whitesoxfan101

QUOTE (whitesoxfan99 @ Jan 29, 2009 -> 09:31 PM) Just an all around terrible performance. Legion has been disappointing, Davis didn't want to play tonight and Trent hasn't hit a shot in a month. Trent is an absolutely awful big game player. For the most part, you can count on him shooting blanks if the stakes in the game are big. I'm surprised at Davis tonight though, he usually shows up in the big games and naps through the lesser ones.

When you beat a team 21 times in a row, the odds say a loss is imminent, especially when your opponent is pretty good and it's on the road. At the same time, this is one of the worst offensive games I've ever seen any college team play, let alone Illinois.

QUOTE (lostfan @ Jan 29, 2009 -> 05:53 PM) Mayor, Governor, President. Game, set, match. Indeed.

QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Jan 29, 2009 -> 07:58 PM) As to the HOF, if it keeps denying the best players entrance, then it no longer becomes relevant. I think it's already reached that point with people like Bert Blyleven and Tim Raines out, and Bill Mazeroski and Jim Rice in.

QUOTE (fathom @ Jan 29, 2009 -> 08:53 PM) I'm not saying the league is bad, but the level of play in Big 10 games this season has been as bad as I can ever remember. Part of it is good defense, and part of it is officiating in my opinion. The refs who do Big 10 games let WAY too much go, and I think you'd see the games open up a bit if they were ever to be called properly.

That might have been the worst half of basketball I've ever seen at the major college basketball level (that is slightly hyperbolic, but I legitimately thing it's one of the 10 worst). People can throw out the "great defense" bull s***, but that was absolutely pathetic offense. Neither team deserves to win at this point, and I would hope for the sake of those watching that SOMEBODY (preferably Illinois of course) steps up and actually plays some ball in the 2nd half.

QUOTE (joesaiditstrue @ Jan 29, 2009 -> 03:58 PM) I still say Bonds gets in, and widespread pandemonium ensues I would bet my posting privledges here that he never gets in the hall of fame, and this coming from a guy that would probably vote for him if he had the privledge.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jan 29, 2009 -> 03:54 PM) I dont know about that. I mean, there was a bottle of Andro found in Mac's locker. That's about as blatant as you get. Except Andro was legal when that happened. Anabolic steroids in your urine is a much bigger problem to get around with the HOF voters.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Jan 29, 2009 -> 03:42 PM) Hopefully he gets successfully prosecuted for perjury, which will probably be enough to keep his cowardly ass out of the Hall of Fame. That will be a happy day. He won't get in regardless. There is a lot more evidence against Bonds than there is Sosa or McGwire (for the record, I think they both used too, but there still isn't nearly as much evidence), and neither of them are going to get in. Now obviously Bonds had a significantly better career than those two, but they'd probably both have been first ballot hall of famers without the whispers.

QUOTE (Jordan4life @ Jan 29, 2009 -> 03:37 PM) Got this article off the Illiniloyalty board. Very good read. The arrow is definitely trending upwards for this program. http://www.toptenchicagosports.com/2009/01...are-flying.html I don't think anybody would argue with this. The Illini really don't have a great deal of talent this year, and are still 17-3 and going to make the NCAA Tournament barring disaster. As the calvary arrives the next two years (and the 2011 class is probably going to be fantastic as well), things are going to only get better and better down there.

QUOTE (rangercal @ Jan 29, 2009 -> 03:46 PM) yeah, but is a 2 % chance on Blake Griffin really worth missing the postseason? No, especially since Oklahoma City is going to get the #1 pick this year. The Chicago hometown kid ended up in Chicago, the Akron boy ended up in Cleveland several years ago, and the local kid from Oklahoma is going to end up with the Thunder. That's just how the NBA does it with their "lottery" (lol).

The argument here is pretty lame. I don't care what "numbers" Pete Carroll has that show Sanchez won't be a success in the NFL. The fact is he's going to be a top 10 pick, if not a top 5 pick, and that means he's going to get 15 to 30 million dollars in guaranteed money (probably somewhere in the 20's). He's set for the rest of his life with that, even if he isn't a good player at the pro level. If he comes back to USC, maybe he suffers a really bad injury. Now i'm sure he'd have had insurance had he come back, but I doubt it would have paid nearly as much as signing bonus, plus the insurance costs a lot of money I believe. Pete Carroll might be right that Sanchez isn't ready and will bust in the NFL, but the guaranteed money will always be there. Plus, he's a QB so even if he's bad, he'll hang around the league for several years and make all of those annual salaries as well. The FIRST thing 99 percent of players care about is money, as much as fans hate to hear it, it's the truth, ESPECIALLY for younger guys. As a guy gets into his 30's, he might have his share of money and want to get a ring at whatever paycut he may have to take, but the younger guys want their money. And who can blame them?

QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Jan 29, 2009 -> 01:02 PM) This is completely ridiculous and completely irrelevant to the Prosecutions case. The Prosecution must prove that Bonds "KNOWINGLY TOOK STEROIDS". How does a sample of urine with Steroids prove that Bonds knew he was taking steroids? Its the same answer as before: I took the cream and clear, I didnt know what they were. I took Pill B that my Dr gave to me, I didnt know what it was, he said it would help the pain, I believed him. Also they have no "chain of evidence". Who has had these substances for 6 years, how do we know that they were not tampered with, etc etc. I wonder how much govt money has been wasted trying to discredit Barry Bonds because he isnt lovable enough. In terms of a criminal case in court, I have to agree with this honestly. One thing that I believe has been shown is that Barry Bonds used steriods, and probably used them willingly, which to me severly damages his baseball legacy, even though I believe he didn't start using the stuff until about the year 2000 and would have been a hall of famer without it. But as hard as it is to prove what I say about when he started using the stuff (which is why I think he won't get in the hall of fame), it's even harder to prove that he KNOWINGLY used steriods. It's obvious he used them in general, and it's highly unlikely he didn't know what he was doing, but I don't think there is nearly enough evidence there to prove he perjured himself. That is just so hard to prove in a court of law.

Sandy Alderson says he expects Jake Peavy to be on the opening day roster. Or, in other words, he'll be traded at high value in July to a team with actual prospects (ie not the Cubs). What a freaking surprise, who could have seen that one coming? You can't trade trash and get gold too often.

That Northwestern/Indiana game was awfully entertaining for a game between an NIT team and a soon to be 1-17 or 2-16 Big Ten team. As for Wake/Duke, Wake Forest is CLEARLY a better basketball team head to head than Duke, by far. The problem is they are young, so they got a bit lazy and let a pretty veteran Duke team back into it as a result, but were fortunate enough to pull it out. With all the length and athletic ability Wake Forest has, they can be a nightmare as a team defensively and as a result can use that defense and athletic skill to lead to and execute on the fast break. They have to be one of the favorites to make a run to the Final Four right now, although that youth can be scary in March.

Saw Lauren Graham on Letterman tonight. I didn't really know who she was other than the fact she was in the Gilmore Girls (which I didn't even watch), and I still don't know anymore about her now, but damn! Girl turns 42 in March and looks absolutely amazing for that age. I had no idea until I just now wikipedia'd her how old she was, I'd have guessed she is in her late 20's based on how she looked on Letterman (and I was watching in HD too). I know a lot of these people have some amazing techniques in Hollywood to defy age, but most of them are pretty obvious. Not in this case.

I agree that action is needed right away, but that article is incredibly dire in it's portrayal of things. It was hard to read it and not feel like it was saying, to a certain degree, it's too late. I don't think it's too late, and I don't think science feels that way either, but that article sure seemed to be talking that way. The sad part is that if it is indeed "very very close to being too late", I am not sure things can be fixed in time. Too many hurdles to clear worldwide in that regard in my opinion, even with a skilled orator like Obama running the free world.

People are going to continue ignoring the facts and continue to think Peavy is coming to the Cubs. It's just like the Roberts stuff last year that people kept buying but never happened. I am done arguing it, because arguments are pointless if people ignore the obvious. The only way the Cubs could possibly get Peavy is if the Padres give him up for nothing, and if they were willing to do that, they'd have traded him somewhere by now. The one interesting thing about this trade if it is indeed Olson and Cedeno is that means the Cubs got Aaron Heilman for Ronny Cedeno and Felix Pie at the end of the day. That is CLASSIC Cubs, taking what were valuable chips, keeping them too long, and trading them for very little/next to nothing (although Heilman has had a few pretty good bullpen years, but my point still stands).

http://www.noaanews.noaa.gov/stories2009/2...26_climate.html This article almost sounds like a case of using exaggerated scare tactics, but it appears they have science that causes them to believe it's actually true. Maybe all of the enviornmental arguments and healthier for the planet/"greener" ideas don't matter because it's too late anyways. That is a sad thought if true.

I have never seen a guy who seems legitimately insane, but also is a very smooth talker at the same time. At least not until Blago, he is truly one of a kind.

QUOTE (lostfan @ Jan 27, 2009 -> 10:47 AM) Ugh I hate "fire and passion" vs. "players coach" arguments. The fanbase always seems to want the one they don't have when they're losing, and they always love the version they have when the team is winning. As always, the truth lies in the middle. You are best off having a coach who has "fire and passion" when he needs it (which isn't a lot, but on occasion) and is a "players coach" in my opinion. It's definitely possible to do too as I think both coaches in this years Super Bowl fall into the category of being both of those things. You don't want a boring stiff as your coach, but you don't want a crazy screamer either.

As I woke up earlier this morning to get ready for the day, I had on WSCR, and they had Doug Plank on the show. He did something I really hate, talked like a dumb, old meatball. Not to sound like Dan Bernstein here, but Plank was talking about how "the important part of football is being more physical and hitting hard and having a plan to dominate" and that is just so damn stupid. EVERYBODY in football is physical and hits hard and has a plan, teams win and lose games because of talent and not making mistakes. Don't talk to me like I'm stupid Mr. Plank.

Craig Drummond to Ole Miss. If you want to know the real reason why the SEC is the best conference in America, a guy like Drummond is it. There is no way in hell he'd EVER get into a Big 10 school (which is the real reason he isn't going to Illinois), so he just verbals to Ole Miss instead and I can almost guarantee you he'll qualify and get on the field in short order down there. That's not me being bitter or angry either, it's just the truth, skip every class is a perfect nickname for that league.

QUOTE (Steve9347 @ Jan 26, 2009 -> 02:57 PM) Stop. Please stop world. Anything with Obama on it is a hot seller right now and that is what rules the day, ESPECIALLY in a bad economy.

1. Orthodox Quaker (100%) 2. Mainline to Liberal Christian Protestants (97%) 3. Mainline to Conservative Christian/Protestant (90%) 4. Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints (Mormons) (86%) 5. Liberal Quakers (81%) 6. Baha'i Faith (81%) 7. Eastern Orthodox (76%) 8. Orthodox Judaism (76%) 9. Roman Catholic (76%) 10. Jehovah's Witness (75%) 11. Seventh Day Adventist (74%) 12. Islam (69%) 13. Sikhism (67%) 14. Reform Judaism (61%) 15. Unitarian Universalism (61%) 16. Christian Science (Church of Christ, Scientist) (44%) 17. Neo-Pagan (44%) 18. Mahayana Buddhism (43%) 19. Jainism (42%) 20. Theravada Buddhism (42%) 21. Hinduism (41%) 22. New Age (39%) 23. Secular Humanism (36%) 24. New Thought (32%) 25. Taoism (27%) 26. Scientology (24%) 27. Nontheist (21%) I wasn't the biggest fan of the options answerwise on this at times, but these quizzes are obviously not exact. Among the 27 listed "religions", I would fall into category #2 on my results (although religiously, I think I am definitely more in the liberal category in comparison to the average protestant).