RockRaines

QUOTE(thedoctor @ Jan 29, 2008 -> 03:42 PM) other than humber, i'm not real familiar with the guys the mets gave up. any insight into these guys? They say Gomez is lightening quick, decent OBP, good fielder, basically a 5-tool guy, but doesnt walk a whole lot. Guerra (sp?)is supposedly a Liriano-type guy, good change, good heat.

QUOTE(jackie hayes @ Jan 29, 2008 -> 03:40 PM) $150 mil over 6? Pretty nice deal for us. I'm surprised they couldn't even finagle Martinez out of the Mets. Humber is a broken down shell of what he once was, maybe a #5 guy. I hear the Guerra guy is good but raw. I just hope Gomez isnt Beltran 2

QUOTE(Gregory Pratt @ Jan 29, 2008 -> 12:16 AM) I can't think of anyone other than Jordan or Babe Ruth who I think could beat Woods in such a poll. Still rather be Woods. Your job is considered a leisure activity for god sakes!!!!!!!! People dont take basketball vacations. The longevity in your profession is ridiculous, and when you get too old to compete, we put you with other old farts and continue to give you the money. ON top of that his hot wife, his baby in wedlock, and you have yourself a winner folks.

Best news of the offseason. Im so happy we dont have to come up against that bastard regularly any more.

Mets is my best guess, and now ive clicked on that link and its confirmed. Has anyone done any research to how many losses Santana hands the Sox each year. This could net us at least 3 more wins. Of course Gomez could be the next Beltran for all I know, and he KILLED us

and scored 100 percent

QUOTE(Pants Rowland @ Jan 29, 2008 -> 12:46 PM) Update on the housing market. Ugh! http://money.cnn.com/2008/01/29/news/econo...sion=2008012913 I hope everyone on here understands that these reports bring areas like Detroit, Miami, riverside, etc etc into the equation.

IM 8 episodes away from having a full season 3 brush up. Cant wait. Forgot how much crazy s*** was going on.

QUOTE(Pants Rowland @ Jan 29, 2008 -> 01:38 PM) Is there any reason not to think the Giants might prefer Brandon Inge over Crede? because the Tigers are keeping him as a backup catcher.

QUOTE(Kalapse @ Jan 28, 2008 -> 06:14 PM) Different website. mlbtraderumors.com is a fine source of information. especially their Gallagher, Murton, Pie, Marquis for Bedard and Roberts trades.

Smokescreen because Crede is on his way to SF.

QUOTE(kapkomet @ Jan 25, 2008 -> 05:20 PM) Hey, you bastard, I resemble that remark. Sorry kap, but you have to admit, there are some strange people in Dallas. But overall a great city. Also seemed like the amount of gated communities is above the norm as well, do you agree?

QUOTE(Leonard Zelig @ Jan 28, 2008 -> 09:16 AM) You guys are talking about English Bulldogs? Yes. Some of the best dogs out there, but are expensive and usually have bad illnesses. Still great dogs. I still think the best in that weight range are going to be mutts from the shelter. My sis and my gf both did that and those are the two best dogs ive ever seen.

Buying dogs are a crapshoot, even certain breeds, the dogs aren't a certain type. Although I always question people who go to a breeder when there are so many great adoptable dogs in shelters, if you aren't planning on showing your dog, take a look at a shelter please. The best city dogs I've ever encountered is a bulldog honestly. They are good with kids and strangers, do not need a ton of exercise, and tend to be quieter. They also cuddle. Second on that list is minature pinchers. They are great city dogs. Exercise and socialization are two important factors in choosing city dogs, my rotty wasn't a good fit for my area as he doesn't trust outsiders and needs constant outdoor time. Because of this I had to move him to my very happy parents house. On the flip side, my gfs adopted mutt boxer/chow loves all people and only likes short walks. All in all, its a crap shoot, but dogs are just awesome to have, and also test your patience as a person.

QUOTE(knightni @ Jan 27, 2008 -> 07:02 PM) I bet you'd find debate on the board regarding that. Ive never heard Jon Garland and fav favorite used in the same sentence before.

QUOTE(JFields27 @ Jan 27, 2008 -> 09:46 PM) dun. dun. dun. :poof: Denial for now. When the physical goes through, they wont.

QUOTE(DrunkBomber @ Jan 27, 2008 -> 07:08 PM) Thats a huge problem with college football. If for whatever reason you have 1 bad game all of a sudden you arent in contention for a championship. And yeah, I understand exactly what this is all about, because of the worst game my team played all year, people think that the conference as a whole is bad and that the team is overrated, and because of the worst they played all year, they couldnt win the championship.. Last years BCS title game.

QUOTE(DrunkBomber @ Jan 27, 2008 -> 07:08 PM) I think it is pretty obvious that it was my opinion based on the topic. Out of all the teams that were "choking" at the end of this year I would also say that number one OSU losing at home to U of I belongs in that ball park as well. They wouldnt have needed all those other teams to lose if they took care of their own business either. Just because the past two years people assume the best teams have won the championship doesnt validate the entire system. Maybe the fact that Florida and LSU both easily handled OSU is part of the reason why people think that. If those teams would have had equal competition in the championship game and the game was closer and they showed more flaws people might begin to question if they were the best team in the country. Thats a huge problem with college football. If for whatever reason you have 1 bad game all of a sudden you arent in contention for a championship. Regardless of USC's being upset they still are a good team and easily took care of their Big Ten opponent in the Rose Bowl, the same team that upset OSU. Actually all but 1 of the BCS bowls were blowouts and theyre becoming worse and worse every year. I just think the fact that football fans have to suffer so the big conferences (like the Big 10, see article above) can make more money. I think you are under the impression that i believe OSU should have been in the national title game, they shouldnt have been close. You can actually track my statements on that throughout the college football thread. They were rebuilding this year and lost 8 all big ten players. They should have been in the Rose Bowl, and thats with the horrible loss to Illinois. But dont compare the loss to Illinois to USC's loss to stanford. They were in the title game on chance, and chance alone. Nobody in the country can agree on which team shouldve been in the game with LSU, in fact there are several Georgia fans that would make a case for LSU not belonging in the game at all. Of course LSU lost to a team that was handled by a Big Ten team that was handled by OSU, so there goes the they lost to, they beat logic that you are using. I would like to know what your method would be, and it better not have any flaws. A 64 team playoff isnt feasible in D1 football. Using all the conference champions doesnt make a whole lot of sense as many of the lesser conferences dont play a schedule as tough as any team in the BCS conferences. In any system you suggest, theres going to be a probability of opinion factoring in as well as chance that the game may not be good. Some teams will be left out, and that would essentially be the same situation we have now. Its all a guessing game and even the bowls do not offer a very level playing field. How many bowl teams played home games this year? USC, LSU, etc etc. Thats flawed in itself. D1 college football is one of the most difficult sports to not only handicap, but also judge quality of teams. Many teams do not venture outside of their home stadium during a regular season unless its required by conference play. Undefeated teams can be a joke (hawaii), smaller conference teams can upset large favorites (Boise St). Certain conference can have down years and still win big games. And some teams can look like one of the best teams ever and go down to an unheralded opponent. The only system that would possibly work as I see would be the playoff system involving teams that qualify for BCS bowls, of course this once again favors the bigger BCS conferences and people seem to want to see that advantage go away. Even with the Bowl week, then having the top two performers play a title game brings a large amount of opinion into the picture. USC is looking like a no doubter to be in that game this year and alot of that had to do with an opponent who not only played badly, but didnt belong in the bowl game in the first place.

QUOTE(BearSox @ Jan 27, 2008 -> 07:17 PM) http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22871543/ As of now, it looks like Jones was the only good prospect Baltimore got, and I am not fond of Jones at all. I think he is over hyped due to his athleticism. Im seeing Clement as well. He's solid.

QUOTE(fathom @ Jan 27, 2008 -> 08:21 PM) I'm just thankful Bedard's not going to the Cubs. They never had enough to offer, not even close. The players reported will show how far off the cubs dreamers actually were. The O's got a good haul on this one.

QUOTE(DrunkBomber @ Jan 27, 2008 -> 06:50 PM) No I do think they were the best teams, I just dont think OSU was good enough to be there and the scoreboard agrees. I would have liked to see someone like USC play LSU this year, I think the game would be much more competitive. Im not even saying with the current system OSU didnt deserve to be there. Especially 2 years ago it would be impossible to keep them out, I think the system is flawed. OSU would have gotten hammered this year in a playoff by a few teams. You wont hear me disagree about this year, but every other team choked, and a young buckeyes team still had enough in them to compete in the game. If it wasnt for stupid penalties and a horrific roughing of the punter, it may have swung the other way. And please dont say USC again, theres no way a team that loses in one of the biggest upsets in football history even deserves to be near the city that the championship game is played in. USC and OSU play for the next two years, so you can very well see if there is a huge disparity in talent on the teams. Still, your point is not made very clearly. Both years you say the best team in the country won the title, well if thats true then the system very clearly worked and played out exactly as it should have been played out. Of course your theories about who would have won have no weight here and I will claim LSU would have gotten hammered by several teams in a playoff this year, nobody knows so its kind of stupid to go out there and make a statement like that. And thanks for posting the article that backs up my statement about money being the biggest driver of the BCS system. Just like I said, it has zero to do with the conference not thinking they could compete, but more about the guaranteed money that is at stake for the larger more prominent conferences.

QUOTE(DrunkBomber @ Jan 27, 2008 -> 06:26 PM) I was using the Big Ten as an example. Ive heard many times that the Big Ten is one of the conferences against a playoff, Im not pulling it out of my ass. I personally dont care what conference the teams come from I just know that the past two years the best two teams werent the ones playing for the National Championship and that a team in the NFL that isnt looked at as an elite team shouldnt be questioned if they win the Super Bowl because the system the NFL uses is much better at finding the better teams. So you think that LSU wasnt the best team in the country this year and Fla wasnt last year? I would like to know who you thought were the best teams. And why would ANY major conference be hugely in favor of a playoff? It gives lesser conferences the same odds to win it all and could cut down on bowl payouts and tv airtime. The fans think of the excitement of march madness and the universities think of the fat checks they get to plug back into their institutions.

I do 2 year leases, I like new cars, warranties and I do not like owning a depreciating asset. Ive lost alot more money buying cars than leasing them.

QUOTE(DrunkBomber @ Jan 27, 2008 -> 10:27 AM) Look at the big ten. They are against the playoff in college football because they realize if there was one they would rarely have as much a chance as they do by making it to the BCS championship game. I think OSU the past two years playing for the championship proves how flawed that system is. There were a few other teams who would have given LSU a much better game. Yeah, too bad those teams choked down the stretch. Heres a simple formula, those teams win, they get in the title game, how bout that? Generalize the big ten as much as you want, they didnt belong in the 2002 title game either against the best team that everyone thought would crush OSU, they didnt. Both systems are flawed, but a playoff would obviously be the best, but not having the system has nothing to do with the Big Ten not thinking they could make the title game, thats the biggest load of bulls*** ive ever read. I bet the Big 12 feel the same way with the embarrassment that was Oklahoma in back to back years including the most lopsided BCS game since its inception.

I didnt realize that Indiana has yet to play a top 25 team. I wish they could have taken some of the 6 the Buckeyes have played. Then maybe our record wouldnt look so damn s***ty.