Soxbadger

Damn you big red, that ruined a season!

Espn schedule says ESPN3, so maybe only internet. (im not watching)

Wisconsin lost to Cornell one time, still hurts.

Your statement was the Bears best case was to lose to the Packers. That is not even close to the Bears best case. I then showed why the Packers without Rodgers, likely would be just as bad as the Bears, showing that the Packers are just as thin as the Bears, because losing a QB like Rodgers would have effectively ended their Super Bowl chances. I have no clue what you are arguing. It seemingly is all over the place. If your argument is that the Bears offense is not as good as the Packers, that is true. But the Bears defense is likely better, so once again, Im not sure where you are going. The point remains, no team is built to withstand the loss of Cutler/Forte. Notice how I said : You then said "nope", implying that the Packers are good without Rodgers.

They are just as fallible. If they lose their starting QB they arent a Super Bowl contender, just like the Bears. In fact the Packers rely more on a single player than most of the NFL, hence they are more fallible. This isnt rocket science, anyone who watches the NFL understands that most teams dont have multiple All-Pro QB's.

So you think Green Bay is good with out Rodgers? Offensive Rushing YPG: 99.7 good for 25th overall Defensive Passing YPG: 298.4 good for 31st overall Defensive Rushing YPG: 108.4 good for 12th overall With Rodgers, they won 5 games by 7 points or less. The Packers with Flynn are maybe 8-6., but Id guess they are 500 or worse.

Thats why its a "BEST CASE" scenario. I know that you may disagree on many things, but Im pretty sure we can all agree that the word BEST means. Its almost like you dont even realize bad things could happen to other teams. If Rodgers got hurt instead of Cutler,do you think the BEST the Bears could have done was losing to the Packers? Thats why its a ridiculous statement. The Packers are just as fallible (if not more fallible) than half the teams in the NFL.

Your best case scenario really isnt best case at all, its what we call "the most likely scenario". Best case scenario would have been Packers are eliminated their first game, Bears are the highest seed to advance, Bears make Super Bowl and beat the Tebow lead Broncos. Thats a best case scenario.

Succession could be very troublesome. Il-Jong was much older when he succeeded his father and they had spent years prepping for it. Furthermore you are now once removed from any connection to Il-Sung who is the one that garners the armies loyalty. And of course the last problem is competing heirs, Jong-Il was the eldest son of Il-Sung, Jong-Un on the other hand is Il-Jong's youngest son, leaving arguably 2 other suitable candidates. If you are going to strike for power, now is the time because Jong-Un is extremely young (27-28) .

QUOTE (KyYlE23 @ Dec 16, 2011 -> 10:41 AM) It is kind of primetime. It is the only game of the day, it is a featured game. It may be on at a "prime time" slot, but the NFL network is anything but prime time. You have to realize the NFL does not want great games on Thursday, their biggest contracts are with CBS/FOX/NBC and having good games on NFL Network has caused complete clusterf***s for the league (see New England Patriots v NY Giants on Saturday Night 2007), so they try and pick decent games (Jax v Atlanta before the season was 2 playoff teams) but not games that have any real meaning. Thus Jax gets a lot of those games because they dont have a home fan base that will have a Senator write a letter to the NFL which in turn causes the NFL to put the game on 4 networks.

And because Thursday on NFL Network is the exact opposite of prime time. Many people do not even get the channel.

What does being the best 6th man have to do with being better than Rip? I believe Rip was a starter, so I dont believe hes eligible for a bench award.

Bledsoe over Gordon didnt make sense for the Clippers, but they see them more than me so maybe they know something.

Doesnt the NBA have to fire the Hornets GM at this point? Either he A) agreed to a Lakers deal that was moronic without even seeing what options were out there or B) was promised some sort of other compensation by the Lakers if he agreed to the trade. Most likely the guy is out when a new owner buys the team, so I hate to say it, but theres a definite reason hed want to collude with the lakers if they promised him a future job. Either way, the guy was either stupid or worse.

I always thought he meant Jordan Knight from New Kids On The Block.

The Bulls without Rose are better than Detroit, who won 30 games last year. The guy you say is worthless (Hamilton) was arguably one of their best 3 players. This is a puzzle.

Cleveland won 19 games last year. 30 wins is considerably better than 19, more than 1.5x better actually. The Bulls wouldnt be as bad as Cleveland.

Even without Rose the Bulls wouldnt be as bad as Cleveland.

Im pretty sure AI would have given group reacharounds to get talent like Deng, Noah and even Boozer. Im not sure thats a good talent comparison. No one on that team outside of AI averaged over 12.5 points.

Or conversely, the more amount of unsecured debt you can discharge.

I wonder if players had their attorneys review the books and do due diligence on their ability to pay out these contracts. If I was Pujols attorney I would have definitely told him that $250mil from Moreno is much more likely to be paid than $287 from Loria. I think A-Rod lost money due to the Texas bk.

This team has bankruptcy written all over it. That will truly be a horror story for the players.

D-Wise wasnt on 2005 White Sox. That is Ozzie's goal.

So who is next Podsednik and Carlos Lee?

Clippers supposedly make claim on Billups. That is unexpected.