[That's all the stuff we saw. Granted Kobe's an amazing athlete, but seven months? And to be ready to play in an NBA game? That means he had to be back getting in shape at least a month ago, too.]
It's fair to raise questions with that kind of recovery. But at the same time, he has access to the best doctors/equipment to help. Not saying that steriods aren't being used in the NBA, but how many NBAers can you think of that have gone from rail-thin to Incredible Hulk in a matter of a couple/few years a la Bonds, Caminiti, Sosa, Canseco, etc.? In baseball, it was simply too obvious to try to hide.
[Here's a gentle reminder for Mocs fans — and we first saw this sentiment from a wise post from either Stewwie or MT or someone from about two weeks ago — new coach = new energy; same limited offense talented = same crunch-time struggles with the ball.]
That was probably MT who said that. My thoughts are that we should be better this year than last year, no question. 10 conference wins is my expectation. I'm not going to sell these guys short just because there's a new coach/system. Wade's a bright enough guy to know to play to his strengths. After a few games with this squad, he'll figure out what will work and what won't. At least I hope.
[Are you worried about the NFL rules czars fining almost every hit?]
Yes. We are quickly seeing the NFL turn into the NTFL (Nat'l Touch-Football League).
[If you are Pat Haden, would you call Gus Malzahn and make him say no — and keep Coach O as the recruiting coordinator?]
No disrepect to Gus, but I would go after other guys first. Especially those who already have some form of Pac-12 ties. I might make Chip Kelly tell me no. Then maybe try to poach David Shaw or Jim Mora. In regard to Coach O, I would give the next head coach the option on whether to retain him. Coach O is a great recruiter, but he's also got a shady reputation. I'd want the next coach to decide if O will be a good fit.
[If we gave you Denver and Seattle or the field to win the Super Bowl, who you got?]
I'd take Denver and Seattle.
[We don not think Cam is a top 5 guy, and if we said that, then we mis-typed.]
You didn't exactly say that, but you implied that he is close by saying that he is elite and that only 5 teams would say no to a trade for him. I was merely asserting (or rather re-affirming) that there's no debate that he's outside of the top 5, but I also think he's outside of the top 10 (for now anyway).
[Put another way, who would you rather have to build your franchise around Cam or Flacco?]
My personal preference is to build around the bona fide pocket passer. The dual-threat QB seems to rarely work out long-term in the NFL.
If money/salaries/contracts are part of the equation, that might be a different BID-ness conversation about trading QBs. But in regard to which QBs are better, I would keep all 6 of those you listed instead of trading them for Cam. Andy Dalton would be first off of the list if I started to change my mind though.
Bottom line, it's clear Cam is not a top-5 QB in the league right now. As for top 10, I would make the case that he's not there right now though I wouldn't rule it out for the future if he continues to improve and develop.
Brady on the final play:
"Gronkowski) was kind of weaving in and out of there. I didn't really want to throw it over his head and out of bounds, so I was a little indecisive," he said. "It wasn't a great throw. No excuses. Should have been a better throw."
[Who else would say no immediately and consider trading QBs with the Panthers to get Cam Newton? No one.]
Only 5 teams would say no to trading for Cam? Seriously? Cam is a good QB, but he is far from elite status. The Panthers are winning games this year primarily from the play of the D, not Cam.
Teams who would trade for Cam right now:
Bills, Dolphins, Jets, Browns, Texans, Jags, Titans, Raiders, Vikings, Bucs, and Cards.
Everyone else has someone just as good or better at QB.
If Gronk had made any kind of attempt to come back to the ball, they wouldn't have picked up the flag. There may have been miscommunication on the play. Brady should have thrown it to the back of the end zone where Gronk was and there would have been a TD (or definite interference).
Chas, the '07 win was huge for KY.
I thought the Murray TD was so close that it'd be hard to fault the ref for making the call either way. Why was there not another camera set up on the other side of the goal line? That would have provided much better evidence either way.
Auburn's big play reminded me of the freak play in the '02 LSU/Kentucky game. I just happened to flip to that game to see that crazy play live 11 years ago.
Heartbreaking. Disappointing. Deja vu. Take your pick. How many times have poor special teams play (especially field goals) cost the Mocs a big win in the Huesman era? Too many to count, unfortunately.
Not sure how many teams the selection committee will take from our conference, but at this point, I can't see it being more than 2. So if both Samford and Furman win this weekend, I don't like the Mocs' chances of getting in. Our conference is unexpectedly down this year and our best team is well outside of the top 30 according to Sagarin. How can you justify sending 3 teams from a bad conference to a 24-team field?
The Mocs have 8 wins, but our schedule has been easy. Both of our non-conference wins have come against teams that STILL have not won a single game this year. Despite the easy schedule, we should have taken care of BID-ness when the opportunities came. The losses to Martin and Samford sting badly. At the end of the season, it looks like our biggest win will have come against...Furman? And they're not even a top-50 team at this point. I hope that we're able to make it to the big dance, but without the automatic bid, we may not have a strong enough case for ourselves.
MJ clearly could have picked a better supporting cast for his pickup team. But he said he wanted a squad that woud allow him to "hold onto the basketball". I take that to mean he didn't want any other alpha males on the team. So he picked a nice good group of guys who would be good teammates and would easily submit to MJ's desire to take most of the shots. That said, LeBron might have fit in on this team. But definitely no Kobe, no Shaq, no Iverson, and certainly no Sir Chuck.
Looking forward to a great game tomorrow between the Mocs and Bulldogs. Interesting that both Sagarin and Steele have Samford ranked slightly higher than the Mocs. I wonder what the line would be for this game. Why are there no lines for FCS football games anyway?
The development on the Ted site will probably be more for the upper tier of the middle class (whatever that is) than for the lower tier. Something new in the heart of the ATL ain't gonna be cheap. I would guess that the rents for those apartments would be closer to $2,000/mo than $1,000/mo. Keep in mind that this is the ATL we're talking about and the cost of living is much higher there than, say, Chattanooga.
Cobb County has supposedly agreed to contribute $450 mil of the the proposed $672 mil cost of the new stadium. Wow. Simply wow. That's roughly 2/3 of the cost.
I checked some NBA highlights last night and came across Jeff Green's buzzer beater against the Heat a few days ago. I didn't realize how difficult of a shot it was until I saw it. Only 0.6 seconds on the clock and down 2, the Celtics threw the ball in to the opposite sideline and Green caught it in the corner and shot a fadeaway 3 over LBJ of all people. Nothin' but the bottom of the net.
[I don't think it was just "improvements" at Turner. They, the Braves, supposedly did not get any of the parking revenue and paid a high rent on their lease.]
Why then would the Ted's owners not at least put that on the negotiating table? Not sure if much attempt was made to try to make the team stay. If it were me, I'd be willing to take less money instead of making no money. Who exactly is going to replace the Braves at the Ted and make the stadium owners any money? Nobody.
[And I think, correct if wrong, they want more and more skyboxes in the new football arena. That is where the money is, not you buying a single game ticket in the upper deck.]
Indeed, the more skyboxes the better for $$$. But they just renovated the place including making improvements in the skyboxes. I personally don't think that justifies starting over and getting the taxpayers involved to do it.
[And the city of Atlanta had to hitch its wagon to the Falcons. Because the new facility is multi-dimensional and all the events above are hyper-competitive in the bidding process.]
Would letting the Falcons leave (or make Blank finance at 100%) cause the Dome to look less attactive for other events? I think not. It would have continued to be a great venue for college football games, basketball games, concerts, etc.
[True they prefer the warm weather locales but the NFL dangles the Super carrot out there so its owners can get new stadiums. Case in point — this year's Super Cold Bowl is right outside NYC. In an open air venue. Bundle up buttercup.]
NY should have never gotten the Super Bowl with an open-air stadium. If it snowstorms that weekend, you can chalk this up to another one of Goodell's idiotic moves. (Can you tell that I'm not a fan of the guy?) While I'm at it, his push for a London team is insane and a lot of the players hate the idea too.
Not liking the Braves' impending move for reasons you guys have mentioned. At the very least, why not pick a spot on the MARTA route? I'm also having a hard time believing that the Ted needed that much $$$ worth of improvements to make it worth staying there.
I'm still in disbelief that the young Dome will soon be no more. At some point, you'd hope that the elected officials would start saying "No" to helping fund new projects that aren't needed. So if it means the Falcons leave for another town, then so be it so long as the Dome can remain profitable with other events (which it would). As for any backlash, the team owner always get it more than town officials.
Part of the reason that the Falcons felt the need start over and build anew is that the arrogant Roger Goodell threatened to never allow another Super Bowl in the ATL without a new stadium. Can someone explain what is so "bad" about the Dome that would prevent it from being able to host the big game once more? Especially after the renovations a few years ago? After seeing the Mocs play there earlier this year, I thought it was first class and looked better than ever.