SexiAlexei

QUOTE (KyYlE23 @ Nov 13, 2013 -> 05:32 PM) Is NIU/Ball St going to be aired tonite? I hope so, it's the game of the year!

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Oct 28, 2013 -> 11:43 AM) Is response #1 a threat? Or is he saying that he doesn't have a choice now but to tackle lower which will result in more injuries? He's got a point about Marshall. I didn't read it as a threat, just a poorly worded comment on the new rules. If you aim high and miss, you hit the players in the head, and get flagged. If you aim low and miss you'll hit their knees. I remember hearing from quite a few analysts that they expect a lot more ACL injuries and knee injuries because of the "new" focus on the NFL of head injuries. It seems to me like there have been a lot of leg injuries in the NFL this year, but I have no idea if it's higher than normal, or I just notice it more now.

QUOTE (LittleHurt05 @ Oct 22, 2013 -> 04:33 PM) You can count on that. Or if he is still under contract, prepare for the major diva act. Which is why this dumping Cutler talk makes no sense to me. You have a solid offense, and can focus on improving the defense, and possibly competing again next year. You dump Cutler and now you need to rebuild both sides of the ball.

QUOTE (Jake @ Oct 22, 2013 -> 04:23 PM) Jay is an excellent fit and is, honestly, a lot like Rich Gannon - they act like him having a bigger arm than Gannon simply makes him "different" than Gannon. Jay happens to be highly talented. Sweet. He's a great fit for the offense we're running. I'm sure they'll consider everything, but it will be very difficult to sell letting the best QB we've ever had go with so many other veteran assets on offense. If I'm letting Jay go, I'm probably cutting Forte as well and going with Bush for the near future. You sure as s*** aren't going to stick a rookie on an offense with so many high-salaried stars If you're letting Cutler go, Marshall is out the door too.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Aug 29, 2013 -> 10:15 AM) Then they need to reword the rule. I would have no problem with this if the NCAA wasn't one of the most hypocritical corporations on the entire face of the planet. True, the players themselves don't have to pay for college, which is awesome, but they still have to pay for their living expenses as well. On top of that, college is more expensive now than it's ever been, yet the NCAA itself showed a $71 million surplus. If you aren't going to pay the athletes that bring in the money, give it back to the students and decrease tuition costs or subsidize educational departments where the country lacks resources or whatever. There are ways they can go about this without coming off like total sleezy, slimy, scumbags. Instead, I think Mark Emmert is doing everything in his power to act exactly LIKE a sleezy, slimy, scumbag. EDIT: Better yet, if you want to keep it all within the athletic realm of collegiate sports, give out more full time scholarships to gymnastics, track and field, baseball, volleyball. I understand football is where like 95% of the money comes in, but these other sports matter too. They do have to pay their living expenses, and I do believe the Big 10 has tried to get this amount increased, but other conferences pushed back. I don't understand why the NCAA should put the surplus into other student's tuition. They are the Athletic Association. Most of the major schools make all their money on Football and Men's Basketball. They then have to use the money they make there to fund their other programs. How many people pay to go see women's field hockey? I'd bet not enough to fund the team. So that money comes from the money the school makes from Football and Basketball.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Aug 29, 2013 -> 08:41 AM) The way the rule is worded leaves for a lot of different interpretations. Texas A&M is selling photos of him while announcing the suspension. He knows about that, so why shouldn't he be suspended further? You're just trying to be difficult. That's clearly a different issue, one of which is currently allowed and one which isn't. Now, you may not agree with it, but that's how it currently is.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Aug 28, 2013 -> 04:02 PM) http://deadspin.com/reports-johnny-manziel...utes-1216681365 So you are supposed to take steps to stop people from making money off of you without your knowledge or permission. That's about as bogus as it gets. Think about that...he is supposed to stop people from making money off of him, EVEN IF HE DOESN'T KNOW THEY ARE MAKING MONEY OFF OF HIM If he didn't know then he's dumber than I can imagine. He's signing hundreds of pieces of memorabilia for a known memorabilia salesman, or whatever their correct term is. And there is 0 chance he didn't get paid for it. I don't believe a kid would spend all that time signing all that crap just out of the goodness of his heart. But I guess it's what you can prove.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Aug 28, 2013 -> 02:21 PM) Manziel suspended for the first 1/2 of the game against Rice. What the heck is that? Either he took money and should be suspended, or he did nothing wrong... Why 1/2 a game? I browsed the ESPN article but I didn't see anything that said why he had a 1/2 game penalty.

QUOTE (scs787 @ Aug 22, 2013 -> 09:36 PM) <!--quoteo(post=2859672:date=Aug 22, 2013 -> 09:16 PM:name=Rowand44)-->QUOTE (Rowand44 @ Aug 22, 2013 -> 09:16 PM) <!--quotec-->He's been "losing a lot of weight" since his Freshman year at Texas. lol well when you start out at 370 you've got a lot of weight to lose. Doesn't look bad. He had a few dunks in summer league? NBA Championship here we come!

Why is there so much hatred on ARod? I get the cheating, but holy cow, ESPN is covering his every move. Callers into radio shows seem to want this guys head. I don't see this much hatred towards any other player that is currently playing that has tested positive. I don't remember Manny getting near this level of attention. Mike and Mike had an interesting point. If he accepted his suspension and sat this year out, it would probably blow over, just like it will with all these other players that just accepted theirs. And the Yankees have 0 room to talk. If I remember correctly, Giambi admitted using steroids, and then Yankees fans cheered him when he came back.

QUOTE (bmags @ Jul 3, 2013 -> 02:37 PM) Taj and Jimmy are both pretty good assets right now. Deng with an expiring asset as well. Also, could have used our trade exception for Robinson, but I guess we'll just let that expire. Why make team better when you can just be? So, with all these great ideas, how exactly do the Bulls use the trade exception to resign Robinson?

QUOTE (bmags @ Jun 28, 2013 -> 10:17 AM) " Despite a quick first step and explosive leaping ability, he’s hesitant to drive ... Contact is not his favorite (2.9 FTA) ... Difficulty handling the rock and creating his own shot against pressure -- scored .59 PPP in ISO opportunities (2.1 TO) ... 2.9 FTA QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Jun 28, 2013 -> 10:20 AM) Sounds like a guy that has the ability to create his own shot. Think you have to like that. ?!?!

Can someone explain this Nets trade? They make a trade for older players, in what would appear to be a win now move. You have a 1st year coach, which to me would be the exact opposite of a win now move. These seem to be exact opposite moves.

QUOTE (Steve9347 @ Jun 27, 2013 -> 04:14 PM) I don't even think cap-wise it works, but they'd likely take Boozer, Charlotte pick, Mirotic, Bulls 1st. Portland would love to get Mirotic and their front office would jump all over that. The only thing is, the Bulls likely would not. They believe Mirotic is going to be an NBA stud. It's hard to argue with this for next season, though. I understand that your trade idea was just hypothetical, but if an offer like that were a real possibility, I hope the Bulls jump at that. I believe the Bobcat pick has a far better chance at being a late lottery pick, or worse. So you have to gamble on that value, and then hope that there is real talent in the draft. That draft could very well be just like this one, where there isn't a clear cut game changer. Mirotic is far from a guarantee as well. First you have to get him over here. It seems like he will come over, but he hasn't yet. Then he needs to adjust to this league. On top of that, you have to hope that his skills translate to this league and that he is as good as they hope. If Portland is willing to take these gambles, and give you a sure thing, I really hope the Bulls jump at it.

QUOTE (Jake @ Jun 27, 2013 -> 03:13 PM) This core has only played with Rose in the postseason once. Everything anyone thinks about the Bulls is based on one playoff series. I'm not comfortable with that. This isn't directed at you, but I can't stand this core talk. I remember this same garbage from 2005 or whatever. Everyone wanted to keep Deng, Hinrich, and Gordon together. No one wanted to get ride of Deng for Garnett or Gasol because we had to keep the core together. The core was good enough to win, we just needed to "tweak" it. I feel like this exact situation is playing out again. Can the Bulls win a championship, yes. Are they going to be the favorites, no. They will need things to fall their way to win. I want to look at this Bulls team and believe they are the favorites, or at least have an even shot, to bring home a title. I don't believe it's even a real possibility, but trading Deng for Aldridge brings you closer. Deng is what he is. He's an above average SF, who can't consistently make his own shot, is a + defender, but can disappear when we need him. Butler is a younger version of Deng, and has the potential to be better. He's a + defender. He is not the additional scorer the Bulls need. To say put him at the 2 and we're good does nothing. We need another ball handler and scorer on this team. Noah is a top center (not saying much in today's NBA), who can pass the ball, but isn't going to put you on his shoulders and win games. I like Noah, and think he is a great piece, but he doesn't put you over the top. Boozer is Boozer. If you can upgrade Boozer to Aldridge, while replacing Deng with Butler, I think you improve this team. We're still a SG away, but we are now anyways. I was a proponent of not resigning Deng and amnestying Boozer, but then I looked at the 2014 free agent class. There's nothing there that wows me. It coudl all change if teams don't pick up options, or they release players, but the current pool of players that won't be under contract in 2014 is not game changing. This Aldridge deal is probably one of the more possible scenarios of taking a step forward and improving the team. If it's not Aldridge, I want the Bulls to be creative, and try to make a trade. I don't want them to keep the core just for the sake of keeping the core.

QUOTE (chw42 @ Jun 26, 2013 -> 01:47 PM) http://www.dailyherald.com/article/2013062...orts/706259711/ Aldridge wants out of Portland and wants in on the Bulls. I don't see how we can pull it off. We'd have to trade Deng + Boozer. The thing is, why would Portland want Deng and maybe a 20 in this year's pick for Aldridge if they're rebuilding. You'd think they'd rather get a much higher pick and a good young player that isn't expiring. I really like Aldridge, but is he THAT big of an upgrade over Boozer? I don't like Boozer much, but let's be realistic here. Booz was putting up .550 TS% and plays a similar type of game to Aldridge before this year. The only reason we hated Boozer was for his defense and his playoff disappearances. The problem is that Aldridge isn't much more efficient than Boozer on offense, probably won't play much better defense, and doesn't have a great playoff resume himself. He is 4 years younger, so there's that. But I don't know if I'd empty the bank for Aldridge with Mirotic on the way. And we sure as hell shouldn't be even thinking of giving up Joakim for him. Yes, I think he is. This is exactly the type of move the Bulls need to make. If your options are resign Deng or trade him for Aldridge, I'd make that trade all day every day. I think the expiring in Deng would appeal to them if they truly are rebuilding, but the picks the Bulls have wouldn't really help at all. And PLEASE do not resign Deng. He's an above average player, but there's always an excuse with him. He seems to be hurt more often than healthy, and signing him to a 10+ M contract kills any shot of bringing in a difference maker in 2014.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Jun 21, 2013 -> 03:19 PM) Well then s***, you may as well buy it with Kinect and then sell the Kinect on its own. I'd assume they mean you're getting it, you just don't have to use it. Or else, yea, that wouldn't make sense.

It baffles me that all these people who jumped ship from XBOX one, are now jumping right back on because they removed the DRM. I wouldn't support a company who thinks this was a good idea. Obviously they didn't think it was either, but now they're right in on XBOX. Who's to say they won't put this all right back in once they get enough sales? They could easily phase this in over a year or two, piece by piece, to lessen the blow. It would remind me of needing a code to play games online. I feel like it started with EA and Madden. You needed a code to play online. If you rented the game, you would have to buy a new code. Now I see this in a lot of online games, and people aren't really bothered by it anymore. I was reminded of this because I went to try to rent The Last of Us from redbox. Right on their website it says you'll need to buy a code to play some of the online parts of the game. XBox could start with their next Halo. Say you buy the game, it's saved to your account, and you can't resell it. Then say something like, by the way, if you buy this game, we're going to need you to check in every 24 hours to make sure your copy is the only one, or it will be deactivated until you log on again. Slowly creep it onto their other games, and it's right back where they wanted to be. I guess this is just me not trusting a company that thinks it's a good idea in the first place. But hey, to each their own. I'm sure there are positives to it as well.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Jun 20, 2013 -> 03:04 PM) OBERON true story, I went to pick up beer for the game last night. I was all "I'm gonna get something different than a 6-pack of Oberon." So I got a 12 pack of Oberon I love Oberon. I don't think I've had a better "summer" beer.

QUOTE (Iwritecode @ Jun 11, 2013 -> 04:22 PM) Have they explained the reasoning behind having to constantly be connected online? I might be in the minority but I've never had any of my gaming systems connected to the internet. It's my understanding that it is to make sure that 2 people aren't playing the same copy of a game at the same time. If they didn't require this, you could install the game on your system and play online, while you give the disc to someone else to play offline. I'm sure they state that it's also so they can update apps and games immediately, but that's not the main point.

QUOTE (Steve9347 @ Jun 11, 2013 -> 03:03 PM) Serious question. Has this EVER happened? Yes, it has. I'm not the most organized person. If I need to clean up quick or when I move, I tend to just put things in a box or in the closet, and this leads to misplacing things. It's still somewhere, but finding it can be an adventure.

I actually like that when you install a game on the xbox one it saves it to your account, and you can download it at any time. It makes me not worry if I misplace a game What I don't like is that they're trying to milk as much money as possible from the gamers. You can't resell your games (not easily, and not person to person). Depending on what you're doing you have to log on either every 1 hour or 24 hours to verify you aren't playing a game you don't own. You can't just share games with friends. They claim that you don't own the games anymore, it's just "leasing". Now, after you come out and say that garbage, you can spin it any way you want. You can even go back and change it, but I won't support a company that thought that was a good idea in the first place. And who gives a F about an all in one entertainment center? I'm buying a gaming system to play games. If I want to watch TV, I have a cable box. If I want to record a tv show, I have a cable box. If I want to watch a dvd or stream netflix, I can already do that on PS3/4. I can connect my PS3/4 to my network and stream movies/music. I don't need Xbox one to tell me how great it is that I can watch TV on it, when I already have a cable box for that.

QUOTE (He_Gawn @ Jun 11, 2013 -> 01:01 PM) Taking my brother and a couple of friends to Chicago for his 21st. Dates are July 8-9 (I know, monday/tuesday sucks but we both do too much coaching on the weekends during the summer to get away). Staying downtown at the Hyatt on Wacker. Good spots for college aged/cheap booze downtown and surrounding areas? I'm sure we can take the L about anywhere. Thanks for any help. Two big college age bar areas that I can think of are; Wrigleyville - Anywhere south of Addison on Clark until Sheffield. You could take the redline to Addison, go west to Clark, and head south to the busiest bars. DePaul area - Anywhere south of Fullerton on Lincoln. Again, take the redline, get off at Fullerton, and head east until you hit lincoln, then go south. I'd give you specific suggestions, but I don't really know what would be busy on a Monday/Tuesday night. You'd probably have better luck in the DePaul area, unless the cubs are in town, but then that's a whole different crowd in Wrigley anyways. Also, it seems that some bars aren't open on Mondays, so just a heads up. There's also taylor street and such out by the UIC campus, but I don't know anything about that, and it can be sketchy in areas. There are also the 4am bars in the area, which are packed no matter what day of the week it is. Big City on Belmont and Sheffield and Trace on Waveland and Clark are two that I've been to. I wouldn't recommend going to them before 2am, as no one seems to go until the other bars close. These aren't the greatest of places, and can be expensive, but it's busy and it's a decent place to go after 2am.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jun 6, 2013 -> 12:40 PM) Take a look at the teams he's been up against though. He had Melo and Billups up against the bloody here have Gasol Lakers. He had the Supersonics up against....well. He's basically gotten about as much out of every roster he's had as any coach in the league for the last decade+. Oh I understand that he has had to go against some great teams, but he has been bounced out of the first round so many times. I think he's a very good coach, and I agree that he gets a lot out of his rosters, but if I were to call a coach amazing I'd hope he would be able to get out of the first round a bit more often. He's made the playoffs each of the last 10 years, but only got out of the 1st round once, which was when they lost to the Lakers.

QUOTE (Steve9347 @ Jun 6, 2013 -> 12:26 PM) The Nuggets are f***ing idiot. You don't tell George Karl (whether he deserved coach of the year or not this year) that you won't extend his deal if he's interested. He's right to tell them to f*** off. Lord save us if the Clippers hire the man. I don't understand the massive love for George Karl. Is he a very good coach? Yes, but the man has never won a ring. He had Melo and Billups and didn't get to the finals. He got upset this year. It seems like he can help his teams exceed expectations in the regular season, but doesn't seal the deal in the playoffs. Maybe it's time they mixed it up.