iamshack

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Dec 23, 2013 -> 12:49 PM) Man I sure do enjoy my 5 mile commute Me too...although now that we're under Berkshire Hathaway, who knows how long that will last...

The trailer for draft day looks pretty awesome...the wife just showed me.

QUOTE (Jake @ Dec 22, 2013 -> 08:19 PM) The defense is bad. Really bad. Maybe Mel Tucker should be fired. I'll let our Scout-in-Chief Emery decide whether Tucker deserves to get another year with different personnel. They lost us today's game. What we need to figure out is whether Jay Cutler is worth our investment. Not whether he is worth the franchise tag or a long-term deal. Is he worth any deal? Are we better off rolling with a mixture of McCown/rookie/cheap FA project for the long-term future or Jay Cutler? These are the choices. We have a great offensive core locked up for a few more years. Best WR tandem in the NFL. A top-5 RB. A very good TE. An OL with real potential. If you sign Cutler, you're saying that core lives and dies with him. Are you comfortable with that? These are the questions we have to sort out. Jay is not showing me he's worth the time. McCown may or may not outplay Cutler next year, but the monetary investment will be relatively small and you'll be free to open the door to the next guy if it isn't panning out/you have the next guy ready. I've been a huge Jay fan. I've been the guy DA is mocking in this thread. I don't think I believe in [the boy from] Santa Claus anymore. My fear is just that we finally have weapons on offense. Is Jay ever going to be an elite qb? Hard to argue that he will at this point. But it would be unfathomably frustrating to have these weapons and not be able to utilize them because we go through another qb merry-go-round. It's really easy to say let him walk and then McCown gets injured in week 2 next year and we put in some rookie we drafted in the 4th round who doesn't pan out. I do know Cutler can win with this offense, but I don't know if he can do it consistently enough with a defense that needs to be entirely rebuilt. It's a very difficult position to be in if you're Trestman and Emery.

QUOTE (chw42 @ Dec 22, 2013 -> 08:33 PM) Lacy may not play next week. Doesn't matter. Any running back runs all over us.

QUOTE (SoxAce @ Dec 22, 2013 -> 08:13 PM) He will still have even bigger run potential however. Lacy was averaging way more YPC when Rodgers was in. He's getting in the end zone more nowadays cause they have to run the ball more with Aaron out. We could stack all 11 in the box against and not stop the run. Simply increasing his attempts will undoubtedly produce more yards from scrimmage than any defensive considerations we might have.

I'm speechless as to how a defense could be this f***ing horrible

Jay is just ruined

QUOTE (DukeNukeEm @ Dec 21, 2013 -> 07:18 PM) So we should all just define ourselves by our job. If your employer wouldn't like something you do in your personal life you just shouldn't do it? Fffffuuuuuuccckkkkkkkkkk that. This would be kind of like you driving your truck s***faced...

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Dec 20, 2013 -> 06:53 AM) The MLB plan looked great to every one of their owners but somehow I think they forgot that the Japanese teams have some leverage here. I still come back to my version of this...every team that bids is out the money they bid as a posting fee and the whole pot goes to the Japanese team. That way you don't have 29 teams bidding for the same guy. Or even half would do the trick...

QUOTE (IlliniKrush @ Dec 19, 2013 -> 02:24 PM) Hockey is certainly dangerous, too. It has the potential for bigger hits, but not as many are head shots, and there aren't the number of sub-concussive blows like there is in football on every play, especially for lineman. You'd be kidding yourself if you don't think I'm hoping a lot more information comes out for hockey. The one thing I found in that article which was odd was that there's a high concussion rate in women's hockey, since it's no-check. That obviously doesn't mean no contact, but no checking takes big hits out of the equation. That's pretty interesting. Disagree with that. There's plenty of information out there, even if it's not a complete black and white picture at this point. There's enough out there for me, and plenty of others. I don't need to be convinced to 100% certainty that I shouldn't let my kid play football. That's just where I draw my line, though. You play a sport where people shoot frozen pucks at speeds that reach the triple digits...are you going to disallow your child from playing hockey? Where does one draw the line? At some arbitrary point. I guess what I am saying is I haven't seen enough to draw any lines yet when it comes to playing football. We all have or will have choices when it comes to our children, and I wouldn't criticize your choice to hold your kid out of football. I just think it's wrong for you to tell someone else to hold their kid out of football.

QUOTE (IlliniKrush @ Dec 19, 2013 -> 01:02 PM) Yes, it's out there. As for your last paragraph, you can do those things without football. Plenty of other activities. Stop turning this into a football OR nothing debate. The data and the stories on TV have been out there. Everyone can use Google, and then make decisions for themselves as a parent. That's exactly the case. It is not out there. Show me a study where it clearly shows that children who play pop warner football are at some increased risk for traumatic brain injuries or other adverse health affects later in life. "Stories" are just stories. You can find a story for anything. And it is a football or nothing debate if your child happens to love playing football or be incredibly gifted at it. You played hockey, right?

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Dec 19, 2013 -> 11:19 AM) http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/sp...oncussion-risk/ I dunno, this is just not enough for me to tell my kid he can't play pop warner football.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Dec 19, 2013 -> 09:06 AM) It is not arbitrary. This is like smoking in the 1980s. We now have a pretty firm grasp on what we are talking about here. Yes, it is arbitrary. Is there data which shows children playing pee wee football or pop warner football are suffering from cte or some other significant health affects down the road as adolescents or adults? Do we know if these same children are suffering from adverse health affects from other sports or other activities? Can my child play touch or flag football and escape some of these potential adverse health affects? At what age is playing football the most dangerous or carry the most risk? The questions can go on and on. Is football more dangerous than not playing football? What are the health benefits from the increased exercise and activity as a result of playing football versus playing video games? What are the social benefits of being a member of a team versus being isolated at home or not exposed to as many children in the peer group? It's an arbitrary decision.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Dec 19, 2013 -> 08:25 AM) Except the odds are much, much greater that you end up with lasting injuries versus becoming the best QB in the history of the game. No, that's not what I am saying. I guess what I am getting at has been stated more eloquently by others already; (full disclosure, I am NOT a parent) I guess I am hesitant to make arbitrary decisions about my children's future FOR them. I believe parents have the duty to protect their children, but that needs to be balanced against every child's opportunity to make his/her own life and legacy.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Dec 19, 2013 -> 08:05 AM) Is it worth being the next Payton Manning for 10 to 15 years, if the rest of your life is spent with scrambled eggs for brains, chronic and debilitating pain, and mental illness from your football days? Do you think that is what Peyton Manning or Tom Brady are going to be doing? I don't.

I absolutely adore this debate whenever it comes up.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Dec 18, 2013 -> 12:10 PM) It's not even that. What if your kid just really, really wants to play football? Absolutely loves it to death. Are you going to tell him he can't? I played for 3 years and quit after my 8th grade year because I wasn't having fun playing it in pads. I still love it. Well, under this scenario, I could argue, well, you might love f***ing donkeys too, but should I allow you to?

QUOTE (IlliniKrush @ Dec 18, 2013 -> 11:30 AM) The typical overreactions posts I was expecting. Football is not on the same page with most other sports. There's a reason it's getting much more attention. At some point, you do have to draw a line. That's every parent's choice. So what if your kid was the next Peyton Manning? You think it is your right to keep him from playing?

QUOTE (IlliniKrush @ Dec 18, 2013 -> 07:17 AM) One thing you can't do is bring back leather helmets. People would die right there on the field. With all the information out there, I think any parent that lets their kid play football is absolutely out of their mind. I also predict that in about 10 years, HS football won't exist. Everything will be club/travel leagues. High schools are about safety first, and at some point they aren't going to sponsor such a dangerous game anymore. Keep in mind many of the injuries are occurring because the helmet is being used as a weapon, not because the helmet isn't protecting people enough in normal collisions. I think I read in one of these articles that the incidences of these severe injuries are much less common in rugby and Australian rules football.

It reminds me of when the Padres pulled Adrian Gonzalaz from their media guide or whatever...

QUOTE (Kevtrem @ Dec 17, 2013 -> 09:53 AM) About a week, the White Sox released a press release that said, Paul Konerko, Adam Eaton, and Dayan Viciedo have been added the SoxFest lineup. In the press release today that says Bo Jackson and Thome will be at SoxFest, it list all the other players including Konerko and Eaton. However, Viciedo's name is nowhere on the release. Am I looking to far into this stuff or is a Viciedo trade on the horizon? I think it's probably a decision by our marketing folks with information from Rick's folks. Suddenly, Viciedo is not really necessary, and could be traded in the right deal at any moment. Probably wise not to put him forward as a face of the organization at this point.

Now this is what I like to see!

QUOTE (RockRaines @ Dec 16, 2013 -> 07:37 AM) He probably still has nightmares about the lines he's played behind for the last several years. Plus its his first game back in awhile. Lost on all the women on Facebook who decided to compare McCown and Cutlers stats the last two weeks is something you added right there, Cleveland's defense is much better than Dallas's patchwork crap. He clearly settled down in the second half. When Haden got injured, as well as one of the other corners.

QUOTE (lasttriptotulsa @ Dec 15, 2013 -> 05:23 PM) True, but if Rodgers comes back the Pack has to be the favorite of the two. He's going to be coming off a 2 month layoff. I doubt it.

QUOTE (Y2HH @ Dec 13, 2013 -> 07:26 AM) So, forget everything we taught you in P90X and P90X2 -- we were wrong. Buy 3, we're right now. Until 4 comes out. Then 3 will be wrong and you should buy 4. P90X is a great workout -- but the versions are just becoming a scam at this point. Hah, they are what they are. I enjoy P90X and X2 are both outstanding...and for what I've gotten out of them, they were well worth the money I spent. I was hesitant to buy this one, but I enjoy the variety and the 30 minutes appealed to me. I'll let you guys know my thoughts once I start.