T R U

QUOTE (stretchstretch @ Aug 30, 2009 -> 05:34 PM) I voted Guillen, as I explained in detail in a few other threads. I'm a little stunned how many baseball knowledgeable people blame the 5 varied 40 man rosters we've had from 2005-2009 for collapsing in the final two months of the season, when they've all been driven by the same manager? When a club is underperforming, people say what does a manager do anyway? well if there's one thing he does is right the ship when it veers off course, and that means keeping the athletes focused, confident, hungry and driven. how do they do that? well, the good/great one's know, the lesser ones such as Ozzie clearly don't. in short, if we had the same guys for 5 yrs, that'd be one thing, but too many players from outside organizations have come here and caught White Sox Fever in August/September along with the rest of the club.... It's not KW, it simply cannot be the collective 5 x 40 man rosters, that leaves one Venezuelan constant Yes, Ozzie needs to man up and tell Dye to stop hitting in the low .100s That should fix him right up. Maybe if he gives Linebrink a special massage he will start pitching better too. OR, do you think the problem is that these 40 man rosters over the past 5 years have had the same problems every season that weren't properly addressed?

QUOTE (Rowand44 @ Aug 30, 2009 -> 05:10 PM) Cause on paper it isn't a mediocre team, it's actually a pretty solid one. You're right, that's why the players have to be the number one blame. The fact that they aren't producing, and KW is the person who put it all together, is the reason why he should also be blamed. Like I said though, im not blaming KW right now.. I guess there is still some chance we remove our head from our ass and get back in it but I wont hold my breath for it. I just know that KW put this team together, and even if the players don't perform he shouldn't get a pass. Its his job to bring in players to get the job done, not put together a great looking team on paper.

QUOTE (Rowand44 @ Aug 30, 2009 -> 05:02 PM) I'd blame it on everyone except Kenny Williams. Putting any blame on him is quite funny to me actually. Really? He is the one who put this mediocre team together. Im not blaming him, but, to say that he shouldnt be blamed at all and if he is its funny doesn't make sense. If you were going to make a list at who should be held accountable for this teams performance ide prolly have it 1. The Players 2. KW 3. Ozzie

I agree with Fathom For a team that was coming off a division title with expectations to do it again trading a starting OF and SP and getting nothing in return to help your MLB team was not very good. And yes, im aware we cleared salary and got prospects.

Its the players, just about every one of them is slumping horribly right now and recently

How can you blame Ozzie for Dye hitting like .120 since the break? Is it Ozzies fault Buehrle has been garbage since his perfect game? The players performance is what is hurting this team most, more than Ozzie making a bad lineup or bad pitching change.. Thats the problem, the players aren't getting it done.. thats Kenny, not Ozzie.

I cant believe I just watched that whole game

QUOTE (rangercal @ Aug 29, 2009 -> 02:59 AM) That's not exactly finding my quote. Your not going to sell me on putting a guy in the top 3, who had a 82 Qb rating not too long ago. To put that in perspective, Jason Campbell had a 84.3 rating in 2008. So is he top 3 if he blows his load this year? Sorry. Phil Rivers is close to top 5, but not top 3. That takes more than 1 season. You didn't make a quote that said exactly that, what you said was Rivers needed to accomplish more than Chad Pennington to be considered in that top class (And you name Brees and Brady in said class) while, according to you and your EXACT WORDS, Brees and Brady technically haven't accomplished more than Chad Pennington has either because they only have one 100+ season as well.. thats what I was saying. So was that your exact quote, no. Was that you contradicting yourself, yes. I said Rivers is a top 5 QB for sure, I never said hes top three and that's that. Rivers first year starting was a 92 rating, but I like how that was ignored to try and squeeze your poor Jason Cambpell example into this. I can play this game too. Oh, Drew Brees? Last season was his first 30+ TD season in his career how can he be considered a top 3 QB in this league? Tell you what, if he can get his career QB rating over 89 maybe ill put him in that top class.

QUOTE (Jordan4life @ Aug 29, 2009 -> 01:06 AM) I actually think Tom Brady is kinda overrated. I think he's a great QB and all. But when people put him in the same class as Montana/Elway/Marino, I want to behead something. Exactly, just look at his stats. He had that one freak season when he had Moss and they ran a spread offense anytime they threw the ball. Other than that he is a low 60's comp% 25-28 TD 12-14 INT QB. His career rating is only 92 even with that 117 rating season.. hes not even a career 90+ rating QB without that year. Tom Brady is considered elite because he was on really good teams. The Patriots "dynasty" was not all Tom Brady.

QUOTE (rangercal @ Aug 28, 2009 -> 09:58 PM) Please find my quote where I say 100 is the line. Tom Brady and Drew Brees have more impressive seasons than Phillip Rivers. YOU said that he needed to accomplish more than Chad Pennington blah blah.. Then your reason was he needs to do it more than once to be considered along the lines of Peyton, Brees, and Brady.. but your entire logic here makes no sense when Brees and Brady only have one 100+ QB rating season in their careers as well.. And once again, if you would look at Bradys career season avg's they aren't any better than Rivers.. I haven't looked at Brees yet either but ide venture to guess the same would apply.

Im out. Doesn't mean im not gonna keep following them, just means I have come to the realization that they prolly aren't good enough to take the central. Still hope they do though.

QUOTE (rangercal @ Aug 28, 2009 -> 10:48 AM) do it for more than 1 season is the point. It was a fluke for CP. Even without his injury, I doubted he would ever top 100. Philip Rivers probably can and will top 100, when he does I'll give him his props as a top 3 guy. No way he is in the same category as Peyton,Brady and Brees. Its funny you should mention that because Brady and Brees also only have one career 100+ rating season.. but please, continue trying to justify your point to apply only to Rivers.

QUOTE (rangercal @ Aug 27, 2009 -> 09:37 PM) By accomplishing more than Pennington would be doing it again. If he has another season like last, I will be first in line to call him top 3, possibly top 1. Your argument for Phil Rivers to accomplish more than Chad Pennington is that ONCE Pennington had a QB Rating of 104. Rivers had a QB Rating of 105 last season, thus, has already surpassed Penningtons accomplishment you have listed. How can surpassing it again change the fact hes already done it anyways? Having a QB rating over 100 for a full season is no fluke..

QUOTE (Brian @ Aug 27, 2009 -> 08:18 PM) Shocked....that it wasn't sooner. Well apparently Mysterio was against dropping the title so soon because when he had his WHC run he didnt hold the title long enough and wanted a decent run with the IC belt.

QUOTE (Kenny Hates Prospects @ Aug 27, 2009 -> 07:04 PM) Really??? Did he wrestle? If so I need to see that video... No he didn't, but it might happen sometime

QUOTE (rangercal @ Aug 27, 2009 -> 06:59 PM) 104.2 passer rating in 2002 (20th highest in NFL history) Ok, but Rivers had a 105.5 rating last year

Rey Mysterio suspended 30 days for wellness violation.. ide expect Ziggler to be IC Champion next Smackdown

QUOTE (rangercal @ Aug 27, 2009 -> 05:04 AM) How about Phillip Rivers accomplish more than Chad Pennington before we put him in the top 3. I still don't see him above the Romo/Cutler tier just yet. What exactly has Chad Pennington accomplished?

Glengarry Glen Ross lmao isnt that the movie that Justin Long has that hilarious porno title for in Zack and Miri

QUOTE (rangercal @ Aug 26, 2009 -> 11:10 PM) Add me to that list. His list is spot on. Yeah, no it isn't. Kurt Warner isn't better than Phil Rivers..

QUOTE (MHizzle85 @ Aug 26, 2009 -> 02:47 PM) Rivers also only has one 30+ TD season as well & only thrown only 4,000 once...Oh, but he's better right? Just because Rivers had a really good year last year, it doesn't all of a sudden shoot him up to top 5 in the league. Do it again, then we can talk. That was Rivers THIRD year in the league, McNabb has been a starting QB for 10 years and Rivers has already surpassed McNabbs season highs in TDs, Yards, Comp%, and Rating. So yes, ide say hes a better QB than McNabb. Rivers also had a really good year his first year starting as well, and his second year wasn't that bad either. I already gave you the Romo argument, ide say they are even but if you still wanna give him the nod ide put Rivers at 4th then. Either way, hes top 5 for sure.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Aug 26, 2009 -> 10:03 AM) He should have went with his original idea for the title "Once upon a time in Nazi occupied France"

QUOTE (MHizzle85 @ Aug 26, 2009 -> 09:46 AM) 1. Peyton Manning 2. Tom Brady 3. Drew Brees 4. Kurt Warner 5. Ben Roethlisberger 6. Donovan McNabb 7. Romo/Rivers/Cutler Donovan McNabb is a career comp% of 58, has one 30+ TD season, and has never thrown for over 4,000 yards. To be honest with you, 2004 was the only season he was "great" anyways. Big Ben was about as good as Orton last season. Hes a good QB as long as they are a run first team with that defense. Thats how hes been good. Cutler? You must be a Bears fan. Just because Kurt Warner has a really good season, which would make ONE in the past SEVEN, doesn't make him better than Rivers. Sorry. Romo is the only solid case you have made. Either way, Rivers is a top 5 QB in this league.

QUOTE (Stocking @ Aug 26, 2009 -> 01:20 AM) I'm more excited for MAG I dont even know what that is, but you disgust me

QUOTE (Milkman delivers @ Aug 25, 2009 -> 09:33 PM) I just got back from Inglourious Basterds. Roger Ebert probably summed it up best. I came away not really knowing why I liked it, but I think I did (and it'll probably get better the more I see it). Some things about it, though: -The "basterds" weren't in it that much -Christoph Waltz definitely stole the show -There was much less action and violence than I expected, which was disappointing I saw it last night as well and loved it