whitesoxfan101

Rough loss for the Bulls last night. Had a great opportunity to get another huge victory, but they just couldn't make plays down the stretch and the Spurs left town with a win.

Hard to judge much from yesterday's Illinois/Michigan State game because both teams played absolutely horrible for most of the game. However, Michigan State is the better team and was at home, and thus it was not a surprise they pulled it out. Illinois is going to have a hard time winning big games this year for the most part, especially on the road, because there just isn't a lot of offense on the roster. For them to win big games, they'll have to impose their will defensively for 40 minutes and have a little luck, such as in the game at Purdue. The more I watch Missouri (who is actually a pretty damn good team), the more I wonder how Illinois just completely destroyed them on a neutral floor. That win looks better and better by the day.

QUOTE (Brian @ Jan 14, 2009 -> 09:26 PM) I've always been a fairweather Blackhawks fan. I admit it. Ha Different now though. When they were bad in the past, the organization was being run like crap. If they go down the toilet, I'll probably still stick with them cuz you can see what the organization is doing. This pretty much describes me as well. Damn the Blues have given the Hawks a lot of trouble this year, but it was nice to see the visitors come up with 2 points last night. I thought Huet played a fantastic game, with an assist to the Blues for all of those off the mark shots on golden scoring chances.

I wonder if Mac even planned on re-signing in a year after his option year would have been up. I would guess maybe not, and the station decided to send him packing a year early and save the 600 grand in this economy. MJH is the bellcow of that station, so this move is obviously a huge risk especially with B&B on down the dial at the same time, but Carmen is pretty good and they still have Jurko and Harry. I would have to imagine Carmen (who is a Sox fan right?) will keep the gig long term, as he's the best they've got and can balance out the Cubbie BS of Jurko and Harry. I wonder where Mac will end up. I HATE the Hampton and Holmes show, and I would love to see Mac end up taking that slot. However, I question if he'd ever go back to the Score, and especially for a show only 2 hours long.

Of course Minnesota is going to be good for a while, they have a fantastic coach and that's really all that matters in college basketball if you want to be good. As I've said in this years thread, the Big 10 has a very bright future in terms of basketball because it's an outstanding conference in terms of it's coaches.

QUOTE (MHizzle85 @ Jan 13, 2009 -> 02:31 PM) I'd assume so. Any kind of history with the girl? If she's not into you, this is one of the biggest teases i've ever heard of. Nah no history, and I was being completely sarcastic, I know she's into me. I'm just not sure if I want to hit it or not. And no, she doesn't live in Russia.

It's just hard to watch the Bulls right now, I think impossible to do so on a nightly basis. The only thing that keeps the Bulls from falling into full fledged "I'll occasionally watch and I still like the team, but i'm disinterested due to the lousy product" status like the Blackhawks did from about 1997 through 2007 is Derrick Rose, and even having him is a byproduct of either luck or NBA intervention, depending on who you ask.

Since so many people here ask for girl advice, I will too! If a girl is flirty with you almost at all times when you see her, texts you a lot, and then sends you a partial nudie picture, does she want you? I'm unsure on this one.

QUOTE (danman31 @ Jan 12, 2009 -> 11:07 PM) Laettner's NBA career > Tebow's NFL career I agree, but I make that comparison in case Tebow is better than I think he will be in the NFL. I think his CEILING in the NFL is akin to what Laettner did in the NBA.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Jan 12, 2009 -> 03:19 PM) Rice played the heart of his career in the 70's, Konerko the late 90's early 2000's. They are not remotely comparable eras, and Konerko shouldn't sniff a HOF ballot (unless he suddenly turns it on and has about 5+ career-best-like seasons). They are different eras for sure, but somebody with such comparable stats to Konerko shouldn't be in the hall of fame, even taking into account the different era factor. Rice should obviously have received more consideration with the era factor, but he should not be in the hall of fame. No way.

QUOTE (ChiSox_Sonix @ Jan 12, 2009 -> 03:02 PM) Only because he is Derek Jeter, plays for the Yankee$, is nauseatingly beloved by the media and is the best player ever (dont forget "Mr November"). NOT because he is worthy of being a 1st ballot HoF'er Jeter is in all likelihood going to retire with around (and i'm being conservative here) over 3000 hits, 1000 walks, 250 home runs, 325 to 350 stolen bases, an OPS around .850 as a top of the order hitter and middle infielder, 1800 runs scored, over 2000 games, 500 doubles, 1200 RBI's, a .315 batting average and .385 on base percentage. All of those numbers don't include his postseason work. He also has (although undeserved) 3 gold gloves, 4 world championship rings, a .309/.377/.469 postseason line in 123 games and 495 at bats, 9 all star apperances, a rookie of the year, an all star game and world series MVP, and 3 silver sluggers. Although his regular season work is overrated, he's one of the better postseason players of all time and will retire with many records of the most succesful organization in sports history. He will be a 1st ballot hall of famer, and I have a hard time arguing it despite my dislike for Jeter.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jan 12, 2009 -> 03:04 PM) Comparing offensive statistics from different eras give no indication of how good a particular player was within his own playing days. Why, because Paul Konerko's numbers during his peak years (1999-2006 or so) aren't as impressive because a bunch of the "better" numbers around him were achieved in large part due to steroid use? I think comparing their numbers (if we assume both of them were clean, which i'm going to) is logicial. It's not like they played 50 to 100 years apart.

Candidate A: .352 OBP, .491 slugging, .843 OPS. .904 home OPS, .786 away OPS 12 seasons, 298 home runs, 603 walks, 895 strikeouts, no gold gloves. Played all home games at a right handed hitters haven. Candidate B: .352 OBP, .502 slugging, .854 OPS. .920 home OPS, .789 away OPS 16 seasons, 382 home runs, 670 walks, 1423 strikeouts, no gold gloves. Played all home games at a right handed hitters haven. Just for the record, candidate B is Jim Rice and Candidate A is Paul Konerko. So I guess assuming Paulie plays out his contract here in Chicago, puts up two average years by his standards, and then either retires or just plays a year or two extra somewhere else, he should be in the hall of fame too? Well yes, according to the precedent set today, he should. The uprising on the east coast for Jim Rice to be in the hall of fame was a joke, and the fact that he is now in is a joke, it's not the "hall of really good". But hey, I'm sure Paul Konerko and his similar numbers will get this same support someday, right?

QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Jan 11, 2009 -> 03:09 PM) All I'm going to say is that I was stunned to see where everyone is pegging Iowa to finish next season. I've seen them predicted as a top 13 team and the best team in the big ten. I'm not sure I get that since they are losing three stud underclassmen (the two big defensive guns on the line and Shonne Greene the best running back in college football this season). Oh and I'd once again like to pat Ferentz on the back as his teams have beaten some big time schools in bowls during his tenure (and aside from the USC loss in there first BCS game they pretty much were in or leading every bowl game). Who the hell are these people? The main reason so many people thought Ferentz might leave is he had a very good team this year and probably will have a non-bowl team next year due to personnel losses (mainly Greene of course). As for Tebow, he's Christian Laettner, except with a wider media following due to the 24 hour news cycle, and obviously a different sport. And to make matters worse, the media seems to think the fact that he has a strong faith in God MAKES him God. He'll be good but overrated again next year, and have a long mediocre career as a NFL backup QB unless he tries to change positions, in which case he'll be out of the league within a year or two. Colt McCoy I didn't think got too much attention this year, he was just that damn good, although he's smart to come back because he hasn't shown he can throw downfield, and might have the chance to next year with some of their young weapons a year older and Shipley back.

QUOTE (Palehosefan @ Jan 10, 2009 -> 05:58 PM) He would have been crazy to stick around Louisville. That coaching staff is in hot, hot water. I would hope so, they are doing a awful job down there. John L. Smith and Bobby Petrino both built quite the program down there, and Kragthrope and his staff have pretty much destroyed all of that hard work the last two seasons.

The biggest play of the game (the 3rd and long pass to Heap on the last drive) should have been a delay of game, and the fact a missed call was such a key factor in a playoff game is a shame. I'm still also curious as to if Flacco stayed in bounds when he rolled out at the very back of the end zone on a 3rd and long pass play before Baltimore punted in the 4th quarter. However, at the end of the day, Tennessee had 3 giveaways (one at the Baltimore 32, another at the Baltimore 17, and a third at the Baltimore 6) zero takeaways, and 12 penalties. You have nobody to blame but yourself when you put up those numbers and lose a playoff game.

QUOTE (gbuk @ Jan 10, 2009 -> 07:08 PM) Well hey, at least we know you've watched your Illinois basketball this year. Just like the pollsters you point out that they lost on the road to Michigan, yet don't point out the win earlier in the week on the road at Purdue. I mean what are we using as criteria for a ranking? Undefeated? I mean hey, if we're going to say that playing poor defense on the road at Michigan means you shouldn't be ranked, then Duke shouldn't be ranked either should they? The recipe to be ranked is the fact that they're playing their best basketball since '06. If people would step back and remember how Weber's offense runs when he has the right personnel and how effective it is they'd be wary of this team. But I've obviously seen the hilarious "Weber is a terrible coach" posts on this board before. Fact is, they're leading the country in assisted basket percentage...exactly what a good Weber offense does. And really, leave the "they were awful last year" argument at home. You really think that matters? I've watched or been at every Illinois game this year except for I believe three, to start. Second of all, Purdue is VERY overrated. They just lost the other day at Penn State, have no interior play, and will continue to be exposed as the season goes on. They are a solid team, probably a 7 to 9 seed in the NCAA Tournament, and beating them on the road is nice, but it's not season changing at all. I also agree that they are playing their best basketball since the end of the 2005-2006 season, but that has no relevance as to if they should be ranked, because they just haven't been very good since the end of 2005-2006 (even the tourney team in 06-07 was mediocre). And the fact that they were really awful last year DOES matter to if they are ranked. It SHOULDN'T matter, but it does, just like guys in the NFL almost never make the pro bowl during their first season worthy of it. It takes a while for people to notice something going well, even with a program as good as Illinois, because the Illini were probably the 2nd to last team in the NCAA tournament in 2007 and were below .500 in 2008, so it's been a while since they were relevant on the national scene. Some posters around here are unbelieveable by the way, I am an Illini fan who has rooted for the team my whole life and generally don't "rip" them all that often unless the subject of Bruce Weber recruiting pre-Jerrance Howard or Ron Zook's coaching comes up. Yet the fact that I have a critical eye and don't wave orange and blue pom poms makes me some kind of negative "hater". Go figure. In the end though, whether or not Illinois is ranked isn't a big deal because they aren't even a bubble team right now, they are more like a solid in the NCAA Tournament team. If the Illini want to be ranked though, get revenge against Michigan and then win in East Lansing next week. That will get attention.

QUOTE (RockRaines @ Jan 6, 2009 -> 02:24 PM) I watched the spot call again today, that receiver totally fumbled the ball out of bounds behind the marker. How can I see that but guys standing 2 feet away cannot? Saw that too. The spot was fine (if anything, I think Texas got a bad spot as the ball itself was inside the 30 in my opinion), but it's questionable at best if the receiver held onto the ball. I don't think it's obvious at all the the receiver "totally fumbled the ball out of bounds", but it was the thing that they should have been looking closely at on replay. That's now why Ohio State lost though. And anybody at Texas trying to woo the pollsters with their comments after last night's game is just an idiot. All Texas did last night is prove they ARE NOT the best team in the country.

It's impossible to defend Big 10 football anymore, it is simply an embarassment and that's the end of the story. Ohio State had an absolutely golden opportunity to beat a Texas team who looked completely disinterested (or bad, depending how you look at it) most of the night, and they couldn't seal the deal. At least the Buckeyes didn't embarass themselves like the 5 previous Big 10 BCS losers in succesion (twice being them of course), but they still blew a golden chance to beat a team who was either disinterested, or perhaps in retrospect, overrated. I will say one other thing, I don't feel good about Oklahoma's chances at all Thursday after watching the Big 12 teams in their bowl games. The SEC had it's issues with Alabama and South Carolina embarassing themselves (although the South Carolina/Iowa game was no surprise), but I think every Big 12 team in a bowl game played below expectations except Kansas, who met theirs, and Nebraska, who won a very close game that was considered a toss up going in. All 3 Big 12 South teams to play have been MAJOR letdowns IMO, even Texas tonight.

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Jan 5, 2009 -> 02:15 PM) How Illinois is not ranked is beyond me. Beating a top ten team on the road with losses to 2 top 25 teams? Come on.... I know the polls mean crap, but it bugs me that the coaches don't show any respect (continuing to vote Gonzaga at or near the top 25 is laughable). They were an awful team last season, and their one game that a lot of people saw was a loss at home. That's not a recipe to be ranked, and I think it's an exercise in futility to argue they should be ranked the day after a road loss in which they played deplorable defense.

QUOTE (lostfan @ Jan 4, 2009 -> 12:32 PM) Squeaking out a division win with a lot of help in the second worst division in football should not have earned the Chargers a home game in that circumstance, but that's another story. Well this I completely agree with. As long as there are 4 divisions though, odds are at least one home team (if not more, such as was the case this year) on wild card weekend will have an inferior record to their visiting opponent. I think that rule should be changed, because you shouldn't be given a home game just because you won a bad division, but we'll see if that happens.

QUOTE (RockRaines @ Jan 3, 2009 -> 04:06 PM) BTW, I cant believe you snuck this post through the Illini buzzsaw. Lickliter, especially in Iowa City, will never assemble the talent that Jerrance Howa....err, "Bruce Weber" is assembling at Illinois, so it's kind of a moot point to argue who is the better game coach between the two of them.

QUOTE (lostfan @ Jan 4, 2009 -> 11:42 AM) He had over 300 yards and a TD (and no interceptions, dropped INTs don't count for anything but an incomplete pass), seriously, what the hell do people expect from Manning? He's so good that when he doesn't appear to be immortal, people think he sucks and blame him for not putting on an epic, historic performance. They scored 17 points, and 7 of them were because Antonio Cromartie is an idiot. Now as I said, the punter caused the Colts major problems (they were in the hole all night), but at the same time, scoring 17 points in a road playoff game is going to get you beat almost every time. Or, from the other perspective, you would NEVER expect the Colts to lose, especially in the playoffs, when their defense only gave up 17 points in regulation (and both Chargers touchdown drives in regulation started in Colts territory because Manning couldn't get a first down and they had to punt from their own end zone).

QUOTE (RockRaines @ Jan 3, 2009 -> 04:08 PM) Some of the best stadiums in college football are in the north, especially in the midwest, and yet no bowl games there. I understand that you want it warm for the fans, but its essentially home games for many of the southern and west coast teams. People aren't going to spend thousand of dollars to travel to a freezing cold site to watch a football game around the holidays. People go where it's warm, and that's pretty much it. Bowl games aren't played in the north for those reasons, not due to some conspiracy to make the Big 10 look bad (I know that's not what you said or implied, I am saying that because some others across the football landscape seem to think that way). The Big 10 isn't getting it's ass kicked in bowl games because they are played in warm climates, they are getting their ass kicked in bowl games because the league is TERRIBLE right now. The bigger problem here is the fact that high school football is SO much better in the south, sun belt, and on the west coast (aka in the warm weather climates), and thus the players the SEC, Pac 10, and Big 12 (tons of players from Texas all over that league) are getting are better than the Big 10 players the schools up here get from the high schools across the midwest. I don't know why players are so much better (and faster) at those warm weather high schools, but until that problem is fixed, the predominant northern conferences like the Big East, Big 10, and even to a certain and lesser degree the ACC (obviously they have some southern schools as well) will struggle. I just wonder if the year round training you can do in warmer climates has anything to do with the talent disparity.