Jake

They should be able to keep their ballots private if they want to. You're supposed to make the right vote, not the popular one. If backlash will have a chilling effect, then you can't make them public.

QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Dec 24, 2014 -> 12:30 PM) Does anyone on the site have the TV version of league pass, but not use the online access or not use it a lot? I have the TV version, but don't use it on my TV. I'm pissed, too, because I didn't realize that Time Warner would only have one HD game going at once. I don't always check, but I've never seen a Bulls game on the lone HD channel.

I don't mind them asking why I cancel - what I mind is that their pay is based on how many people they talk out of it, which understandably results in a terrible experience

Will Aaron Brooks be the first tiny, offense-oriented backup PG to return the next season after playing well?

Probably not a pick, but game over either way

Wow. Alshon Jeffery may well have lost us this game with his atrocious day

Very lazy by Jeffery

I thought Wilson was done for sure

SPECIAL TEAMS! SPECIAL TEAMS! SPECIAL TEAMS!

Fuller has been talking s*** non-stop today

You can say that Jimmy Clausen hasn't convinced you that he's actually any good, but he's basically pitched a no-hitter today (would be a perfecto without the "errors" if you catch my drift). Don't let your dislike of management cloud your judgment of what is a really nice football game for him. Unfortunate that the receiving corps seems to have packed it in

Great job!

Wow, another drop. On the bright side, Clausen looks extremely accurate and works the pocket pretty well

Special teams come through like usual. And a sensational play call for the TD

Awful no-call

Jeffery caught one!

Clausen looks excellent. Accurate, making smart decisions, has been victimized by four drops at least by now. The one bad play was the fourth down on the goal line - I don't know if there was a guy to throw to, but he chucked it up to Eben Britton

Clausen actually looks really good.

QUOTE (scs787 @ Dec 20, 2014 -> 11:05 PM) A google search tells me no but maybe I'm missing someting...In an effort to save money I'm thinking about getting a roku...but only if theres way to full baseball, basketball, and football games...I'm SOL n that regard right? Basketball is possible via NBA League Pass - $149/year. MLB.tv is possible, I believe that's also $149 for a full season. I might be wrong and it could be as high as $199. There is no streaming support for NFL on Roku or any other streaming device other than game consoles

QUOTE (Chicago White Sox @ Dec 18, 2014 -> 08:11 PM) I think you're reaching a bit here. I won't deny that actual WAR is fairly predictive of actual wins, but projected WAR doesn't seem to be very predictive of actual wins. I mean, we're only talking about a .43 r2 between projected and actual WAR. And again, actual WAR is fairly predictive of actual wins, but it's far from perfect (BTW, not suggesting it should be). So saying projected WAR is "fairly predictive" of actual wins doesn't seem entirely accurate to me. I would say that projected WAR is directionally right more often than not, but it will still have its fair share of misses, some of which are quite sizable. I'm not arguing that these projection systems don't provide value, because they do, but I would never use them more than a frame of reference when setting my own expectations. Without more human input, the accuracy of these protection systems will always be limited. I'm a social scientist, so we poop our pants when we see an R2 that high

QUOTE (Chilihead90 @ Dec 19, 2014 -> 04:57 PM) Family plan. I'm in the same boat. I'm on a company line where there's just no way it's advantageous for me to get an off-contract device short of needing one before I'm eligible for upgrade. The thing is, if I call them (ATT), they always give me an early upgrade.

Once the cap moves up, whatever we pay Jimmy in the summer will look like a steal

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Dec 18, 2014 -> 06:15 PM) It's an admittedly small sample size, but this begins to paint a picture. What I thought about while reading was - okay, so we know actual WAR is very predictive of actual wins and that projected WAR is fairly predictive of actual wins. What would be nice is a comparison to other things. Maybe compare against analysts' predictions and against some other statistics, like bWAR or WARP or non-sabermetric statistics.

QUOTE (greg775 @ Dec 11, 2014 -> 10:46 PM) Speaking of Democrats and Obama ... Did anybody see that AWESOME skit on Sat. Night Live a week or so ago where they had that funny cast member, don't know his name, the chubby (fat?) guy as host of a panel discussion. The gist of it was he asks his black guests questions about Obama failures and the guest comments on them and agrees that Obama is a joke, then the host asks the guest, "Does he lose your vote??" The guest immediately says, "No." He repeats it with 3-4 guests and they all say "no," when the host says, "does he lose your vote?" It's really funny and backs what I've said all along that Obama would be president the next 20 years or so if we had no term limits and he could keep running. No matter what he does and how inept he is ... he'd keep winning. It's a big LOL on our entire country. s***, it's like Kansas. Brownback is the worst government official probably in U.S. history (did you see the cuts he announced this week; slashing all sorts of organizations who do good things for citizens; and he'll kill all the programs for the elderly, etc) and what do KANSANS do ... they re-elect him. Shakin my head. You do realize the whole point of the skit was that Obama was still better than the alternatives. The gist was that these black folks felt so unwanted by the rest of politics that of course they weren't going to desert the first black President. Besides, they weren't listing off Obama failures, they were listing off hypotheticals like having his daughters talk back to him and other stuff like that.

He meant adding teams to the playoffs.