southsider2k5

http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/story?id=3982442&page=1

QUOTE(fathom @ Dec 11, 2007 -> 09:10 AM) If I had to guess, it's 4 years. Has he changed his stance on only accepting a 3 year contract?

QUOTE(kapkomet @ Dec 11, 2007 -> 10:07 AM) That islamo-pig ain't getting my IP address. Oh sure, give it to Pat Buccanon and Rush Limbaugh, but not a really nice guy like Mahmoud.

QUOTE(Steve9347 @ Dec 11, 2007 -> 09:58 AM) So where's this Mitchell Report already!? According the Wash Times, as soon as Thursday http://washingtontimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/a...081/1005/SPORTS

http://www.ahmadinejad.ir/

I think Navarro set this franchise back farther than any other player single handedly did in my lifetime.

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Dec 10, 2007 -> 07:41 PM) He's still behind in N.H., and he might not play well with the type of people there. A win by someone else tosses everything wide open, and there's only like 3 days between NH and Iowa this year, so momentum is certainly going to behave differently from last year. And, there's always the potential issue of him simply not having enough money to compete in a national race before super Tuesday. He'd only have 1 month to bring in cash based on his Iowa win, and even less time to spend it. He actually might wind up relying a lot on matching funds (which, if he did, would only help the Dems and him, because he might be stuck in the same boat as Kerry in 04, unable to go on the air for 3 months). Who ever emerges from the Republician pack is going to have an assload of cash come flying in to them. With the clog on the right, there is a ton of cash sitting on the sidelines. I read somewhere not to long ago that a majority of Bush's biggest bundlers haven't done anything yet. Money is not what I am worried about right now.

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Dec 10, 2007 -> 06:10 PM) Link As I understand the history of the commissioner of baseball's powers, this is pretty much a shot in the dark. The "good of the game" clause is pretty broad, and has always been enforced as such. Just ask the Black Sox players.

So its going to be Huckleberry Hound... Yick.

I don't think this is the type of player the Sox are in search of. I think they are looking more for someone who can get on base and play some defense, as opposed to someone who mashes off of the pine.

Its getting into desparation time for Camp Clinton... So can you be a part of the Vast Right Wing Conspiracy as a Democrat? http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22181497/

That's an impressive thing for a young pitcher to do. Hopefully it serves him well.

QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Dec 10, 2007 -> 05:49 AM) I think its kind of funny that people get all worked up when Ozzie or Kenny say these sorts of things. What do you expect them to say? My guys suck?! Heck, if anything, this tells me its likely that one of Danks or Floyd might get moved in a trade. I don't remember seeing Floyd's name, but Danks name has been in a lot of trade rumors. I still wouldn't be surprised to see him traded, and Kenny take a chance on one of his famous reclimation projects. He has had tons of luck at picking guys off of the scrap heap.

Inge is the very thing the Sox have been trying to get away from, not to mention he is the definition of a grinder.

QUOTE(Soxy @ Dec 10, 2007 -> 09:52 AM) Sentenced to 23 months. So he will serve less than a year, and be back in the NFL for the 2009 mini/training camps. Wonderful.

QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Dec 7, 2007 -> 03:45 PM) Point of clarification - I have read nothing indicating any increas in profit for baseball. Attendance is up, and revenue is up. But so are costs. Some clubs still lose money, most only make a little - and that is just the guesswork that Forbes publishes annually because MLB doesn't give out this information. Has there been any indication at all that MLB and/or the teams are actually making more money? Personally I have no problems trusting Forbes numbers. They exsist because they know how to decipher stuff much more involved than a baseball team.

QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Dec 4, 2007 -> 02:54 PM) I'll throw a log on this fire... Had a good talk over the weekend with a guy who reports from Iraq for a major newspaper. He's recognized as a top journalist in that theatre. He saw the sudden drop in Iraq violence as attributable to a sort of perfect storm of positive changes, the biggest of which were: 1. The decision by Sunni insurgent leaders to break from Al Qaeda and stop supporting them. This actually caused a small amount of new violence between the groups, but a dramatic drop in overall violence because they stopped supported AQ missions and vice versa. 2. The further decision by those same Sunnis to "give peace a chance", more importantly, give the Iraqi central government a chance to involve them in decision-making. 3. The surge tactical change of putting patrol units out into the thick of communities, instead of inside large bases. This put US and Iraqi troops in better contact with the locals - think community policing, but in a military context. The number of troops wasn't as important as the change in methods. 4. There was a major war going on between the multiple Shia groups, as well as between Shia and Sunni of course. But the Shia leaders of the two major sects have now made friends, for the time being. Further, they are acting together to do pretty much the same thing the Sunni warlords are doing - trying to reach out to the political process. Now, that 4th one is interesting in the context of Iran, because the Al Sadr army (or is it the Mahdi? I don't recall, its one of them) is highly connected with Iran. They sudden decision to make peace may have been triggered by Iran's change of heart. Seems like some pieces of the puzzle are finally coming together, and that may be due to the US and Iran's various efforts at diplomacy (a novel idea for Bush and Ahmedinajad). BUT, in order for this to stick, the Sunni and Shia leaders need to see real progress from the Iraqi central government in making inroads on many issues. If that doesn't happen, this lull could disappear as quickly as it appeared. I hope the US and the Iraqis see that and seize the moment. Unfortunately, it doesn't look like that is happening yet. Let's all hope that changes. After listening to the Sunday morning spinsters talk about the NIE report, I have no doubts now that there was some dirty dealing going on behind closed doors. This is the first time in 7 years of the Bush admin that there has been a complete sudden 180 degree reversal on something so big, so quickly. That added into the way and the timing of changes in Iraq just all fits together way too well.

QUOTE(Dick Allen @ Dec 9, 2007 -> 01:53 PM) What did they offer ARod? Are you telling me that Arod wasn't their top wish going into this offseason?

QUOTE(RockRaines @ Dec 7, 2007 -> 04:01 PM) dodgers, giants, yankees, red sox, mets, orioles, phillies, cle, AZ, Col You can also put Anaheim on that list, don't forget ARod was their #1 target, followed by Miguel Cabrera.

We tried sending Crede to Anaheim last year, is it possible this year? Hell I'd take a Chris Bootcheck for our pen, just to dump the salary.

QUOTE(Chisoxfn @ Dec 8, 2007 -> 11:29 AM) We'll see what dumb ass things i Do next Friday at the company Christmas party. Me too!

QUOTE(ChiSox35 @ Dec 8, 2007 -> 01:56 PM) I thought there were already whispers about Roberts and Performance Enhancers in the past. No? To me it would make sense that stuff like that ran in certian teams clubhouses. You already have Tejada and Palmiero connected to it, it wouldn't surprise me at all if they were passing it on to other in Bal.

QUOTE(fathom @ Dec 7, 2007 -> 04:12 PM) The Mitchell Report's coming out in a week.....don't make any signings KW! If Gibbons, Guillen, and the non-suspensions are any clue, the Mitchell report is a monumental waste of time.

QUOTE(Dick Allen @ Dec 7, 2007 -> 04:25 PM) Too bad Willis had a far better career record. Gimmicky or not, I'll take outs. Wait, are you telling me that a pitcher is rated by wins? ALL HAIL JON GARLAND!!!!

QUOTE(Gregory Pratt @ Dec 7, 2007 -> 03:42 PM) I just think there are a lot of people who flatly refuse to ever consider the White Sox "losers" in any sense of the term unless it's absolutely literal As opposed to those who do no matter what...