danzig6767

Anyone know why the Badger game isn't on ESPNU, instead they are replaying the Denver/RIT game?

Wow Perfect example though of what i posted a few days ago about being scared of this Vermont game. In any one and done hockey format, a hot goalie can carry an inferior team to a victory.

What kind of arm does Edmonds have, i never paid any attention?

Undertow and Lateralus are my favorites

I'm with you on feeling it's a shame that Tool hasn't put out more work and i don't really know why that is the case. My guess it has almost entirely to do with Maynard just having a desire to venture out on other interests of his both musically and outside of music, but i obviously don't know the dynamics among the band members as a whole. I just assume that because it's Maynard who writes all the music. That's usually the case though for any band that puts out limited music or stopped putting out music. It almost always is the case of the lead man who also writes all the music and who is the main focus of the band simply choosing to venture out in other areas and the rest of the band has no choice but to accept this because they can't make more music without that lead man. Kinda like say the Smashing Pumpkins. If Billy Corgan wanted to do other things, the rest of the Pumpkins couldn't exactly put out a new album without him given he's the lead singer and writer of the music. Maynard not only has done the Puscifer stuff, he also did Perfect Circle and now owns a vineyard which he's heavily involved in.

For personal reasons i agree with you given i'm such a big fan of Tool. That said i just don't think they care much at all about their legacy beyond being respected for the quality of their music overall and that they are for the most part. They created a pretty unique style of music that nobody has else even really bothered to try and copy. When a Tool song comes on even if it's say a first time hearing it, i and many Tool fans would instantly know it's them. Can't say that for many out there who made music or are making it today, especially among mainstream music played on much of the crappy radio stations in the country.

I think a lot of the reason for that is Maynard doesn't seem the type to be in music to just cash in for every penny possible and he has other interests besides Tool. Plus, they've never just thrown together an album quick to to satisfy a record company and to make a fast dollar. I saw a lengthy interview with Maynard and the rest of the Tool band members and they were far from your typical successful rock band. They all seemed level headed for all their success, liked that they could often walk the streets without being noticed, were protective of their families and time with them, and they all enjoyed having time to do other things in their lives besides being members of Tool. BTW, here are a few Puscifer tunes on youtube

Gus Johnson is the best in the business bar none

Tool lead man Maynard James Keenan is touring with his Puscifer creation and they'll be playing at the Pabst Theater on the 30th. I'm a fan of Puscifer's music even if it's limited to one CD and an EP, but i've read some varying reviews of their live show which supposedly isn't just a live rock concert. From what i've read it's a mix of comedy, theater, and music all mixed into a concert. Plus, from night to night to night i guess they play different themes of their songs ranging from country versions, remixes, industrial, and simply regular versions. Some reviews have been really good while others thought a lot of the non-music aspects took away from enjoying the actual music. Tickets are about 50 bucks a piece once taxes and fees get mixed in and i was going the take a friend as a birthday gift, i was wondering if anyone has seen their show and if so, what they thought of it?

If the Brewers give Edmonds the amount of playing time he seems to want, that would pretty much have to turn Gerut into strictly a pinch hitter given both backup outfielders are lefthanded unless someone got hurt or Hart was brutal.. They aren't going to trot out Edmonds 2-3-4 times a week and also having Gerut in the lineup very often, if ever. Gerut isn't going to like that at all. If Edmonds is on the team, my guess is both our backup outfielders aren't going to be happy with their amount of at bats, especially if Gomez doesn't really struggle at the plate.

Sometimes these seeding numbers can be way off base. Does anyone really buy that Cornell is only a 12th seed level of team? They now supposedly have "upset" both a 5th and 4th seed even though Cornell whipped both teams. I saw both games by Cornell, they are as good or better than Temple who some thought was also under seeded and Wisconsin. I have no doubt that Cornell could win a lot of games in the Big East and Big Ten regardless of only being a 12th seed. Every year there are mid-majors that get only say 7th-12th seeds that are better than that, but because they don't play in a power conference, they could automatically put in those seeding slots. Then when they beat a power conference team or two that were seeded higher, most people stupidly act like it was some big upset when it really wasn't. Of course then it'll be said, well these mid-majors get exposed once they reach the Sweet 16 or Elite 8. The same though would happen to the majority of 4th-5th-6th-7th-8th seeds from power conferences if they managed to get into the Sweet 16 or Elite 8 once they had to go up against the 1-2-3 seeds that make it there also. I'm not trying to make excuses for Bo Ryan, obviously overall in his tenure at UW, Ryan hasn't had the same level of success in the NCAA Tournament to match his success during the regular seasons. I just reject this notion that facing mid-majors is always some big break and thus should lessen wins against them or make a loss to them galling. Wisconsin would have been better off having to face 5th seeded and bigger name Temple than having to face Cornell. Cornell isn't the first mid-major to be legitimately much better than the seed the committee gave them. That's why they often enough knock off higher seeded teams from power conferences or just barely lose to these higher seeded teams from power conferences in nearly every big dance.

SCSU has a really good team this year, and could easily get to the title game, if they play up to potential. Sure they lost to some bad teams, but that's gonna happen. I fully expect SCSU and UW to meet in the regional Final, and it should be a real good game. Even the Vermont game scares me a bit simply because any one and done format in college hockey is dangerous. It's a low scoring game usually and a hot goalie any given day can steal a win for an inferior team. Have one of those say 42 to 21 shots on goal advantages, but still lose 2-1. That said, a UW vs SCSU sure looks to be the most likely scenario and we should be the favorite. My biggest worry about advancing to the Finals or winning the title is goalie. Gudmanson is a solid goalie, but he's not skilled enough that he's going to steal a game for UW often if the offense struggles to put pucks in the net.

Seriously? Who did they beat in those? Beat 12 seed Weber State and 13 seed Tulsa (barely, thanks Freddie Owens!) Beat 11 seed Northern Iowa, 14 seed Bucknell and 10 seed North Carolina State. Beat 14 seed Cal State Fullerton and 11 seed Kansas State before losing to 10 seed Davidson. Yeah, really impressive runs to the Sweet 16 and Elite 8 there. http://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/eyes.gif How a team got to a Sweet 16 or Elite 8 is completely irrelevant. You can only play the team you play. That said, Bo hasn't been able to have the kind of tournament success overall to match his regular season success. His style of play on both ends and recruiting to a degree probably all factor into the very mediocre tournament results. I'm skeptical that will change, but all things considered, Bo is a great asset to the university and the athletic program.

If they keep Edmonds and he agrees to stay, it seems pretty clear that whoever ends up being the 5th OF guy between Edmonds/Gerut will end up being a very unhappy player. Both are lefties, both think they should get significant playing time, and both could fill in here and there at all three OF spots. Usually the 5th OF job on a team ends up going to a guy just happy to have any kind of MLB job regardless if it included very limited playing time. That doesn't seem the case as to how either Edmonds or Gerut would handle the 5th OF job and eventually i could see it becoming a clubhouse problem.

Whoever this guy is, he's not a very poor fantasy baseball manager. It always amazes me how often managers get suckered into accepting 2 for 1 trades like this. In the vast majority of fantasy trades, he who gets the best player wins the trade, especially when it involves a top 5-10 player. I've played fantasy sports a long time and never ever have accepted a single 2 for 1 trade like the one above.

Great find TLB! God, that had me laughing! I doubt Buzz would be too proud of that set to music Yea that was classic, i love coach Buzz. I did think the triple jump after the Fulce layup was even funnier than the dance.

BTW, the Badgers don't play on Saturday, the second game is Sunday at 1pm and it's being shown on FSN.

Don't forget Phil Kessel who was from Madison. Plus, the women's team had seven Wisconsin girls including the goalie and the coach Mark Johnson who played at Wisconsin and now coaches the girls program at Wisconsin.

If they beat either Louisville or Notre Dame at home, i can't see how MU isn't then a lock? Has an 11 win team in the Big East ever been left out of the tournament? Big props to Buzz. When he was hired, he had a great reputation as a recruiter, but obviously his coaching abilities were a big question mark. Well, when i look at last years team and what Buzz has got out of this years squad, i'm incredibly impressed with him as a coach. He's got this short on bodies and height roster to play very hard, with discipline, and without any ego whatsoever. I have a really hard time believing that Crean could have taken this roster and coaxed out as many wins and besides the great coaching job, Buzz looks to be recruiting well also. I'm very pleased that he was given the head coaching job and confident that Buzz will allow the program to continue being quite successful.

Well, Friday night the Big 10 network will show a replay of the hockey game at 10 pm. So just make a point to not know the score and you can watch it as if it was live. That said, i agree that it blows how few games have been on this year.

More lack of long term think by a Bucks GM Could have bought a 2nd rounder to get Blair for 2 million dollars

No doubt, but i'll take three points One think i hope though is we've seen the last of Bennett in the net except for maybe playing in one of the Michigan Tech games to rest Gudmandson. From that point on, Gudmandson should be able to handle playing each game. He's clearly our best goalie and each game is huge from her on out.

I think the owners are a bigger problem than the players in getting the gap closed from the haves and have nots A salary cap would be nice, but the lack of deeper revenue sharing is what separates the NFL from MLB in regards to smaller market teams being able to keep more of their quality young players when they reach free agency. The big market teams want to keep the big revenue gaps they currently have which largely comes from local TV/radio revenues. That said, i can understand to a degree why those large market teams don't want to share more given that some of the small market teams/owners who get revenue sharing millions just pocket the cash instead of using it as intended. This i think also keeps the players from being behind more revenue sharing.

A lot of the parity has nothing to do with revenue sharing. The good teams pay less for players and the bad teams have to overpay anyone to play for them. The big market teams also pay less for players as they know they can get additional funds from endorsements. The short schedule and lack of depth for injuries have more to do with parity in the NFL than the cap and revenue sharing. If baseball moved to a 40 game schedule you'd have parity in baseball as well because even bad teams can get off to a hot start. Everything you say has merit, but the reality is most NFL teams can afford to resign their young players when they become free agents and sometimes even sign other teams free agents, including small market teams. That's not realistic in baseball's economic system of much more limited revenue sharing. Green Bay is the smallest market in all of professional sports. Yet, in the last two years signed arguably one of the most valuable commodities in the game, an extremely talented young QB named Aaron Rodgers to a 6yr extension and resigned Jennings also long term. I can't remember the last high quality young player about to reach free agency that the Packers really wanted to keep, but weren't able to for financial reasons. If Prince Fielder was a Packer, fans wouldn't have to fear that the team couldn't afford to keep him from big market franchises. The only way Prince would leave was a desire to play elsewhere, not because Packers revenues couldn't support paying him. Clay Matthews had a breakout rookie year. So long as the new NFL CBA doesn't change things drastically, i have zero fear that if Clay becomes a star OLB that the team won't be able to afford him as he nears free agency. I can live with the fact that most small market MLB teams can't be prime shoppers in free agency. That's fine. My by far biggest peeve is how most small market teams fans almost always have to start wondering/fearing when they will have trade away their young stars if they have one as they get say 2-3 years from free agency. NFL fans rarely ever have to go through that crap if they have a young budding star like a Fielder because their franchise will have the revenues to pay out a huge contract. Phillip Rivers and Rodgers were the equivalent to young ace starting pitchers in baseball, yet it wasn't even big news in the league that they signed 6yr extensions to stay in Green Bay/San Diego because small market football franchises in the NFL have enough revenues to keep stars all the time. Nothing else i think demoralizes MLB small market fan bases like developing stud young players, but knowing that once years 4-5 of their careers roll around, the inevitable trade talking starts because those fans know their franchise doesn't have the revenues to hand out 100 plus million dollar contracts like the big markets can. Plus, the added frustration that not only can big markets take away their young stars, big market fans never have to face the same fears when they develop a young stud. In today's baseball, Robin Yount would have become a Yankee or Red Sox before he ever got to lead the Brewers to a World Series and become a Wisconsin legend who went into the HOF as a Brewer.

Even if it is devalued, my gut feeling is that the vast majority to all team will continue using the same structure of a set rotation involving a setup guy or two followed by a closer instead of say just using any reliever when a manager thinks it's time to use his best guys whether it's the 7th inning or 9th.