the washed up coaches they employ. In the grand scheme of things, whether Goff is good or not, it has nothing to do with the preseason. The Rams want to win and think they can and as a result, they believe the current #1 / #2 are better then the future and they are right. Goff was super raw and he has proven nothing but that right now. I think the Rams were crazy to move up, but they don't want to give up their season just handing things to Goff when he isn't ready. That isn't necessarily a bad idea. I know we are all used to top picks starting right away, but if they don't think he's ready, and they feel the rest of their team is playoff caliber (and to be frank, outside of their weak receiving corps, it is) and they can get there with Keenum (while still developing Goff longer term), than that isn't so awful. Awful is whether they drafted the right guy in the first place. Not the fact that he is inactive behind two guys they think are better served right now (while they try and win).

QUOTE (raBBit @ Sep 8, 2016 -> 05:39 PM) That's not the scandal I was referring to. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whitewater_controversy Colin Powell sure did his best to take us to Iraq and lied about the pretenses that eventually got the US in the war. HRC has supported just above every conflict that has came up when she held office. http://foreignpolicy.com/2016/07/27/hillar...bya-iraq-syria/ I had long forgotten about whitewater.

Denver's defense is so freaking fast. Panthers oline got destroyed. Did not expect to see such an exciting game. Simeon looked awful, but I always have to remind myself how awful Manning looked last year.

QUOTE (raBBit @ Sep 8, 2016 -> 03:20 PM) Are you really using the length of a career politician's "fairly successful" career as something that makes her a good candidate? I assume you're a big fan of Mitch McConnell and John McCain too? She's covered in fraud every step of the way. She couldn't even smile and wave as first lady, she had to work in a scandal then too. She had to step down from her last position dishonorably. She's corrupt to the core and symbolic of everything that is wrong with our country's politics. Not to mention she's unbearable in her speeches and transgressions...or at least she had been before she fell off the map as the Trump show took over. The only thing that keeps her around is the elite's money, the fact that she's a woman and our country's marriage to bipartisanship. EDIT: Hillary and Powell are both neoconservatives when it comes to waging war. That's why she's getting certain endorsements from the right. That's why many war mongers were extatic when Obama nominated her as SOS. I am not a Hillary fan, but to throw the fact that she had to work in a scandal as the first lady, well, that is a pretty low blow, given she was not directly involved in what lead to that scandal (was tied to her husband). Why is Hillary a neoconservative when it comes to waging war? I also don't view Powell as a war mongerer though.

I take my complaints back. As long as apple give me my free ibuds with the lightning connector when I get my new iphone (I won't get this generation, won't be until the next generation when I'm up) then I am happy

QUOTE (chitownsportsfan @ Sep 8, 2016 -> 10:48 AM) It's not Jose's fault that the offense wasn't able to produce more and keep the Sox competitive until he heated up. I mean if this was a pennant race we'd be praising him for turning it up down the stretch. That said, I had hopes he'd be a 5 WAR player consistently and those hopes have pretty much been dashed. Maybe he'll have a monster line next year but his defense and baserunning are about as bad as advertised so he needs to hit like 300/370/580 to put up that 5 WAR. Can he do it again like his rookie year? Hope so but not banking on it. He looks more like a 2-3 WAR player. Good starter, but not a superstar. He was a 5.5, 3.8 and right now at 2.6. I don't know where you get the 2-3, but I think more likely he is a 3-4 WAR player, maybe a 5 WAR, but seems unlikely he is a 2 WAR player (given even with all his struggles, he'll finish the year somewhere pretty close to 3. He is also on pace for more walks and fewer strikeouts then last year (yes less power as well) but a slightly better average and OBP. We've seen he can still hit for power too.

QUOTE (shipps @ Sep 8, 2016 -> 02:08 PM) Would it hurt to let Larson start the first game and let Whitehair get a little extra time to get acclimated? Larsen is pretty bad.

QUOTE (RockRaines @ Sep 8, 2016 -> 09:05 AM) Do you do that often? The Apple ear buds never once stayed in my ears for more than 2 min, I would never ever ever use theirs. And technically BT emits 1000 times less radiation than your phone. I was being largely sarcastic with the radiation part (although I do think about it, I know that every freaking thing emitst that crap so I just pray they come up with a cure for cancer and any other things the increased wireless signal, etc, causes. I use wired headsets and absolutely love the apple earbuds (they are really good cheap earbuds). And regarding the whole charge and listen, I do it when I am traveling for business, but not on a very regular occurrence (not a heavy phone user anyway). I don't really want to spend money on bluetooth headphones (even though I am sure they are darn nice and once I had them I'd be like, why did I wait to get these). Like I said, I'm just really cheap.

QUOTE (RockRaines @ Sep 8, 2016 -> 07:40 AM) Technically the new phone has a headphone jack through the Lightning port in case I don't think you can charge and listen to music though (when using the lightning port.

QUOTE (Ezio Auditore @ Sep 8, 2016 -> 06:55 AM) I didn't know everyone was still so attached to headphone jacks, I've been doing everything wirelessly for a couple of years now. A couple people have refuted this to me, saying Bluetooth quality is not as good as wired headphone quality, but that's really not what's going on here. The vast majority of people upset at Apple are not people listening to high-bitrate, lossless audio on a pair of $200 headphones, they are probably streaming music on a pair of cheap headphones and can't tell the difference (but like pretending they can). Because I'm cheap and like my free apple headphones. Do everything I need and I don't have to pay a dime. I think it is total crap to force me to use bluetooth and add extra radiation to an already radiated life.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Sep 7, 2016 -> 10:50 AM) 1 year is worth way more than two months. Oh, I misread your thoughts, I thought you meant we weren't going to sign him at all and let him walk (not trade him in the off-season). I actually agree with you then, depending on what the clubs plan is. I think if they want to move him, they probably should capitalize while his value is high (realistically, they should have moved him at the deadline). That said, if the right offer isn't there, then I think you keep him and dump him at the deadline (as in the case for a guy like Miguel, I don't know how much teams will give up prospects in the off-season for him vs. mid-season when they have no alternatives and thus less leverage). For star players, you can move them at both times, no problem, but the more mediocre guys, I tend to think they have more value mid-season vs. offseason.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Sep 7, 2016 -> 06:59 AM) At the deadline he will be months away from free agency. Guys get traded at the deadline who are months away from free agency all the time.

Gould has handled everything with a lot of class.

QUOTE (bmags @ Sep 6, 2016 -> 04:19 PM) I think they absolutely should regret not bringing in competition into camp. But Gould was definitely on downward trend and I think his missed PATs really did scare them. This isn't a "we're way better!" but our kickoffs are probably better and we'll need to get inside the 30 to score points. Like I said, I don't think Connor Barth is better. Maybe Gould has regressed that much during the off-season, but last year, Gould was better then Barth.

QUOTE (RockRaines @ Sep 6, 2016 -> 04:11 PM) You are a math whiz, thats a nice stat. I'd argue there are several "geographically challenged" programs in that same boat like Nebraska, MN, WI, WVU, Utah, Colorado, Mizzou, Kentucky, Kansas, Oregon, Washington etc. Proximity to a bed of talent is a plus, and of course facilities and campus. Iowa was always my favorite place to visit, but I think you can surely argue they are top tier in that group. I agree with all of those places and I'd argue Ferentz and Iowa have outperformed (and in many cases significantly) pretty much everyone on that list, with the exception of Wisconsin & Oregon. Heck, when you look at the big ten since Ferentz came in and I believe Ohio State & Wisconsin are the only teams who have won more games than Iowa since 2001 (note this is overall, not in conference). Iowa is ahead of Michigan, Michigan State, and Penn State. Note: I presume Nebraska has more, but I didn't look them up since they weren't in the big ten that long.

Too much Gould bashing. I hope Barth is good, but I think we are actually going to regret this move (not for cutting Gould but for not finding a better long-term fit if we were going to go down this path). Gould had a higher kicking percentage then Barth lats year, hit more kicks over 50 yards and more kicks over 40-49 yards too. In fact, Gould hit more kicks from 50+ yards then Barth hit from 40+ yards last year.

QUOTE (RockRaines @ Sep 6, 2016 -> 03:55 PM) Nobody said fire the guy, but extend his contract with 5 years still on it? Seemed very very premature when they havent won the conference in over a decade and he wasnt being heavily pursued by another program. And with all due respect, I dont believe Iowa was really in contention to win the national title, regardless of the outcome of that game. They did capitalize on not playing a single good team in conference until the title game which is all you could ask for. I never said they were a title front-runner, but no one would ever expect Iowa to be the front runner to win a national champsionship. Under Ferentz, we've known were going to largely be competitive with certain years where we give it a pretty darn good run. This has included playing in some fantastic bowl games as well. Ferentz was re-energized the past year and I think they can have another very very good season (by Iowa standards) this year. By the way, since 2001, Wisconsin has had a 70% winning percentage vs. Iowa's 64% and has won an additional 14 games (essentially one more game per season).