bmags

QUOTE (IamPabloOzuna @ Feb 18, 2010 -> 07:38 AM) Albert Belle circa 1998. I don't care if its more than 5 years ago. BA: .328 OBP: .399 SLG: .655 (1st in MLB) HR: 49 RBI: 152 R: 113 He had like 50 doubles that year too. Incredible.

Mr. Damon, You're hot then you're cold you're yes then you're no you're in then you're out youre up and you're down choose, BEN

next year they are gonna be right. I can't believe we lost to iowa state. so embarrassing.

Mizzou beats texas. Suckasssss.

come on mizzou protect this house betches

yeah, if it ain't done by tomorrow, my optimism plummetssss

Seriously, that would be brutal. But man I can't see the sox commenting and opening themselves up to this...(shiiiit, torii hunter pt. II)

QUOTE (Real @ Feb 18, 2010 -> 02:52 AM) is it 4.5 million with 2 more million in deferrals, stretching that total amount to 6.5 million? or is it 2.5 million up front with 2 more in deferrals making 4.5m total? A few pages back there's good info about that 4.5 deal that I can't really explain all that well

Please beat texas, Mizzou. It would do so much to secure a nice seed.

That comment filled me with acidic rage. Or heart burn.

I think it's a bit of a confusing question Would I want the magglio of what...06 07 08? hell yeah, Do I want the magglio of 10? Not so much. If we are taking a players best year and putting it on that team, that's one thing, I thought we are adding a player we want on our team today that we lost. In that case, Vazquez. The rotation would be ridiculous and our bullpen would be the least used.

YOU MEAN VIZQUEZ

sun times needs to work on their format, that s*** is unreadable

Who among us could tell that cute little boy he couldn't be on our baseball team?! My god, the powty lips! We'd have to buy him a puppy to make up for it.

QUOTE (Steve9347 @ Feb 17, 2010 -> 11:35 PM) It would not even remotely compare. Yeah, I kind of missed the fun that day and only got there once it was decided he went to DET. That was insane, if we really could've pulled that off in 08 with the s***tttt prospects we had, lol.

do you guys realize how absolutely brutal it would be at this point if all the sudden we see @prosen or whateever say "damon signs with tigers"? Would be total 08 "CABRERA TO SOX?" moment only to find the tigers pulled it off.

QUOTE (Leonard Zelig @ Feb 17, 2010 -> 11:26 PM) Why are those # signs in front of the team names? # are trending topics @ is the person you are replying to RT means you are quoting someone elses tweet (ReTweet)

Man, this is exciting. Twitter is totally #bonerquality

I really want a Vizquez jersey. And can't wait for the Rally Vizquez

it's pretty difficult for theory's to be made into laws. Like I said, I find it disrespectful to walk into a class of someone who the subject is their life's study and work, and challenge them before listening to their presentation. And if you can't listen to alternative presentations without crying about bias then you probably aren't cut out for college.

The casual fan is a huge portion of any fan base. They aren't paying attention constantly,a nd will not thing "this guy is just a yankee cast-off" they will think "hey the guy that was playing for all those world series teams I saw signed with the white sox!"

any player that has been slurped up by ESPN for the past 6 years is going to be exciting for a fan base. Peavy has no where near the name recognition that Johnny Damon has.

Maybe I'm timid, though I doubt it, but I also think those questions are out of place for the class. Elaboration: When I take a science class, I do not go into it looking to prove my beliefs, I go into it for knowledge on how to do the science and how to understand their topics/jobs. A better way to explain this, This 6,000 year belief is based on religion. The biologists work is not based off of religion, but based on the work they've done. I think the importance of the class is to ask questions pertaining to that work. And I think it's shortsighted to say you can't still find you're beliefs on that 6,000 even moreso by knowing how the science works. And more elaboration: I took religious studies courses on the torrah and also a christianity course. When in the torrah class, I didn't feel it germane to the class to ask "Why do the jews reject the son of god when there is clear evidence that he was the prophet?" The class is about the teachings of the torah and the societies it represented. My questions stuck to them. In the Christianity class, I did not ask for proof to counter my growing atheism. I learned what there was to learn, and I found it a fulfilling class. It's just as important to learn the topic at hand without forcing the topic to extrapolate to your own hypotheses. That can be done at professor hours. But I find it a bit disrespectful to ask the teacher to debate something off topic.

I had a presidential class too. I thought it was a little overly favorable to Wilson, but I don't know what you take from that. It seems poliSci professors think much more highly of him (perhaps his background) And also he had a huge hard on for James K Polk, but I chalked that up for being a big They Might Be Giants fan.

Was anyone else surprised at how unpolitical their college was? I was pretty relieved, I think I would've been annoyed as hell at Madison, Wisc in 2008. All my polisci courses were so process specific it never really got into political parties. It might just be that thousands of 18-24 year olds on their own without parental influence tend to be more liberal before they find jobs and move on.