No santo tribute?
 

This guy is such a pu$$y.
 

Woody is backkkkkk!
 

If only Chuck were!
 

And the Bears win the NFC North. Not a peep from Old Chuck. But if Ricketts whip his a$$ the wrong way one morning, look out! Chuck is all over that one.
 

Maybe Chuck is going to write a year end wrap up.

As a side note, I hear that Sports Central might be coming back at 720 radio.
 

Happy New Year!
 

"Maybe Chuck is going to write a year end wrap up."

He won't do that unless it involves bashing the Ricketts somehow. Of course, the Ricketts are doing what his boy Cuban said he would if he got the team:

http://blogmaverick.com/2009/01/06/the-cubs/

Funny, how that works.

And on a side note, it's been a fanstatic year overall in Chicago sports. Blackhawks bring back the Cup, the Bears win the NFC North and take the 2 seed while the Bulls take monsterous steps to becoming a revelent team again. Even the White Sox made some big moves while the Cubs at least got interesting again (watching Quade trying to mold these young kids into players is a lot more interesting then Piniella and gang mailing it in for a year and a half).

Lots to write about and be happy with. But we won't hear a PEEP about it!
 

Of course, Cuban wouldn't have overextended himself to make the purchase in the first place and it doesn't appear so far that the Rickettses have invested extra money into scouting or player development. Their most recent hires at the Major League level may have been driven by cheapness more than the qualifications of the candidates hired.

Also, from previous rants you have implied that you have a poor opinion of Mark Cuban so it seems incongruous for you to build a defense of Tom and his siblings by comparing them to him. You wouldn't want them doing the same things he suggested since Mark is some sort of idiot in your opinion.
 

Back to Chuck, maybe he's lost his password to the blog? Someone who is supposedly Chuck posts over at Desipio from time to time. So if you miss your opportunities here to argue with Chuck, maybe you can find the opportunity you seek on the message board there.
 

"Back to Chuck, maybe he's lost his password to the blog?"

After spending 7 years on it, I don't think so! Besides they have code words in case you forget it.

The Cubs just got Matt Garza today so obviously they are willing to invest something in their team because while he is cheap compare to what other pitchers make, he still going to be making 7-8 million over the next three years.

This excuse by Chuck and a few others that the Ricketts are "cheap" is a bunch of bull. Are they not willing to not over extend themselves given all the uncertainly there is from the economy, the ballpark remodeling, the buying of the team and even the fat contracts left over from the previous owners? You damn right! But to say they are cheap and "without a plan" like Chucky has stated is being beyond clueless and honestly, reckless if he were a sports columnist. Luckily he is not.
 

No Garza love?
 

No Garza love?
 

Are you asking me or Chuck? Or just asking for opinions from the general public.

I think the Cubs overpaid. And I don't understand why they needed him. The Cubs have plenty of starting pitching. What they needed was a second baseman, a lead off hitter and perhaps a center fielder.

At this point, the Cubs are no better than they were before last season. Garza is the right-handed equivalent of Ted Lilly. Pena is about the equivalent of DLee. If they get lucky, maybe they can compete for the wild card. Or if it goes bad, they can wrestle sixth place from the Bucs.
 

The odds of the Cubs being a contender in 2011 even with Matt Garza are remote. A pitcher that is equivalent to Matt Garza would surely be available prior to the 2012 season.

The Cubs have basically replaced Ted Lilly with Matt Garza and the two are comparable pitchers. The Cubs have also replaced Derrek Lee with Carlos Pena. Again, these guys are very similar. So has the team been improved at all? I don't think so, but maybe the Cubs will prove me wrong.

Tom Ricketts sent a message to season ticket holders that extolled building a team with prospects. 2011 would have been the perfect year to play prospects at first base and at the back end of the rotation. It would have given the team more payroll flexibility and they could actually figured out if the kids can play. I suppose it would have been death at the ticket office.

At Baseball-reference.com, it is interesting to read the similar pitchers to Garza at his current age. Among the illustrious names cited were Steve Trachsel, Kip Wells and Jason Marquis. Also on the list were Brad Penny and Darryl Kile. I'm still not impressed, but maybe that new Cub pitching coach can get him to the next level.
 

In effort to pretend to compete this year, the Cubs wasted about $15million (Pena, Garza, Koyie) that could have been put to better purposes for the future of the team. As I stated before, there will be a pitcher of Matt Garza's level available next off-season. He isn't a 1 or 2 starter, he's a 3. You can look at all different pitching metrics and he's a middle of the rotation guy, exactly the kind of pitcher that the Cubs have plenty of already.