cabiness42

Are there really fans who think this way? Not once have I based going to sporting events on crap like that. It's pretty much, cost, convenience, and how good the team is. Give away more free stuff, as in tonight Section 112, Row 8 wins free hot dogs. Section 532, Row 15 wins club level seats to a future game. Section 351, Row 2 wins a lap dance from a Chevy Pride Crew girl (OK, maybe that one won't work, but it would get me to more games).

That's a good thing, because the breath-holding record is something like 9 minutes and it's over 200,000 minutes until Opening Day.

It's a terrible idea for football from Louisville's standpoint. They're probably going to go 12-0 this year and will be lucky to be ranked in the Top 10 because their schedule is so poor. If they can't find their way out of the Big East and hope to compete for a championship in football, they need to be looking for home and home series with the other end of the Big Ten standings.

I told them I would go to a lot more games if they moved the team to Louisville. I guess there wasn't enough other support for that idea.

Very rarely passable and mostly horrific.

Yes, it takes quite a division to be the only one not to produce any of the past ten World Series Champions.

Awesome! I hope it f***ing hurts like hell.

NFC is 19-9 vs AFC so far this year.

I prefer a good brown ale, red ale, German wheat, or bock beer. I don't have any favorite brands. I am not at all a fan of non-bock lagers.

+1

Unsurprisingly, the UCI has agreed with USADA's findings and has officially stripped Armstrong of his titles. The weird thing is now I can say I was present when the last American won the TDF, as we just happened to be on my family's one and only vacation to Europe and happened to be staying at a hotel less than a block of the Champs-Élysées when LeMond won for the third time in 1990 and I wandered out to catch the riders on their seven laps to finish off the final stage.

This, and I live in an area where the Cards are the second most popular team.

I will say it again--you can make good arguments for keeping ANY of the five, but if you keep ALL of them, you have an offense that can't win in 2013. Viciedo had a .300 OBP, and if you have him in the lineup with guys who have OBPs of .326, .296, and .287, you will continue to have the 8th best team in the AL.

Well, Congressional races are a lot harder than Senate/Presidential races because you are polling smaller areas plus much fewer polls to work with. Also, though Nate predicts a winner in every race, he is putting probabilities on all of them and if he has 25 races where his winner is <60%, he should expect to be wrong on 10 of them.

Every algorithm one could use will have some kind of bias, even if it's unintentional. I have always favored creating an algorithm that uses TV market boundaries as the district boundaries as much as possible. It's probably still a biased system, but you minimize the number of districts within each TV market which (a) minimizes the number of TV markets any particular candidate needs to cover with TV ads and (b) minimizes the number of races for which voters are bombarded with ads any any given TV market. Or yet, even a better solution: Since we draw such crazy boundaries anyway and since so many candidates move around their state to find winnable districts and aren't really FROM their district anyway, how about entirely eliminating districts? Within your state, you vote for a slate of candidates from a party. If in your state the Republican slate gets 60% of the vote and the Democratic slate gets 40%, then the Republicans get 60% of the seats and the Democrats 40%. Then there are no more 'safe' districts and everybody's vote is worth something. In bigger states like California and Texas, a third party slate getting 3-5% of the vote would actually net them a seat or two.

Whether or not he was forced out of bounds is a judgment call and is not reviewable. If they had ruled that he was forced out but had not re-established his feet inbounds then that would have been reviewable.

I had been thinking all year that Rees gives ND a better chance to win, but after the BYU game, I'm not so sure. The O-line seems to do better at run blocking than pass blocking, and Rees missed several reads/throws to the point that I no longer think his passing advantage outweighs Golson's running advantage. Either way, the defense is going to need to bring it all Saturday against Oklahoma because even against a Big 12 defense, I don't see the Irish putting up a ton of points. Besides, I don't see Kansas State or Alabama/Florida losing a game, so it would be less frustrating to go 11-1 or 10-2 and deliver a beatdown to Louisville in the Fiesta Bowl than to go 12-0 and have to whine about not getting into the title game.

My understanding of comeback player is that you were recently an All-Star or near All-Star, then had a stretch of being absent and/or sucking, which may or may not have been due to injury, and then return to All-Star or near All-Star form. Rodney doesn't meet the first criteria in that he was never All-Star caliber previously. He might win if the award were called "most improved" but he didn't really come back from anything. Dunn, Peavy, and Rios all clearly fit that category, though Rios has been so up and down during his career that it's hard to define the exact time frame of his 'comeback'

I'm going to include some things you didn't list: 1 Job Security 2 Location 3 Benefits 4 Interesting Work 5 Schedule 6 High Wages* 7 Good Work Conditions 8 Promotion Potential 9 Loyalty of Supervisor 10 Appreciation of Work Done I put an asterisk next to High Wages, because based on location and benefits, there is a minimum salary I would require to maintain my family's standard of living, so in some respects that would be #1, but when you talk about salary above and beyond that minimum, items 1-5 would be more important.

How is that even remotely realistic? Even if the Padres make him available, other teams have much better trade bait in order to get him. I understand 100% that A-Rod isn't anything close to what he used to be, but he and Youkilis are the only two realistic options I see to get any kind of reasonable offensive production out of 3B.

I make about two football bets a year, but if I were to ever bet regularly, it would be on winning/losing and not on a point spread, and this is exactly why. Coaches coach games to win them, not to win them by x points. Jim Harbaugh's job is make decisions to give his team the best chance to win, not the best chance to cover.

So his OPS might be .760 next year. Tell me where we get a 3B that will be better.

Hey, now the mods can merge this thread with the 'Relationship Advice' thread!

I don't think greg is dumb enough to think that we would fall for that. Probably somebody else trying to make us think it's greg.

I always wondered what he'd do after leaving the Senate.