Underachiever

There is no Sunday night game next week, if the ESPN schedule is correct.

I always kind of shrug on these types of plays. Im by no means a tough guy, but it’s tackle football, not touch football. I don’t believe for a second that the contact caused the runner to fall. As a Packer fan, I’ll take it.

If my math is correct, NFC vs. AFC is 39-39-1 with the San Francisco-Houston game remaining. FWIW, it suggests that the NFC is slightly better, due to the fact that AFC had 48 home games, NFC had 32, since all 16 of the extra games were played in AFC stadiums.

It was a no brainer, worst case is likely KC ties with a FG and you have OT just like if you don't convert on 4th and KC runs out the clock rather than being aggressive from their own 1. Maybe they felt KC would tie it for sure and didn't want to face OT again. Please. You all are playing checkers, Zac Taylor is playing...some other game that is not checkers.

I guess I am asking if you knew what preceded the behavior. I don't have that game available to me.

what happened?

A downfall is inevitable given all the draft picks they've traded away LA teams going all in to not win is fun to watch. Angels, Dodgers (Scherzer, Trae Turner this year), Lakers (If you are over 30, we will take you), and now the Rams. Such a shame.

Wentz is so bad. Feel bad for JT.

4, and I would put money on it.

I’m still mad that Reich had Taylor and a ten-point lead against Tampa, and threw the ball on 19 straight plays. Only after Wentz had multiple turnovers and lost the lead did he put the ball back in JT’s hands.

Brewers averaged 4.56 runs per game vs an MLB average of 4.53 runs per game. NL average was a little lower without the DH at 4.46 runs per game. Brewers position players posted a 97 wRC+. Taking out JBJ it would have been about 102. The offense was almost exactly average last year. That means when the Brewers face another "exactly average" pitching staff and lineup in the playoffs, they should be fine. But the bar is not set at "average" when you think you have a World Series team. Being "exactly average" is what got them bounced by Atlanta. Average offenses don't go 20+ innings in a row without scoring in the playoffs. Average means 8th of 15 in the National League, and that doesn't even make the playoffs. I assume you are pushing back at the "underestimating how bad our offense was" comment in the post above, but you cannot seriously point out a 97 wRC+ and pretend like that is good enough. As far as playoff contenders go, it is below average. Those are the teams that should be the measuring stick, not stats that include Baltimore, Detroit, and Pittsburgh. And, if you are putting that fine a point on it, 97 isn't average, 100 is. So, while almost "exactly average", I can also say it was below average and not be wrong. Maybe I'm wrong. Find me a team that won a WS with a 97wRC+, I'll take back everything I said. They may be out there, I don't even know how to search for it. I believe in analytics, but cannot pretend the Brewer lineup was good enough.

You forgot to factor in the "punchable face" factor, which drops O'Neill several hundred points in my personal projections. Put Bader on that list as well.

Come on, you didn't have "block in the back on the return" or another penalty on that bingo card? Hard to believe that ST did not have a single penalty last night. So...progress?

Great read djoctagone, thank you. Loved that tidbit. (I read this article while perusing the offerings at ‘The Jerk Store’. They called looking for me.) I am not sure if what Alexander said is true. But remember, it's not a lie if you believe it.

For the record, I have no problem with it. But I think we’re headed toward an ESPN-driven super league with only 30 teams. College Presidents, many of whom pride themselves on inclusiveness, will have their jobs depend on making this exclusive club. I think part of the short sightedness in this is that if there are fewer teams, a lot of boosters used to a 10-2 team going to a nice bowl will find that someone needs to absorb those losses when the remaining super conference teams go head to head. 13 of 14 SEC teams are going to a bowl this year. 84 of 130 BCS teams managed a .500 record, mainly on the back of their non-conference schedules. Won't happen when they have killed off all of the easy non-con matchups. Texas may make more money in the SEC, but will spend it all on coach buyouts every three years when they go 4-8. And ESPN is not paying those dollars to have a featured matchup between Alabama and Wofford.

And the trophy definitely will be less glamorous. My how my dreams were dashed on the day Peavy informed us that the mayonnaise bowl is not a Big Ten game this year. Duke's is truly the premier condiment-based bowl game, until Heinz field adds one. Edit: I know that Tostito's makes salsa. But I consider that a chip-based bowl. Don't try to change my mind.

My guess would be opposite to your guess. I'd bet that on most weekend Brewer games especially, a minimum of 40% of the attendees are from outside the metro area. Again, purely my guess. And every dollar they spend at the stadium or night they stay in an MKE hotel is a dollar that the city doesn't have without the Brewers. That also doesn't cover the impact of, say, rural Wisconsin bars' revenue during seasons. Yeah, Wisconsin is a drinking culture, but I can't imagine that you have as many rears in bar stools on a Sunday afternoon if the Brewer game isn't on. Heck, I'd be super curious to know how many STL fans stopped caring about football when the Rams left, and the resulting revenue loss from football Sundays as fans stopped caring about the league, beyond just 'game' revenue. I know this is a Packer thread, but it seems to have turned toward the Brewers, and they are first in my heart. I'm not sure you have to guess on impact. There are a lot of articles out there. I have read that St. Louis spending on the Cardinals increased when the Rams left, that St. Louis still owes 100 million in bond money on the empty stadium, and economic impact has been met with a shrug. Seattle has shown positive economic impact from the Sonics leaving, though a lot of that is from increased use of the arena, which doesn't really translate exactly to football. I think the point made earlier that most don't care about sports is spot on. We on Brewerfan are huge fans, and live in a sports bubble that most don't inhabit. The fact is that most jobs provided by sports teams are low wage and less than full-time. The spending goes mostly to the teams. One article spoke of the economic impact being confined to "walled cities". The Brewers own estimates show that 6% of visitors from Outside of the Milwaukee area stay overnight, and without spending more time on the numbers than I have right now, it is unclear whether or not that includes staying in hotels or at private homes, so I don't know. I live near Madison and would never spend the night, not that my individual case matters. Here is a study, which interestingly enough, was published in February of 2020, just a month before...you know. It is written to be pro-Brewer, and I wish that they broke it out more than: city of Milwaukee, Milwaukee County, and rest of Wisconsin. I think they should have looked at the five-county numbers as well. My guess is that they did, and keeping the metro area with the "rest of Wisconsin" made their case look better somehow. Just this weekend, I was thinking how lucky I am to live in a state with 5 million people that has three major league franchises. Maybe that's why I'm a big sports fan, maybe not. Had I grown up in Iowa? Who knows? https://homecrewadvantage.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/The-Economic-Impact-of-the-Milwaukee-Brewers-and-Miller-Park-1.pdf

I also wonder if part of the owners' spending frenzy was in fact to help turn the tide in their favor. Most fans see dollar signs, so six players getting a billion dollars total seems like the players are whiney and greedy. Getting to free agency more quickly just doesn't grab the headlines. I don't know, maybe none of them give a crap. On another note: Removal of draft pick compensation for losing QO players (From Nate82's earlier post). why would owners be against the draft pick for QOs?

I'm a pretty big optimist as a Brewers fan. I like the Renfroe signing. I have not been a prospect-hugger since the late 80s when the Brewers had too many good first basemen in the system (Robidoux, Pyznarski, Adduci were all going to be stars!). That said, the one thing I don't understand is people talking about players on the current roster cycling through the DH spot. Yelich, Cain, Taylor, Tellez, Vogelbach (RIP), etc. They seem a little light on the "H" part of that. None of the batters on last year's roster excite me as a DH.

Not necessarily. Even if the service time/free agency relationship is altered somehow in the new CBA players who have already earned X amount of service time might be grandfathered in under the previous stipulations while the new clauses could only apply to players with less than X amount of service time. If the union gets players to free agency more quickly, it seems that they would want everyone to get there more quickly. Usually grandfathering is a benefit for those being grandfathered, in this case it would be delaying a payday for players just for being in the league longer.

Fans who attend the draft better do some vocal warmups. That's a lot of booing in a short time.

LA teams sure like their all-star rosters, even if those all-stars are a few years past their primes.

Almost every pass play! Nijman is jumping early.

Colts have JT. A 24-14 halftime lead. Then, they open the second half with 19 straight pass plays. After losing the lead, they go on a ten-play drive in which JT rushes 8 times for 58 yards, scores a TD. On the day, Wentz fumbled three times, losing 2. He had two picks. But by all means, put the game in his hands.

I’m right there with you. I’ll add Clemens, Schilling, Rose and ARod to that list. I have flipped on Rose. Once MLB owners starting making money on gambling from kiosks and sportsbooks located in, or attached to, MLB stadiums...it's pretty much impossible for MLB to make the claim now that gambling can/could leave a big stain on the game. It would be different if he bet against his own team, but to my knowledge there was never any evidence that he did. If I had a ballot I'd be including him as a write-in. Also want to point out that he was one of my least favorite players during his playing days, so it's not like I would have ever looked for some excuse to argue for his inclusion. The guy always came off as a huge jerk. Tangent: When I lived in Cincinnati, I heard a lot of Pete Rose stories. I loved the guy as a player, but as the post above says, he was known as a jerk. There was a restaurant that gave a gift certificate to the player of the game. The players had an idea that they should pool the certificates and have a huge party at the end of the year. Rose allegedly said words to the effect of, "I'm going to be winning most of those, why should I share with the rest of you?"