We should just pretend we don't have him and do our conjecture from there. If he comes back in any meaningful way then it's gravy. But really, how many times do you have to be smacked in the head to decide to finally get out of the way?

is there no room for sarcasm? must you present your views in the BCB way?

if ANYONE here would take the time before they spoke to realize that maddog runs a great blog  (which for some reason isnt linked here) is one of the smartest commentators out then you wouldnt see this type of reaction

he knows more than that 90 % of the ppl who comment here and just because he doenst think we will be the 2007 Tigers he gets this shit

is this going to be a Cubs love it or leave type of place or somewhere where anyone can post?

But don't drag the rest of us down, as misguided as we may be. If we choose to find hope that perhaps this team can turn it around come 2007, for crying out loud just let us. It's one thing to disagree and think this team is doomed, but quite another to run everybody down and ridicule those who think differently than you.

"I want to jump up and down when I think about that `84 team, and I want to cry when I think about Steve Garvey.  That ball Tim Flannery hit through Leon Durham's legs, how can that happen?  You know how? Because that's baseball.  That's what makes this game great.  It happens every day.  The impossible is possible.  The unbelievable is believable.  That's why I love baseball."

This post was intended to be funny and nothing more than that.  There was no cut downs of the author who wrote much of the original wording to this.  I said what I had to about his diary right off the bat.  I said nothing else in that thread.  

To be quite honest with you all, what irritated me the most about Santo for Prez's diary was his claims that those who disagreed with him were Cub-haters as he has already referrred to me in this diary.  Personally, I don't care.  I know how much the Cubs mean to me and how much the game of baseball means and I don't have to prove that to anyone else.

This was merely an attempt to be funny making light of a thread that caused much argument earlier today.  Perhaps it's one I shouldn't have done.  Perhaps I should not have added the little commentary I did.  Perhaps, just maybe, this was much needed to show that not only are the 2006 Cubs going to have a similar record to the Tigers a year ago, but also to one of the worst teams in the game a year ago.

If you take Bonderman and Verlander out of that rotation, trade Rogers to the Dodgers (or where ever).  Put Ordonez on the DL for most of the season and let me know how the Tigers do.

I'm looking for moves that point toward a World Championship, and does anyone honestly believe that Hendry is the man to make those moves?  That's the bottom line.  

The Cubs have a G.M. who has taken a team that was five outs away from the W.S. three years ago to this.  And I think he is in way over his head.

What does that have to do with the 2007 cubs?  Absolutely nothing, which is the exact amount the 2006 Tigers will have with the 2007 Cubs, or the 2005 tigers and the 2006 cubs.

Why does there need to be a conversation here every day about how "anythng is possible", I think everyone knows that.  I gues its because the management can't/doesn't do anything that gives more of a chance then that, and people need to justify their fandom or why to watch this year.

Just for funsies, how many teams had a simliar record to the 2005 tigers and didn't have a great year the next?

no apologies for grammatical mistakes. and i booed myself the whole time I wrote this.  stay classy bcb.