Chisoxfn

QUOTE (hi8is @ May 5, 2016 -> 02:01 PM) It hit me with some blues as well. Cared more about losing the game than breaking up with my lady. Hence why you broke up with your lady

Things just got interesting. Ryan says he can't back Trump as the nominee. Will be very curious to see the backlash and potential splinter that is about to potentially happen. IMO, this is a much bigger deal than Romney or almost anyone else in the party making this statement. This is the speaker of the house, who was put in this position by the party. https://www.yahoo.com/news/house-speaker-pa...--election.html

QUOTE (Rowand44 @ May 5, 2016 -> 12:34 PM) This is exactly how I feel. Just give the dude another chance. His stuff for whatever reason was depleted a few years back but he bounced back pretty terrifically last year. I have no idea what he's capable of(I do think he can be a decent enough 5 though) but at least give him the opportunity to prove one way or another what he is. The Sox seem pretty against that though for whatever the reason may be. This tends to be an area the Sox struggle with. They don't tend to have much patience to actually test their young guys (especially from a positional perspective so the Sox might get the benefit of the doubt with Johnson). They just aren't overly patient when it comes to prospects (unless you are talking about top prospects).

QUOTE (greg775 @ May 5, 2016 -> 12:27 PM) Chili, you can't ever wear anything Cub related. That would be too sickening. Accept a Cubs pencil from her or something though. The flowing dark locks may be it though. No offense to the bald(ing) guys on here, but girls will admit they like flowing hair like Chili apparently has. This might be the post of the year Greg.

QUOTE (RockRaines @ May 5, 2016 -> 12:26 PM) Terrorism is such a tiny little blip on the radar of issues with this country its hilarious how often its brought up. Terrorism is happening all over the world. I don't think it is a little blip at all. We invest billions in it and are currently at war all over the world largely driven by it. So to call it a little blip seems pretty crazy. We benefit greatly from being isolated geographically (vs. Europe), but it is a real issue and a real threat. That doesn't mean I walk around the world worried about it, but the reality is their are a lot of radical people in this world willing to give their lives to kill innocent people for the "greater" good (in the terrorists confused eyes). To have a successful government you need to have safe borders and a safe society, education, and good quality infrastructure, imo. I do agree with you that some people overblow it in the grand scheme of things (like plenty of other issues). And of course what one person finds important can drastically differ from what another person finds important. But in general, having a country relatively free from terrorism, benefits/impacts every single citizen of the country.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ May 5, 2016 -> 12:14 PM) How often do people get prosecuted for using the incorrect restroom? This is such a waste of time. Women's restrooms have stalls. Men's restrooms have stalls and urinals. If you are afraid someone might be leering at you, it's pretty easy to solve. The whole thing on both sides in relation to this matter is a giant f***ing waste of time. Our government has far more important things to deal with that they have been ignoring forever. No one has gotten much anything done in Washington in recent time. We have an economy, low rates, defense issues (terrorism), etc. Yet we are wasting our time on s*** that impacts what, .1% of the population? Focus time on how to deal with income inequality, etc. The amount of time that gets spent on something that impacts so few people is just completely absurd. It is kind of like when congress was wasting its time on steroids in baseball when this country had far greater issues.

QUOTE (HickoryHuskers @ May 5, 2016 -> 12:16 PM) Mom's harsh. I'd give my kid the exact same lecture. By harsh, you mean give her kid a dose of reality (and keeps them grounded), then yes.

QUOTE (RockRaines @ May 5, 2016 -> 12:02 PM) Id rather have Vogel than Hoiberg Oh absolutely. Vogel is an above average coach, imo.

I like Eli Apple's mom. http://www.si.com/nfl/2016/05/04/nfl-draft...-state-buckeyes

Boylen is one of the few guys on the staff that I have any faith in. So it would figure he'd head elsewhere. Yes, I am that down on Hoiberg. Honestly, I think Del negro would be an upgrade and that says something. I will admit, that he clearly could learn in year two, but if he has a 2nd year like his 1st year, you have to cut ties.

Ken BergerVerified account ‏@KBergCBS 2m2 minutes ago Another name emerging as a possible replacement for Vogel in Indiana, according to league sources: Bulls associate head coach Jim Boylen.

Wish the Bulls could pounce on Frank Vogel and replace the god awful coach we have.

On a sidenote, I do think it is pretty surprising that they can't draw against a team like Boston. Usually Boston always will draw crowds wherever they go due to their overall fan base. I realize the weather and lack of school, but that is a pretty big negative, imo. Goes to show how hurtful the past few years struggles have been. Bottom line is people go to games to be entertained and for a few years the Sox were horrific in the entertainment department. It takes more than a few weeks to change that. This club needs to be a consistent winner with playoff consistency. Do that and even with what the Cubs do, they absolutely will draw consistently. Problem is the franchise has not had a sustained run like that anytime during any of our posters lifetimes.

QUOTE (gosoxgo2005 @ May 5, 2016 -> 10:43 AM) I was told that unless Johnson throws a no-no, today will 99% be his only start for now. Take that FWIW Sox have there own concerns with Johnons's consistency issues so it doesn't surprise me. I feel the Sox should actually see what Johnson gets as I prefer him to Miguel, but I presume Sox will hand job to one of Turner / Miguel. Miguel is pretty hittable, sure a slight upgrade from 2016 Danks, but I think better odds are on Turner / Johnson actually being solid. Could be wrong though. Last year, Johnson posted an ERA plus of 117 over 35 big league innings. Small sample size but the eyes backed up the results. He also had success in his first stint a couple years back. Problem is somewhere in between he had a season where he was complete trash (stuff non-existent, etc) and this spring while he didn't look that bad, his stuff definitely wasn't near as good. Don't know what the driver is, but I thought I had saw where his stuff popped back down in Charlotte this year so I personally think as long as his stuff is there, he is a no brainer to be a qualify 5th starter (vs. everyone else we are talking about). Sox don't think so and they clearly know more than I do, although I happen to think they are wrong and are just being too gun shy due to other concerns they have on him.

So I'll just say and I'm sure some of the people are joking, but better to find a girl that is a baseball fan vs. a girl that isn't. Who gives a rats ass if she is a fan of your team or not. The rivalry could actually make it more fun.

QUOTE (KyYlE23 @ May 5, 2016 -> 09:39 AM) It just sucks that the story sets it up to an eventual Hound/Mountain confrontation, and Brienne takes him out I keep hoping that it will eventually happen.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ May 5, 2016 -> 08:58 AM) She left him to die by the tree (fan theories say he might still be alive, possibly the gravedigger on that monk island). She then went to Saltpans where she found a ship heading to Bravos. That's the book version, I know in the show she also leaves him to die, don't remember if she goes to a town or just stumbles upon a random boat though. I hope he makes a reappearance. I liked the hound.

QUOTE (Tex @ May 5, 2016 -> 07:53 AM) The foreclosure problem was the homeowners could not make the payments. The mortgages had balloons and at a certain point the payments were too much and the borrower was defaulting on the loan. In those cases it was better for everyone for the banks to accept a smaller loss than having to foreclose and deal with all that. In this case the payments in all likelihood can, and will, be made. The other mitigating circumstance is y'all are choosing not to live in the house. If she was still living in the house, there isn't a problem for anyone. I agree if you can get the bank to gift you the difference, go for it. But I don't think your lawyers are being dishonest on their opinion. There really isn't a compelling reason for the bank to take the loss. If I was a shareholder in the bank, I'd be screaming if they did. On a side note, would you mind loaning me $10,000? My plan is to pay you back $5,000 and for you to forgive the balance. One other thought. With her credit in the 800s, I wonder how far it would fall if you did default? That could be a hit worth taking for $50k. A mid 600 credit rating is survivable if she trusts you will be married for the next decade or two. One thing to note, whomever owns the debt at this point, is probably not the bank that underwrote it and the debt from that vintage (i.e., 09) for the area has probably already been written off and the losses taken. And whatever credit hit that is taken, it will only effect the holder so the other significant other could get other debt in there name. I believe after 7 years everything is whiped from the credit history anyway (in terms of it won't be held against you anymore). When the whole foreclosure situation happened, the problem was the banks underwrote loans people couldn't afford. Mortgages didn't necessarily have balloon payments, rather, the interest adjusted up or they were qualified on interest only and the underwriting standards to even validate the income, etc, were god awful to non-existent (blame the banks and individuals requesting the loan for that one, but banks were still the ones who created these "liar" loans). What should have happened is more banks should have seen the writing on the wall and negotiated more in good faith vs. not. They could have worked more with the buyers and prevented the glut of inventory that eventually came onto the market. A person could have $10M sitting in the bank and they can still walk away from the loan (nothing in the standard mortgage contract that can change that and the bank has no right to that money...that said, you will pay income taxes on the forgiveness of the debt unless you can claim tax insolvency).

QUOTE (Tex @ May 5, 2016 -> 06:15 AM) I'm trying to type this without sounding like a dick. If someone could get a short sale with their credit in the 800s, who wouldn't get a short sale? Seriously, you want the bank to absorb a $50,000 loss on your investment. I tend to believe the lawyer. If you loaned the money would you take the loss? The bank has no rights to anything but the house. The loan agreement says you either make payments or they can take the house as collateral. The bank has no right to anything else. Either they agree to a short sale, renegotiate the debt, or you walk away and let them foreclose. End of the day, the ball is in there court and the onus is on them. The homeowner has the advantage and the loans were designed that way. Right wrong or indifferent, banks underwrite deals knowing they will lose money and some homes will be foreclosed on. On an FHA deal, it is even higher risk and thus they are compensated more because of that. After a short sale you can't buy a house right away (unless you pay an absurd interest rate) so it isn't like the person who walks away from the house is making out like a bandit (they lost the equity they put in) but at the same time, when they entered into the agreement, they always have had the option to walk away and lose the house. It isn't like they entered into the deal with the intention to welch. Note: Please note, my opinion differs if you lied when the loan was underwritten (i.e., fake income, etc).

QUOTE (shipps @ May 5, 2016 -> 06:11 AM) So the short sale lawyer is telling her that the short sale was denied because her credit score was to high (in the 800's) and it was an FHA loan (she was first time home buyer) so those are harder to get approved for short sales. He suggested that she wait a few months and try for short sale again. I cant tell whether or not this lawyer is offering her sound advice or is aggressive enough with the bank. From what I read you cant take no for answer when trying to negotiate a short sale with the bank and these guys seem very passive by what she is telling me. Second opinion. Find someone else. The banks will do everything they can to try and milk money out of a person. It is what they do. You have to have someone who is going to be aggressive. When push comes to shove, they have no right at any of your other assets, etc. All they see is a person with a solid score and other assets and they say, we can get more money from them...but from a legal perspective, they aren't entitled to any of it. I realize people struggle with this fact and want to pay back their debts, but look at the real estate industry and you'll see tons and tons of companies who structure themselves purely so they are isolated and can walk away from bad investments. You have to do what is in the best interest of you when working with a bank. These loans have risks and the banks underwrite them accordingly with risk margins, etc...they know some people will walk away and as long as you are honest with them in the underwriting process, my opinion is, you need to look out for your interests, not the banks. And from an FHA perspective, people pay even more in fees on an FHA loan which are supposed to cover the higher default risk anyway. I would get advice from another party (worse thing they do is come back to you with the same answer and none of them should be getting compensated unless action happens).

QUOTE (OmarComing25 @ May 5, 2016 -> 07:38 AM) Over the past two weeks, Abreu is hitting .308/.373/.462. As I said in this post, his problem has not been swinging at the offspeed low and away, it was always not swinging enough at pitches in the zone. Over the last two weeks he's still swinging at balls, but now he's swinging a lot more at strikes. After swinging at just 63% of strikes after the first few weeks, he's swung at nearly 80% of strikes over the past two weeks (numbers similar to his 2014 season), with great success. Abreu is successful when he swings the bat more often. You can live with him not laying off the pitches low and away as long as he's swinging at the good pitches to hit, which is what has happened during his current hot stretch. He currently has a career-high walk rate and a career-low strikeout rate, so he'll be fine. Keep swinging, Jose. You are an excellent poster. Always learn something new from your posts.

QUOTE (ron883 @ May 4, 2016 -> 07:34 PM) You'll see, I'm going to be right. Abreu can't lay off the breaking ball outside. I'm going to bump this up when he is in a slump, and I'll bump it at the end of the year when he puts up his worst year yet statistically. In his first two seasons, Abreu put up numbers in line with only Albert Pujols. Yes, I think you will be wrong. He certainly could end up being worse than last year, but if Abreu has a bad season, I'll be beyond shocked.

QUOTE (gosoxgo2005 @ May 5, 2016 -> 05:39 AM) Rodon is slowly starting to drive me insane watching him pitch. Anyone who'd rather have Rodon over Nola right now is taking c razy pills Rodon is much rawer than Nola. He is going to have his issues and still has to work on repeating his delivery, etc. His raw stuff is outstanding, but he's still absolutely a work in process from a pitchers perspective. That said, he's got a great pitchers frame and clearly plus stuff which is good enough to develop at the big league level. Despite some struggles, including one awful game, his overall ERA is still I'll also point out Matt Latos will end up with an ERA > 4. I hope I'm wrong but he'll revert back. His stuff isn't good enough to pitch as close as he has, that said, his command and moxy is certainly good enough to give us quality starts (which is something I had my doubts about before the season started). The key to this club, outside of health (which is a key to most any club) will be whether we can find a sustainable 5th starter, imo. I think Johnson can be that guy and I hope he can show that. That doesn't mean dominant pitcher, but can give us innings and keep us in games.

Is first episode today?

Reports that if Lakers get top pick they have decided they will trade it for a more proven player.