OnWis97

If I take everything I read at face value, most MLB teams need to flee their urban hellscapes. The Twins, Mariners, Giants, Dodgers, and Cardinals, just to name a few, better get to the suburbs or roll the dice on smaller markets.

The A's mess could last one-to-four years. So their situation will easily be resolved first.

MLB is major sports league most reliant on having an even number of teams. I cannot imagine several years of an odd number. It's fun to play out the scenarios. Is every "A's" game just a forfeit win for the "opponent?" Do we just use winning percentage with uneven numbers of games played? Does the schedule get 100% balanced so every team (within each league) has the same number of byes? I really don't see this happening. It's bad for everyone. Lost home games for other teams, lost ability for the A's to come into Vegas as a competent team, lost MLB roster spots. I'd say they'll probably have an OKC Hornets situation in Salt Lake City or somewhere. If not that, the options are to play outdoors in the Vegas heat, several lame-duck years in Oakland, or being a 100% road team.

For those old enough... ...which I am for the Drive and the Fumble (had to look the other one up). I recall the Broncos pulling wins out of the air a couple of times vs. the Browns. But the Technically Not Expansion Browns was the best I could come up with for the change from futility to crapping the bed. I'm old enough to have seen all but two NFC teams in the Super Bowl: The Vikings and the Lions. It's funny that it's for two very different reasons; one for futility and the other for finding inventive ways to nullify being one of the more competitive franchises in the league. It felt like Lions fans got a taste of Viking fandom yesterday. I still don't know which is worse...

Lions fans were sick of living like Browns fans. Now they have a taste of what it's like to be a Vikings fan.

The gray Washington jersey is serviceable. The white one looks like a fashion jersey to me. (though I like the "DC" patch a lot in the strange DC shape).

I do kind of agree. I would not say they've aged badly but I don't think they've quite achieved the modern classiness of the White Sox change at roughly the same time (a bit before, I think). Therefore, while I don't think they need a change, they're definitely not untouchable. I don't necessarily think then need to emulate the other Seattle teams but I guess I don't see them moving too far away from what's kind of a "Seattle" aesthetic. It feels like Seattle is kind of like a bit of a less-focused Pittsburgh.* *Though the green and yellow likely to come back in the NBA will take away from that.

I tend to favor outlines. I even like double-outlines (like the Bucs numbers and the 1990s Chargers). That said, I really do like the Dodgers jersey pictured above. The lack of white on that uniform makes it really nice. While I do think I prefer the white outlines for the Yankees (at least for now; we'll see whether I get used to it), I think there's a "traditional team" component that (to steal from another member, who's name I don't recall, that used to favor "brand" over "aesthetics") that makes this aesthetic work for the Yankees even though it would be a terrible idea for the Astros. Why specifically 2009?

I think this change makes sense for the Yankees. I admit that I liked the white outlines (though I did not like the sleeve stripes). But this is a very traditional look for a traditional team. Then again, they have a corporate sponsor on the sleeve, so tradition is really not what it used to be.

Reminds me of Northwest Banks in the Twin Cities changing to Norwest Banks. My first encounter with "all that time and money for...?" They'd eventually be bought up by Wells Fargo.

It's amazing how fall weather lingered throughout the midwest and rustbelt right up until the NFL Playoffs. Anyway, I'm going Ravens over Packers.

Did Penix cost himself any money last night?

I think there was consideration for an asymmetrical one that had the "point" lower to look a bit more like the state. I'm glad they went this way...I prefer the subtlety with more of a conventional "flag" look. I'm starting to warm up to it, though seeing it match with the other state flags, I do think the version with the green stripe would have set it apart better.

I don't know whether there was a connection but some in Minnesota were melting down that the one with green had a resemblance (if you really wanted to see it, which they did) to some subdivision in Somalia. I think it'll probably pass the legislature, though if the GOP members hear enough about how woke it is to change the flag, I suppose this could go in the direction of a straight party vote. The Dems have both houses but I could see a few citing the process or the fact that one party should not make the decision. So it's not 100%.

It's probably the most popular college sport right now after football and basketball. It seems to have come on very quickly over the last couple of years. A regular-season Wisconsin vs. Minnesota match was shown on Fox a month or two ago in the late afternoon on a Saturday (following a college football game). That kind of exposure seems like a very new development. A couple of years ago I bandgwagon-watched Wisconsin win the national championship and was blown away by the intensity of it all. I also caught the end of a regular season loss at Nebraska this season and the intensity was still impressive (i.e., doesn't only apply to national championship). That all said, I don't anticipate becoming a frequent viewer because it's not like I don't have enough sports to waste time with already.

There were some others early on that I liked better but when the final six were announced, this was probably the best one. I really don't like the white being at the top...I hope it ends up in the middle. Overall it's been pretty disappointing. The state pulled the old "your reward is the exposure" thing and then seemed to rush through the process. The state seal ended up being really nice, in my opinion. The flag redesign is kind of working out like a less-successful version of Utah's change. There have been times I've suspected that the group (I really don't know who they are) is "throwing" the process with the objective of keeping the same flag. That's not what I think happened, but I do think they should have slowed it down at some point. Despite the arguments a couple of pages ago, I generally favor separating ourselves from the other blue / seal flags and am glad something is happening. As a bonus the same crowd of people who adopted William McKinley as their favorite president a few years ago is suddenly really attached to our "blah" flag. It's fun seeing them melt down over something they don't actually care about.

I'm generally indifferent to the in-season tournament and I'm pretty much waiting until at least one of them is completed to make judgements. I'm generally curious to see how the winning team reacts. My guess is with a little more excitement than after any regular-season win. Will there be a banner (please, no)? T-shirts (probably but I'd never get one)? Will it last? Will it become big enough to water-down the actual championship (I doubt it)? There are some T-Wolves fans that are upset that the team with the best record in the West didn't get in. I personally don't care; in fact, I'm kinda relieved they won't have an 83rd game. (and I also understand, and accept, that there's a randomness to using four games to go from 30 teams to eight). I choose not to nit-pick the fact that these were the only games where margin of victory matters. I am not too into the nuance that the Wolves, not used to success, could have used the "playoff atmosphere." Meh. They got that last year when they gave Denver a couple of games. At no point have I ever invested in the in-season tourney. Also, though, I don't see it as problematic or something to have angst over.

I was pretty upset at the time. A few years later Nebraska beat out undefeated Michigan. I remember complaining about the "tie goes to Nebraska rule." It was why I was happy about the BCS; I felt the traditional Rose Bowl tie in was doing the Big Ten a disservice. One of those two Nebraska wins (I think it was the Penn State year), there was a split in the polls. Then Penn State made the mistake of taking their foot off the gas against Indiana or someone and won by a lesser margin. From that point on, Nebraska had full control of both polls. In the Michigan year, Tom Osbourne announced his retirement mid-year. That effectively served as tiebreaker. Quibbling over #5 is better than quibbling over #2 (BCS) and #1 (old system). I look forward to quibbling over #13; that'll better-resemble the quibbling over #69 in basketball where once the games start we forget about it.

It's almost like a four-team playoff doesn't work when there are five big conferences. I'd have preferred to see FSU in over Alabama, even though Alabama's probably the better team. I still think Georgia's probably better than Alabama. But they lost, just as 'Bama did to Texas. FSU never did. And if you're going to consider their QB situation (which is like the NFL booting the Eagles out of the playoffs if Jalen Hurts goes down), then I think it's fair game to consider the miracle Alabama needed to beat a team that had just been smacked around by New Mexico State. Anyway, I prefer resume/body-of-work to projection. And if you're going to project, may as well go: 1. Georgia 2. Bama 3. Michigan 4. Washington Anyway, Bama's going to win this whole thing, obviously.

I can’t see why they would do that barring a surprisingly, generous offer. Yesterday, Edwards didn’t have a great game and KAT grabbed that win for them. I am usually a big Steve Kerr fan, but I was a little disappointed in his comical defense of his player and suggestion that Gobert did the same thing. L O L. I think Green might tone his act down if someone popped him in the jaw.

It’s my (admittedly hyperbolic) label for them after the NCAA apologized for slapping them on the wrist. US sports media clearly wanted them to remain a power and while it’s not as much the case today, they felt like America’s team for a few years.

Even with all that’s going on at Michigan, I can’t root for America’s Team today. Hopefully if Michigan loses it’ll be to Ohio State.

The Timberwolves have beaten the Celtics, Nuggets, and Heat (albeit on "Player Rest Day" for Miami). And they've blown a 20-point lead to Atlanta. This team could probably skip the entire play-in that round that they're becoming mainstays in if they could just figure out how to hold leads against non-elite teams. They'll probably miss the six seed by two games after going 1-5 against Charlotte, Detroit, and Washington.

As playoffs have expanded over the years, it gives more fanbases to pay attention well into the season, which is good for getting people to the games. However, the World Series ended up giving us a couple of teams that I think were not very well known to many fans. Given the somewhat random nature of who wins a short series, by enlarging the playoff field, the likelihood of a team that didn't spend much of the season on the radar going to the World Series increases. It's a bit of a double-edged sword I suppose. I suspect Atlanta, who is known as being really good and has more notable players, would have bumped the ratings some. Maybe even a Baltimore, who isn't as well known but was recognized as having had a great year, may have helped. I know there's a chance that I'm projecting here as it is probably the World Series for which I knew the fewest players since I was about eight years old. I did not find the matchup particularly compelling.

I recall when Wisconsin played at Arizona in football maybe 20 years ago they were in a flooding locker room waiting for a torrential downpour to end. I thought it was a huge anomaly. I'm actually going to Tucson for the first time ever in early December. I'm counting on some nice weather. But that 7-12 degree difference would not do it for me. I don't think I could spend time in either place in the summer. During one of D-Back home games last week I was disappointed the roof was closed but then I found out it had hit 100 that day. It was October 20 or something. And it's not going to get better...(Of course where I live winter is like seven months...)