"Insanity: doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results"
- Albert Einstein
That's the only way I can characterize President Obama and Congress's plan to stimulate the economy by spending yet another 800-plus billion dollars when we're already in such a deep hole. So let's look at a few things in this latest 647-page insult to the American people.
1. $1 billion for Amtrack because yea, that works, right? Right?
2. $50 million for the National Endowment for the Arts? I'm all for preserving art, but really? I guess the Smithsonian's huge money goes in with this too.
3. $40 million for global warming research. Damn, I thought that was settled.
4. $2.4 billion for carbon capture demonstration projects, whatever the hell that is.
5. $650 million for digital TV conversion coupons? ARE YOU OUT OF YOUR FREAKING MINDS!?!
6. $4.9 billion to everyone's favorite voter fraud organization ACORN.
Which leads me to paraphrase political comedian Lewis Black, "We'd be better off if they just came to our door and pissed on our foot."
At what point do we say hell no? President Obama, God bless his soul, picked a guy who didn't pay his taxes at one time to head up the treasury. Oliver Stone couldn't come up with that. But what's worse is that Geithner used to lobby, and what's President Obama's big rule? No lobbyists in the administration. And twice now, he's broken his own rule.
But let's get back to this stimlus crap. President Obama, Speaker Pelosi, Sen. Reid, etc. have talked about the urgency to pass this bill quickly, not leaving much time to read it all and dissect it. Let's go to the quote vault again.
"Anytime you pass something that rapidly, you're bound to have mistakes."
- Barack Obama
Obama was talking about the PATRIOT Act being passed too rapidly, and he had a point. But suddenly, that concept doesn't apply anymore.
And finally, let's look at the petition to silence Rush Limbaugh. Silencing the opposition. Sound familiar to some other places?
Again, I didn't want to be so hard on Obama so soon, but he's hit the ground running, and he's making himself look like an idiot, well to me at least.
Wednesday, January 28, 2009
Sunday, January 25, 2009
A Uniter or Divider?
No, I'm not talking about George Bush. I'm talking about Barack Obama. We are about a week into the 44th president's administration, and I am far from impressed (surprised, surprised). I don't want to ramble on too much, but let's go down a quick list here. At times, I will directly address our chief executive.
1. He issued an executive order to close Guantanamo Bay. Okay, that's fine as long as there are certain conditions. And the main one is THAT YOU HAVE A PLACE TO TRANSFER THEM TO, IDIOT! You campaigned for almost two years and campaigned on the idea of closing the place down. So why in the HELL did you not have a backup place????
2. Obama, who is supposed to be the one to usher in a new era of bipartisanship in Washington said that Republicans "shouldn't be listening to Rush Limbaugh and expect to get anything done." He also told republican lawmakers "I won. I'm the President." Good ole bipartisanship there for you.
3. He wants to cure the economic crisis and the huge debt by SPENDING MORE MONEY!
4. He's supposed to have a transparent government with no lobbyists in his administration. And yet, he has a deputy defense secretary who has lobbied big time in the past. He didn't allow cameras to see him sign the executive order to give federal funding to international charities that provide abortion services. And he has grown irritated with reporters that ask him tough questions.
Hypocrite anyone? Arrogant ass? I know it's early, but it is certainly not hopeful, and there sure isn't much change, at least good change.
1. He issued an executive order to close Guantanamo Bay. Okay, that's fine as long as there are certain conditions. And the main one is THAT YOU HAVE A PLACE TO TRANSFER THEM TO, IDIOT! You campaigned for almost two years and campaigned on the idea of closing the place down. So why in the HELL did you not have a backup place????
2. Obama, who is supposed to be the one to usher in a new era of bipartisanship in Washington said that Republicans "shouldn't be listening to Rush Limbaugh and expect to get anything done." He also told republican lawmakers "I won. I'm the President." Good ole bipartisanship there for you.
3. He wants to cure the economic crisis and the huge debt by SPENDING MORE MONEY!
4. He's supposed to have a transparent government with no lobbyists in his administration. And yet, he has a deputy defense secretary who has lobbied big time in the past. He didn't allow cameras to see him sign the executive order to give federal funding to international charities that provide abortion services. And he has grown irritated with reporters that ask him tough questions.
Hypocrite anyone? Arrogant ass? I know it's early, but it is certainly not hopeful, and there sure isn't much change, at least good change.
Saturday, January 17, 2009
Exit Bush, Enter Obama
I was amused at how many people watched President Bush's farewell address Thursday night and then turned around and said something to the effect of "there's the Bush I voted for" or "there's the Bush that was missing." In reality, he wasn't that much different from what he's been in the past. If at any time he was different, it was in his final press conference, where he aggressively defended his decisions, specifically in regards to his terrorism policies and Iraq policies. Perhaps the best, or at least most important thing Bush said the other night was in regards to the years following the September 11 terrorist attacks:
"As the years passed, most Americans were able to return to life much as it had been before 9/11. But I never did. Every morning, I received a briefing on the threats to our nation. I vowed to do everything in my power to keep us safe."
I believe him, and for that, I think we can all be thankful, for that may have been the best accomplishment of his presidency. It's no question that the Bush presidency has left several less-than-desirable things: massive deficits, energy problems, education problems, unresolved immigration problems (a practical endorsement of amnesty for illegals), support for McCain-Feingold (throwing the first amendment out the window), etc. But Iraq will likely be the issue Bush is remembered by. And anyone who thinks they completely know whether or not that war was the right decision is delusional to put it lightly. (For the record, count me in with the less than thrilled crowd, but not the narcissistic "blood for oil" people).
History will judge George W. Bush. Abraham Lincoln was a rather unpopular president, and Harry S. Truman was widely unpopular as he left office. And yet as we now look back on history, those two men show up in virtually every "top 10 presidents of all time" lists. I'll leave Bush with this summation. He was a decent man, lacking in some critical leadership areas to be a truly effective president. He didn't always surround himself with the best people. I believe he had a set of principles and at least tried to follow them. He received very harsh treatment from the media and the opposing party, some of which he deserved, some of which he didn't.
On Tuesday, Barack Obama takes over. The general idea from CNN I got this morning was that we should all be excited. As a friend commented to me, if anything else, it's history. I'm usually pretty careful to be "excited" by politicians. As a matter of fact, none have ever excited me. And I can't forget that I strongly disagree with several of the ideas which President Obama campaigned on. On the other hand, I've watched him tack closer to the political center in the last two months in the decisions and statements he has made. That could make me feel even more comfortable with him, but I'm not one to get complacent either. I know two things will certainly happen. Apologies will be made for any shortcomings in at least his first year or two (aka: Bush will be anointed the scapegoat), and there will be a double standard in how he isn't criticized for putting on such a ridiculously expensive inauguration in bad economic times (well more expensive than Bush's even though Bush was thoroughly grilled).
But putting policies aside for the moment, Obama has great potential. I agree that this can indeed convey a positive message for Black Americans, and particularly black youth. But let's not kid ourselves. Too many people voted for Barack Obama solely because he was black, and too many people voted against him because he was black. "How much is too many," you might ask. The answer is at least one. Because voting for someone with a disregard for principles and ideas and solely on skin color is not just a waste of a vote, but a thorough rejection of what Martin Luther King and the Civil Rights movement stood for. With that in mind, we can't ignore the progress that has been made. I'm not merely talking about electing a black president for the first time. I'm talking about the millions of people who made a conscience decision of whether or not to vote for him, regardless of what he looked like. In that sense, Dr. King would be, and we can all be, proud.
I do indeed hope that Obama becomes one of our great presidents. But for now, we can only hope and support him.
"As the years passed, most Americans were able to return to life much as it had been before 9/11. But I never did. Every morning, I received a briefing on the threats to our nation. I vowed to do everything in my power to keep us safe."
I believe him, and for that, I think we can all be thankful, for that may have been the best accomplishment of his presidency. It's no question that the Bush presidency has left several less-than-desirable things: massive deficits, energy problems, education problems, unresolved immigration problems (a practical endorsement of amnesty for illegals), support for McCain-Feingold (throwing the first amendment out the window), etc. But Iraq will likely be the issue Bush is remembered by. And anyone who thinks they completely know whether or not that war was the right decision is delusional to put it lightly. (For the record, count me in with the less than thrilled crowd, but not the narcissistic "blood for oil" people).
History will judge George W. Bush. Abraham Lincoln was a rather unpopular president, and Harry S. Truman was widely unpopular as he left office. And yet as we now look back on history, those two men show up in virtually every "top 10 presidents of all time" lists. I'll leave Bush with this summation. He was a decent man, lacking in some critical leadership areas to be a truly effective president. He didn't always surround himself with the best people. I believe he had a set of principles and at least tried to follow them. He received very harsh treatment from the media and the opposing party, some of which he deserved, some of which he didn't.
On Tuesday, Barack Obama takes over. The general idea from CNN I got this morning was that we should all be excited. As a friend commented to me, if anything else, it's history. I'm usually pretty careful to be "excited" by politicians. As a matter of fact, none have ever excited me. And I can't forget that I strongly disagree with several of the ideas which President Obama campaigned on. On the other hand, I've watched him tack closer to the political center in the last two months in the decisions and statements he has made. That could make me feel even more comfortable with him, but I'm not one to get complacent either. I know two things will certainly happen. Apologies will be made for any shortcomings in at least his first year or two (aka: Bush will be anointed the scapegoat), and there will be a double standard in how he isn't criticized for putting on such a ridiculously expensive inauguration in bad economic times (well more expensive than Bush's even though Bush was thoroughly grilled).
But putting policies aside for the moment, Obama has great potential. I agree that this can indeed convey a positive message for Black Americans, and particularly black youth. But let's not kid ourselves. Too many people voted for Barack Obama solely because he was black, and too many people voted against him because he was black. "How much is too many," you might ask. The answer is at least one. Because voting for someone with a disregard for principles and ideas and solely on skin color is not just a waste of a vote, but a thorough rejection of what Martin Luther King and the Civil Rights movement stood for. With that in mind, we can't ignore the progress that has been made. I'm not merely talking about electing a black president for the first time. I'm talking about the millions of people who made a conscience decision of whether or not to vote for him, regardless of what he looked like. In that sense, Dr. King would be, and we can all be, proud.
I do indeed hope that Obama becomes one of our great presidents. But for now, we can only hope and support him.
Thursday, January 8, 2009
Smoltz to Boston
I was merely disappointed that Stafford and Moreno left, but this is devastating. I hated it when Greg Maddux and Tom Glavine left, but this is the first time probably since the 1996 world series that I've been heartbroken. Smoltz has always been my favorite Brave, and I have to admit that the Front Office takes the blame for this. If it was just any 42 year old pitcher coming off a third or fourth surgery, and he wouldn't be ready until the end of May, I could understand letting him walk. But this is John Smoltz! He's an Atlanta sports icon, and he, along with Chipper Jones has been the face of the franchise. Smoltz is the only one that has been with the Braves from the start of the run in 1991, and if Tom Glavine doesn't return, all of the 1991 Braves will be gone. Apparently Smoltz was guaranteed two million with a few more in incentives. Boston offered a guaranteed five million, and he took it. How could Frank Wren let anyone top our offer?
The only way this would have made sense is if Atlanta had spent up all its money in making the team a World Series contender and simply couldn't shell out the money to Smoltz. But they have at least 30 million sitting on the shelf, so it's inexcusable. You can't use the rebuilding ploy because you came out and said you were going to spend money and make the team competitive. If you were going to rebuild, why try and trade young guys for Jake Peavy? Why offer AJ Burnett and Rafael Furcal contracts? Why offer Mike Hampton more than Smoltz? Smoltz isn't the difference between 70 wins and a division championship, but he wouldn't impede the rebuilding progress. As a matter of fact, he could still mentor the pitchers like Jurjjens, Morton, Hanson, etc.
I think not making the moves to make the Braves better probably made the decision easier for Smoltz, who undoubtedly wants another shot at a championship that he wasn't going to get here with the roster as is. But to lowball a guy who has sacrificed for and poured his heart and soul into an organization for 21 years is pathetic. Wren probably is too stupid to realize that this will make a significant, negative impact on PR and attendance. Fans still pack the Ted, just to watch Smoltzie pitch.
Add Frank Wren to the **** list.
The only way this would have made sense is if Atlanta had spent up all its money in making the team a World Series contender and simply couldn't shell out the money to Smoltz. But they have at least 30 million sitting on the shelf, so it's inexcusable. You can't use the rebuilding ploy because you came out and said you were going to spend money and make the team competitive. If you were going to rebuild, why try and trade young guys for Jake Peavy? Why offer AJ Burnett and Rafael Furcal contracts? Why offer Mike Hampton more than Smoltz? Smoltz isn't the difference between 70 wins and a division championship, but he wouldn't impede the rebuilding progress. As a matter of fact, he could still mentor the pitchers like Jurjjens, Morton, Hanson, etc.
I think not making the moves to make the Braves better probably made the decision easier for Smoltz, who undoubtedly wants another shot at a championship that he wasn't going to get here with the roster as is. But to lowball a guy who has sacrificed for and poured his heart and soul into an organization for 21 years is pathetic. Wren probably is too stupid to realize that this will make a significant, negative impact on PR and attendance. Fans still pack the Ted, just to watch Smoltzie pitch.
Add Frank Wren to the **** list.
Wednesday, January 7, 2009
The Future of Georgia Football
I won't spend too much time dissecting the Stafford and Moreno decisions. But I'll break it down like this. I certainly would have liked for them both to have stayed. If I had been advising them, I would have told Moreno to go ahead, but for Stafford to stay put another year. I won't speculate what I would have done if I was them, since I'm not, but I must admit if I had the chance to go in the NFL and make millions, I'd probably take it. I could always come back and finish college 10-15 years down the road. I will say this about Stafford. Listening to him in the press conference, I didn't get the vibe that he is mentally ready for the NFL. (Not Moreno either for that matter) But at least Moreno stands to go to a pretty good team. The highest I saw him possibly going was 12th overall to Denver, and that's a playoff potential team. Some other potential suitors (Chicago, New York Jets, New Orleans, New England) are close to being playoff teams. Stafford will probably wind up in one of four places: Detroit, St. Louis, Kansas City, San Francisco. But let's assume these experts are right, and the Lions do take him first overall. He will step into the league's worst franchise in a city with the bleakest of bleak economic outlooks. And he will be expected by many Lions fans to be the savior. Is he ready to take that on? God help him. But that being said, what's done is done. I wish them nothing but the best in their NFL careers.
Now in regards to the future of Georgia, I certainly don't believe it is one of despair. Regardless of the officious prick Jim Rome's opinion, Georgia has more than a chance to have a very successful 2009 campaign and success even further down the road. Joe Cox, a nation turns its lonely eyes to you...uh, the Bulldog nation anyway. I'm comfortable with Mark Richt and Mike Bobo's full endorsement of Cox as a perfectly capable QB, and I think in many ways, he could be more successful than Stafford. Many are likening the situation to DJ Shockley in 2005, when in his one and only chance to lead the Bulldogs, he helped bring in an SEC championship. Cox certainly doesn't have Stafford's arm strength, and he's not going to be the sexy first round draft pick. But I'm thinking he'll probably be much more than merely serviceable. Cox does throw a more accurate deep ball, and he will probably make much better decisions than Stafford did.
Also to keep in mind is that the Bulldogs will have a veteran and seasoned offensive line coming back, all of it to be exact, that will protect Cox. This includes their best lineman Trinton Sturdivant, who missed all of 2008 with a knee injury. And I would say that an offensive line like the prospective one for 2009 certainly would have helped Stafford out much more. Cox will have a multitude of good receivers to throw to, the biggest target being AJ Green. But remember that Mike Moore looked really impressive this year, and Kris Durham, Tavarres King and Israel Troupe should all contribute as well. That's not to mention a couple of recruits coming in that could see time. Cox should be fine. He knows the system, and he should manage it well. He's led the Bulldogs to victory before. (Colorado 2006) I could even see Georgia mixing Logan Gray in similar to the way that Florida mixed Tim Tebow in in 2006, and LSU Ryan Perriloux in 2007. And keep in mind incoming freshman Aaron Murray, who I think we'll see in 2010, and who I think we'll be a stud.
Perhaps the biggest area of concern is the running back position. Who will step up in Moreno's place? There's talk about moving Richard Samuel to linebacker, but who knows? I would expect Caleb King will have a chip on his shoulder during the off season, but he definitely has the ability. Dontavious Jackson and Carlton Thomas, both of whom were red shirted, have the talent, and Washaun Ealey could make an impact. It may be a running back by committee thing, until one of them steps up as the guy.
Georgia's defense stands to improve for next season. With all of the defensive tackles, except Corey Irvin returning, the Bulldogs will have plenty of depth. Geno Atkins is back, along with Jeff Owens, who will be returning from a season ending injury. Rennie Curran, Daryl Gamble and Akeem Dent will all be back at linebacker, even though the Dogs are losing Dannell Ellerbe. Let's just hope that players like Darius Dewberry, Akeem Hebron and Marcus Dowtin can step up and be reliable backups. The secondary should be improved, providing Reshad Jones can become more disciplined at safety. Look for incoming freshman Branden Smith to make an immediate impact. The biggest concern on defense will probably be at defensive end. Who will step up at that position? Demarcus Dobbs? Justin Houston? Maybe incoming Toby Jackson?
As for special teams, I would hope that Blair Walsh can get his kickoffs under control, and I think Georgia will be fine.
The team could benefit from a little more favorable schedule. Starting at Stillwater will be tough, but the Dogs also get Arizona State at home and LSU at home, even though the Tigers could creep back up to prominence next season. Biggest of all is that Georgia gets a bye week before Florida. Can't complain there. There are of course the tough ones, like the trip to Knoxville, but I'm still more comfortable with the 2009 schedule than the 2008 one. And finally with Stafford and Moreno now gone, the media's expectations for Georgia will drop. So almost certainly no pre-season number one ranking, maybe not even top 10. And the Bulldogs have done much better when they were lying under the radar. Don't set your sites too high that Georgia may win a championship next year, but absolutely don't write it off as a rebuilding project.
Just remember the striking similarities between 2005 and 2009. After a disappointing 2004 in which the Bulldogs failed to meet their high expectations, they lost David Greene, David Pollack, Fred Gibson, Reggie Brown, Odell Thurman and Thomas Davis among others. The jury was still out on DJ Shockley, and yet the Bulldogs won the SEC.
Now in regards to the future of Georgia, I certainly don't believe it is one of despair. Regardless of the officious prick Jim Rome's opinion, Georgia has more than a chance to have a very successful 2009 campaign and success even further down the road. Joe Cox, a nation turns its lonely eyes to you...uh, the Bulldog nation anyway. I'm comfortable with Mark Richt and Mike Bobo's full endorsement of Cox as a perfectly capable QB, and I think in many ways, he could be more successful than Stafford. Many are likening the situation to DJ Shockley in 2005, when in his one and only chance to lead the Bulldogs, he helped bring in an SEC championship. Cox certainly doesn't have Stafford's arm strength, and he's not going to be the sexy first round draft pick. But I'm thinking he'll probably be much more than merely serviceable. Cox does throw a more accurate deep ball, and he will probably make much better decisions than Stafford did.
Also to keep in mind is that the Bulldogs will have a veteran and seasoned offensive line coming back, all of it to be exact, that will protect Cox. This includes their best lineman Trinton Sturdivant, who missed all of 2008 with a knee injury. And I would say that an offensive line like the prospective one for 2009 certainly would have helped Stafford out much more. Cox will have a multitude of good receivers to throw to, the biggest target being AJ Green. But remember that Mike Moore looked really impressive this year, and Kris Durham, Tavarres King and Israel Troupe should all contribute as well. That's not to mention a couple of recruits coming in that could see time. Cox should be fine. He knows the system, and he should manage it well. He's led the Bulldogs to victory before. (Colorado 2006) I could even see Georgia mixing Logan Gray in similar to the way that Florida mixed Tim Tebow in in 2006, and LSU Ryan Perriloux in 2007. And keep in mind incoming freshman Aaron Murray, who I think we'll see in 2010, and who I think we'll be a stud.
Perhaps the biggest area of concern is the running back position. Who will step up in Moreno's place? There's talk about moving Richard Samuel to linebacker, but who knows? I would expect Caleb King will have a chip on his shoulder during the off season, but he definitely has the ability. Dontavious Jackson and Carlton Thomas, both of whom were red shirted, have the talent, and Washaun Ealey could make an impact. It may be a running back by committee thing, until one of them steps up as the guy.
Georgia's defense stands to improve for next season. With all of the defensive tackles, except Corey Irvin returning, the Bulldogs will have plenty of depth. Geno Atkins is back, along with Jeff Owens, who will be returning from a season ending injury. Rennie Curran, Daryl Gamble and Akeem Dent will all be back at linebacker, even though the Dogs are losing Dannell Ellerbe. Let's just hope that players like Darius Dewberry, Akeem Hebron and Marcus Dowtin can step up and be reliable backups. The secondary should be improved, providing Reshad Jones can become more disciplined at safety. Look for incoming freshman Branden Smith to make an immediate impact. The biggest concern on defense will probably be at defensive end. Who will step up at that position? Demarcus Dobbs? Justin Houston? Maybe incoming Toby Jackson?
As for special teams, I would hope that Blair Walsh can get his kickoffs under control, and I think Georgia will be fine.
The team could benefit from a little more favorable schedule. Starting at Stillwater will be tough, but the Dogs also get Arizona State at home and LSU at home, even though the Tigers could creep back up to prominence next season. Biggest of all is that Georgia gets a bye week before Florida. Can't complain there. There are of course the tough ones, like the trip to Knoxville, but I'm still more comfortable with the 2009 schedule than the 2008 one. And finally with Stafford and Moreno now gone, the media's expectations for Georgia will drop. So almost certainly no pre-season number one ranking, maybe not even top 10. And the Bulldogs have done much better when they were lying under the radar. Don't set your sites too high that Georgia may win a championship next year, but absolutely don't write it off as a rebuilding project.
Just remember the striking similarities between 2005 and 2009. After a disappointing 2004 in which the Bulldogs failed to meet their high expectations, they lost David Greene, David Pollack, Fred Gibson, Reggie Brown, Odell Thurman and Thomas Davis among others. The jury was still out on DJ Shockley, and yet the Bulldogs won the SEC.
Monday, January 5, 2009
Some Notes on the Passing Sports Scene
* The Falcons turnaround season ended this past Saturday thanks to a fairly poor performance. But hey, give Arizona credit. One clear thing we should have learned, that some of us had already learned, is that Keith Brooking's best days are behind him. I don't know how in the hell a 10-year veteran could be that out of position on a 3rd and 16, but oh well. I took issue with Jeff Schultz of the AJC and his seemingly doom and gloom column after Saturday's game. Nope, the Falcons didn't play well at all, but did you really expect them to win the Super Bowl. I thought at best, they'd beat Arizona and then lose to the Panthers or Giants this week. Of course as typical with the Atlanta media, one person said the team might be Super Bowl bound, and they ran with it. Of course, this season could always turn out to be a fluke, and the Falcons could suffer through a couple more bad seasons following this one. Afterall, the franchise has yet to post back to back winning seasons. But with the personnel in place, I can't see them flopping. Matt Ryan should only get better, and his supporting cast of Turner, Norwood, White and Jenkins will add to the success. If the Falcons can address their biggest weakness (pass defense) in the offseason, expect them to field a competitive team in 2009.
* Matthew Stafford and Knowshon Moreno should be nearing their decisions in the next week, and then we should be able to guage the future of the Georgia Bulldogs. Obviously I would like them to stay, but I'd have to say both are probably gone. Assuming they do go, I still feel pretty well about the 2009 season. Georgia has yanked in another strong recruiting class, and their defense should be much better next year with injured players returning. Also, they'll have the entire offensive line back. The running back situation should be solid with Samuel, King, Jackson, Thomas and possibly Ealey looking to make the big impact. And I would welcome a healthy QB competition between Cox, Gray, Murray and Mettenburger, even though I think Cox will get the nod. Georgia could surprise some people in 2009 because their schedule is a little more favorable.
* Can all of us please now say that a playoff system is needed in college football? With Utah's victory over Alabama, the Utes are now staking their claim to the national title. Same goes with USC, who handled Penn State. And if Texas beats Ohio State like they should, they will make their claim as well, especially if Oklahoma beats Florida. I still don't think Utah belongs in the discussion, but out of Florida, Oklahoma, Texas and USC, it's impossible to pick a definitive best team out of those.
* I assume the Atlanta Braves haven't dropped off the face of the Earth and are still trying to improve their club for 2009. GM Frank Wren has made it clear that pitching is the first priority. I doubt the Jake Peavy talks start going again, so that leaves Ben Sheets and Derek Lowe as ace options. The left field position still needs to be addressed, and Adam Dunn might be worth the gamble. Or maybe even Jermaine Dye. And don't forget John Smoltz. Anyway with 40 million still left in the bank, Atlanta needs to get on the ball if they expect to contend this year. They could get their ace pitcher and power bat for left field without having to give up their prized prospects (Hanson, Heyward, Freeman, Rohrbrough). It's really a question of if they are up to it.
I'll have a bigger post on the Braves soon.
* Matthew Stafford and Knowshon Moreno should be nearing their decisions in the next week, and then we should be able to guage the future of the Georgia Bulldogs. Obviously I would like them to stay, but I'd have to say both are probably gone. Assuming they do go, I still feel pretty well about the 2009 season. Georgia has yanked in another strong recruiting class, and their defense should be much better next year with injured players returning. Also, they'll have the entire offensive line back. The running back situation should be solid with Samuel, King, Jackson, Thomas and possibly Ealey looking to make the big impact. And I would welcome a healthy QB competition between Cox, Gray, Murray and Mettenburger, even though I think Cox will get the nod. Georgia could surprise some people in 2009 because their schedule is a little more favorable.
* Can all of us please now say that a playoff system is needed in college football? With Utah's victory over Alabama, the Utes are now staking their claim to the national title. Same goes with USC, who handled Penn State. And if Texas beats Ohio State like they should, they will make their claim as well, especially if Oklahoma beats Florida. I still don't think Utah belongs in the discussion, but out of Florida, Oklahoma, Texas and USC, it's impossible to pick a definitive best team out of those.
* I assume the Atlanta Braves haven't dropped off the face of the Earth and are still trying to improve their club for 2009. GM Frank Wren has made it clear that pitching is the first priority. I doubt the Jake Peavy talks start going again, so that leaves Ben Sheets and Derek Lowe as ace options. The left field position still needs to be addressed, and Adam Dunn might be worth the gamble. Or maybe even Jermaine Dye. And don't forget John Smoltz. Anyway with 40 million still left in the bank, Atlanta needs to get on the ball if they expect to contend this year. They could get their ace pitcher and power bat for left field without having to give up their prized prospects (Hanson, Heyward, Freeman, Rohrbrough). It's really a question of if they are up to it.
I'll have a bigger post on the Braves soon.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
