dc.

Well... I like the change. I mean, even with more passing... we owned the clock... nearly 40 minutes... that's unbelievable. Really... I think what Cam and Harbaugh want to do is get the points early... and eat the clock late. We've shown we can do both. I'm excited to see it continue.

The jinx seems to have made it to a new season... please keep all comments regarding (dessert)walks, romps, stomps and domination OFF this board and out of earshot.

Our defense really didn't have a bad day. Later in the game they showed some weakness... but the game was only made close by a pair of unusual mistakes... and unusually BIG mistakes.

Well... let's just say that this game shouldn't have been nearly as close as it was. Blocked punt plus interception means that despite having only 40 some yards of total offense... they were leading the game. Which is just pathetic. I think Gannon was right that we probably did try to be too fancy early... but really, it wasn't the fanciness that cost us... it was just a pair of weird big plays. Long-run, I think the passing attack is going to help us a lot, obviously. Offense looked great. Defense looked good most of the time - Gannon said he hadn't mentioned Ed Reed or Ray Lewis very much... well, again, until the middle of the 3rd quarter (or later, even) the Chiefs had only run about 20 plays on offense... you're not going to hear many names that way. Special teams just looked bad on top of bad. No return game. Kicking game was eh. Punts were good... when we got them. The biggest thing the defense lacked was the big play... but that's alright... we'll find it. We always do.

1. Need I mention the words?? Matt.... Stt... Stt.... Sttttttt.... 2. Special Teams play has been pretty atrocious. 3. Like the offensive attacks... but we're acting like we don't even trust our run game. 6 yard run leads to 2nd and 4... why don't we try the run again? It works. 4. Both Rice and McGahee look a little prissy... Show me Le'Ron running over some people. 5. Timeout usage... challenge... all silly. C'mon. First game, but we've been here before people.

that's his point, cleetz.

Any word on Polamalu's injury yet? Their defense looked far less fierce without him out there. I really don't understand much of anything that Titans did last night. The long pass game was never open... and their biggest mistakes came in trying to heave it downfield... even with a short clock at the end of the game, they had more than enough time (with 3 time outs and 2 min warning) to use the running game which had opened things up for them, and they simply didn't... and then the defensive changes, as we have mentioned. Personally, I think the Steelers look more than beatable. But I think you all are right that they will be tough to beat - especially because they face the Dolphins/Titans while we get the Colts/Pats. I also think this game was classic Steelers - no one else wins games like that. They should have been down so often, by so much... and all the breaks seemed to go their way for a while. Announcers always try to tell us it's not luck... but there's some luck in there.

And actually, if anyone has already registered with ESPN anyway... you can just join whatever group we make with that entry. We'll get on it.

Again Crav... it all comes down to Tenn's defensive schemes. They just laid off him. And again... especially with our versatility... I never want to lay off Ben or any other QB we're up against that can really throw. I'd rather risk a huge play than just let them pick us apart. It just doesn't make sense. When you rush him, it's 10% chance of big play, 90% chance of incompletion, sack, interception, etc... If you let him sit back, those numbers just switch.

I think the no-huddle success has as much to do with the Titans laying off the blitz as anything else... Collinsworth finally started saying it in the final three minutes or so... "I'd rather risk the big play than just let them rip my zone apart with 3 or 4 man rush." And if you're only going to rush 4... at least make it creative. We've seen the Ravens fall apart the same way before. But at least with our versatility we can rush with Suggs and drop someone like Kruger... Meanwhile... need I mention how watching Bironas miss two inside 40 made me feel? Especially about a certain situation we've been discussing/avoiding in these parts?

Hard to stop them when you completely give up on your blitz... the only thing holding the Steelers in check all night. The Steelers had that game lost 8 ways to Sunday and the Titans couldn't finish them off or get close once... that's the same Titans team that played that same game against us last season. Classic Steelers escapism.

Pitt should be down at least 10 right now... geeeez. And would have been rolling had that final second play turned into a 100yd TD for Tenn... instead only an 80 yard near-TD. Rats!

Couldn't quite pull it off and no shame in that... Between the lost calls to the refs (there were a few, as always, that were beyond atrocious) and Vasquez's stupid fouls early and late... and the entire team's failure to shoot free throws... it just wasn't meant to be. Competitive. Should be a fun final few games. I think the worst non-call was on a shot by Elliot Williams with about 10 min remaining... ran down the court, jumped up to lay it in, and had his arm fully extended pushing away a defender on the ground... Duke gets away with the push off all the time... but that was just absurd. Plenty of others that got away too... but you have to expect to play uphill in a sense.

Schmuck had good reviews of just about all the O's who pitched against the Italian team the other day... the young pitchers especially... Bergeson pitched two innings allowing just one hit. 19 of 22 pitches for strikes, including three k's. Tillman pitched a perfect inning, 10 of 14 for strikes. Arrieta threw a scoreless inning as well. And Matusz started the game with a scoreless inning...

Considering they and most other papers will be out of business within years? I dunno. But if you wanna give me a recommendation and throw a line to the paper... I'm all for it. ;)

The Roberts-Hudson comparison is okay... but not perfect. Briefly... Hudson has never topped 100 runs in a season. In fact, he has never topped 90. Roberts has topped 100 three times and another at 92. Hudson has a career high 166 hits. Roberts averages over 175 hits per season. Hudson has a career high 34 doubles. Roberts FEWEST doubles in his last 5 seasons is 34 (50, 51, 45, 42). Hudson has a career high 10 steals. In his last five seasons, Roberts lowest total is 23, with 126 steals in his last three seasons combined. Hudson has 42 career steals ... Roberts had 40 in 2008. It goes on and on. They are close, but I give Roberts a significant edge. Even in fielding... despite the gold gloves... Roberts actually has a higher career fielding percentage, has been higher for the past few seasons (including compared to Hudson's most recent GG season) and has a higher range factor and has turned significantly more double plays. (More proof that gold gloves are a joke). Meanwhile, what players are getting in this market is largely irrelevant. Roberts extension begins in 2010 and we should be comparing his contract to what players are signing for NEXT season. It's hard to predict. The market this year has been largely affected by the economy... any kind of rebound could provide a major boost next season. We'll know more about the Roberts deal when we figure out what people are signing for next year. But 10m is hardly breaking the bank for this club and I think Roberts is worth it. As for the percentage of payroll question... the O's payroll will probably be closer to 80 than 70 this year. Still a hefty percentage. But again, the 10m per season doesn't begin until next year. And we don't know the club's payroll then. What we do know is that the contract is not at all backloaded... which is good. We pay the same in 2010 and we do in 2013, so we're not stuck with a growing salary. Additionally, the O's payroll is on the low side because of the shift to young players. It won't stay there, it doesn't have to stay there. It's simply where we have been for a while because we've had no major talents and bought nothing either. The team is willing and able to spend a significant bit more, I bet, when the time comes.

I think it's worth being happy about. WOOOOOOOOOO. Also, I don't know why you think that "no one wanted to sign him to THAT contract." Then why do it? MacPhail hasn't exactly been caving to anyone else. He hasn't exactly been scared of letting anyone else walk out the door. I didn't mean it was about fear of seeing him somewhere else. I meant that if every other team (or most) were going to pay him that kind of money, that's an indication that he's worth it and that maybe our own bargaining tools are wrong. Other teams want him and want to pay him for a reason... As for making the same as Markakis... yeah, that's true. And part of it is because Roberts is 6 years older than Makakis. I don't like it, but part of baseball is that you are paid for your past work, not your future work. In 6 years, at 31, Markakis will be getting 15-18m a year, if not more, probably. Roberts, as a 31 year old veteran on this team, and a stellar lead-off man, is being paid as such.

Listen to MacPhail talk about it, and you have to trust... Roberts is getting older, but not especially older. History suggests that middle infielders are able to maintain, or even surpass, their previous success as they age into their mid-30's. 36 is not dead in baseball the way it is in football. Especially when you consider that part of Roberts great benefit to this club is simply his ability to get on base... it's not just speed, it's not power... it's his eye at the plate and his contact. Contact hitters aren't exactly the type you think abotu fading quickly in their early 30's. Many contact hitters, in fact, get better at finding their pitch and avoiding the bad ones. And when you talk about growing an organization from the ground up, you have to consider the type of people you want to be considered leaders in that clubhouse... and Roberts is certainly the type that I want leading a team. Finally, next year Roberts would hit the market and, in my opinion, easily get this kind of money. And it comes down to whether we want him or whether someone else does. We have no viable other options to play 2b in the organization. And teams like the Yankees, Red Sox and other contenders would be all over Roberts come free agency... so how is it such a bad move for us? It's not overly expensive. It doesn't tie our hands down. It doesn't interfere with our ability to do anything else as a club. It's retaining talent that would otherwise find its way to another team.

Nope. Didn't even see it. Heard updates as I was at work though. Only been to one game this year since I graduated... expensivo to get back. Anyway... to be honest... I was talking with friends about it last night... I never thought it could happen. And I still don't believe that this team will make the tournament. This hardly locks it up. This is the first time in forever where I am not the one championing Maryland's ability to play to anyone's level on any night and 'shock the world' any given day. I just don't believe it. Maybe I should after yesterday, but I don't know. This team is not that good. They will probably still get walloped by Duke. Probably lose to BC again. And then they'll still need 2 wins in the ACC tourney to even think about the big one... and two wins would mean one against Duke, UNC or Clemson probably...

ExtremeSkins is, I believe, the official message board of the Redskins... they signed on to that a few years ago when teams were creating boards. The Ravens opted to create their own system. So the Skins website has upwards of several hundred thousand members, I believe. They beat us in some ways, sure. But we hold our own. I hardly consider us rivals.

Well, yeah. But my point is that it's cheaper because of government interference. Which is just another stupid thing - subsidies. We don't want to pay an extra 50c a gallon for milk or for corn or whatever... so instead we agree to hire taxes and the government makes the same payment for us... and what do we get? Well, we still end up giving our money... and then MORE... to producers because they make double by taking subsidies AND selling products like HFCS. Exactly. And if you read about how they make the stuff... its even worse. It's impossible to avoid HFCS entirely, and there's nothing to say you should... but why can't we just have sugar??? I don't drink much, but my liver's going to be the age of my dad's in 10 years courtesy of HFCS.

Funny because they have been around for so much longer than us and consider us their "rip off." Whatever. We win the search/hits battle courtesy of our exclusively written content by members via the front end and the blog.

Whoops... might have been wrong. Oil down almost $2 already today.

No ideas on what they are worth. There's a place in Towson/Lutherville called Jay's where I used to do all my sports collection shopping as a kid and I think they buy cards - in bulk especially. I remember we used to buy these boxes they would pack of just 500 or 1000 cards, and they'd sell 'em for 10 bucks. Anyway, might be worth inquiring there. But as for demand for signed cards of virtual no names? No clue.

Not sure if you're serious there or its your dry wit, Spen. Don't mind either way. But I never really cared nor paid attention to HFCS versus Sugar until a parent of one of my swimmers, who is a doctor and researcher, started telling me all the differences and this and that. And I started to really figure out the difference. It's digested in your livers, not your intestines, and strains your body, etc etc. And what truly pisses me off is that government subsidies to the corn industry are the only reason we have HFCS. The subsidies are so ridiculously high that there was so much excess corn, they decided to figure out a way to make it used more.... just to pad the farmers pockets anyway. Ditch the subsidies, give me sugar! Especially now that ethanol products are making corn even MORE valuable to produce, which is creating somewhat of a shortage of wheat products (which is why your bagels and bread are costing more - wheat producers are making corn).