Chicago Meatheads

So there are a couple of cities that are, well ridiculous when it comes to sports. New York, Boston, Philadelphia all come to mind. You have batshit crazy fans in Oakland, as well as Dallas, and those Flippin Packer fans have to be crazy for wearing team colors and sitting outside in -30 degree weather. There is 1 group of fans that are more ridiculous, more stupid, and more meatheaded than any of the others....

Chicago sports fans.

Face it, you get a smile and a chubby whenever you hear Da Coach spew pro-Bears propaganda all over ESPN airwaves. You take every chance to throw in a spiteful jab to a Sox or Cubs fan. TE Bulls will never be a good as when Jordan was here, and you've been committed to the Indian since Mikita, Esposito, and Hull were winning cups.



In all reality, we are the world's worse sports fan. Quick to jump on the bandwagon to fire an undeserving coach, and first to say that rookie who just hit 3 homers will be one of the greats. We flood Vegas every year with ridiculously dumb bets on the Cubs finally winning the World Series, and seem to forget that Green Bay is 3 times the team the bears have been over the last 20 years.

We boast, Original 6 and NFL charter franchise. History! History! History! But usually fail to create new memories. We fill ballparks and arenas in droves, spend more than we should on tickets, food, and drinks.

Chicagoans need to wake up.

Currently we have 2 major issues in Chicago sports, and these are issues that have the most proud meatheads ranting and roaring about. The first, the Chicago Cubs.

Turn the clock back to October 22nd 2011... The Cubs hire Theo Epstein away from the Boston Red Sox. Theo was seen as a golden boy, to the likes of Billy Beane. A guy that knows how to succeed and do so through a set of crazy numbers and computers and pie charts and graphs and fat kids who look like Jonah Hill. Cubs fans were ecstatic, baseball know it alls said this was a great move, and people imagined that this would signify a World Series pennant in the not too distant future.

But wait, Theo said there is a lot of work to do. So the mantra of, give us a couple of years to fix it, and Cubs fans drank the koolaid. It was said, so it must be so?

Either way, Theo made his way through the organization, letting long term people here go and revamping the commitment to the minors. Found some hot prospects, got lucky with some Jim Hendry holdovers and signs were pointing up. In 2012 we lost 101 games.



So Jed and Theo went back to work... Inquiring on everyone, spending where they thought necessary, and skimping where they didn't think they should. Some small improvements made here and there, this team should be a little better than last, but still not quite there.

So now people begin to call for heads. Theo's a joke! Jed's just an errand boy! Dale's not the guy! Ricketts just want our money! I don't know what we're yelling about!

It takes time people. Think of a tree. You don't bury a seed and the next day there's a 100' Oak. It needs its roots, it needs a strong core and thick trunk, far reaching branches, and eventually giant leaves. Same with the Cubs. Theo planted a seed in the minors, is in the process of watering and fertilizing (there's a joke about the shit on the field here), waiting to support that strong core, which becomes a talented and great team. Understand people, Andrew Friedman (possibly the best executive in baseball today) took about 3 years before Tampa made the playoffs, why is a year and a month too much time for Theo?

The next Chicago Meathead controversy is Derrick Rose.

Before this year, Derrick was the greatest thing to happen to Chicago since Michael Jordan. MJ himself thought a D Rose lead Bulls team would eventually win more championships than he an his teams were able to win. He was king of the city, could do no wrong.

Derrick Rose is the humblest super star there is! See Derrick Rose give his MVP trophy to his mom! Derrick Rose is a no nonsense superstar! I still don't know why we're yelling!!!

Rise went down with a knee injury last year, and all if that changed. You'd think the kid is Jay Cutler for all the crap he takes.



Problem is, Derrick was cleared by doctors months ago, and he has an older brother that doesn't know when to shut up. Sounds familiar... My younger brother Derrick has a brother that doesn't know when to shut up....

From a PR standpoint, Derrick and his people, the Bulls and their people, ALL handled this poorly. There are constant questions on if he'll play, cause it seems there are constant questions on if he will play. Since it looks like he can play, fans have begun to turn on him. They all have their crazy theories on why he's holding out, or that he's spineless, or doesn't care about the team and only himself , etc etc...

What people don't realize is, after any knee injury, let alone an ACL tear, athletes are likely to cause additional damage to the knee or opposite knee if they are not 100% confident in their repaired knee. In fact, multiple superstar caliber athletes have had a knee injury and have come back before they were absolutely certain in their abilities and damaged their careers.

This is the biggest reason Rose shouldn't play until he is absolutely ready to play. Till he is 100% certain he can do everything he was capable of doing on the knee before the injury. Derrick Rose isn't a role player, or the guy you look to for a quick spark, or late game spot up 3. He's the guy that you look to carry the franchise for the next 10-15 years. He knows, the Bulls know, and most somewhat intelligent fans know, you don't risk the future when you have questions about the present.

I'm sure most people would rather the Cubs fire Theo and Dale and Jed, and they want Derrick Rose to suit up tonight. I'm sure they will jump up and down, and throw comeback and firing parties if it were to happen.

But if that did happen, the Cubs will go another 100 years without winning and D Rose will be playing pickup basketball with Penny Hardaway and Tracy McGrady at the local Y. Smarten up Chicago fans, for the sake of Chicago sports, smarten up.

The Tyrant that is, Our 1st Amendment Right

I know that this is a sports themed blog, and I apologize if this misses the boat for you. I also want to warn that this posting covers issues that some may find uncomfortable.

I want to take a moment to explain why we should look to amend our 1st Amendment Rights, Freedom of Speech.

When introduced, freedom of speech was something that the British oppressed from our fore fathers. When we were British owned they kept the general population without the ability to freely speak, keeping them uninformed, obedient to laws, regulations, and levy's passed down upon them. Restricting the press, and other forms of organized communication was a way of maintaining control over the colonies at a time pre-telephone or pre-internet.

Communication evolved. Telephone, cell phones, more media outlets, news, mail, and other. Then came the internet, giving individuals email capabilities, Instant Messaging capabilities, and now Social Networking. Through this evolution of communication we have lost a lot of responsibility in what we say, and especially in how it affects those it is directed to.

Bullying, false information, cyber-bullying, releasing private information, all of these things have lead to completely destructive or fatal results. Over the last few months we have heard stories of Cyber-bullying on Facebook which has resulted in teens committing suicide. Here are some interesting facts which I have found from www.bullyingsstatistics.org:

Suicide is the third leading cause of death among young people, resulting in about 4,400 deaths per year, according to the CDC. For every suicide among young people, there are at least 100 suicide attempts. Over 14 percent of high school students have considered suicide, and almost 7 percent have attempted it.

Bully victims are between 2 to 9 times more likely to consider suicide than non-victims, according to studies by Yale University

A study in Britain found that at least half of suicides among young people are related to bullying

10 to 14 year old girls may be at even higher risk for suicide, according to the study above

According to statistics reported by ABC News, nearly 30 percent of students are either bullies or victims of bullying, and 160,000 kids stay home from school every day because of fear of bullying

You read that correctly, suicide is the cause for 4,400 youth deaths per year with about half of those deaths related to bullying. That is roughly 2,200 deaths per year due to hurtful words from others. I don't think that our forefathers thought giving us freedom of speech would result in the tragic deaths of our youth.

There is also the question of false or intentionally misleading media coverage. Coverage which can falsely accuse someone of crimes, swaying public opinion before a verdict has been determined in the courts. From thieves to rapists, from murderers to money embezzlers. We are also living in an age of tabloid media, passing false stories off as truth. Not long ago these magazines were constantly being sued by celebrities attempting to save their image through the tabloids false stories. Not only did this end up costing these media outlets credibility and money, but it tied up our judicial system with cases which could have easily been eluded.

Looking at what we now know, shouldn't the US Constitution should be a living, evolving document. A document which should be able to be amended with the times, for the better, based on the needs of the times, and not subject to political battles. After all  why should a senator from California be able to vote for a change which would affect people in Maine? Especially when they may or may not have the same needs, worries, or demands? Instead we should give the President full authority to make changes to the constitution as he sees fit, he is the only elected official which the entire country votes on.

Wouldn't this be perfect? Giving 1 man ultimate power, allowing him to change the law of the land as he believes is needed. Perhaps he also should be granted special wartime powers, or special powers during heightened threats of a terrorist attack.

By this point (or possibly long ago) you thought, "this is a completely ridiculous and outrageous suggestion!" You would be very much right. Thing is, we should be outraged by the mere thought of changing any rights that are afforded to us through the constitution. This includes our 2nd Amendment.

We should not ban firearms, any sorts of firearms. Not only are we granted the right to bare arms so we can hunt for food or protect our families, we are granted the right to stand up to a tyrant government if or when needed. I am not saying that we should buy guns and start a militia tomorrow, however I am saying that one day in the future its not inconceivable that Americans will need to do this. If there are less firearms available to the people, the less of a chance there is that the people will have the ability to fight back if the time comes.

Assault rifles accounted for 323 deaths in 2011, while bullying accounted for roughly 2,000. Think of that, why aren't suicides caused by bullying a bigger story? There were 1,700 more deaths from bullying than assault rifles. You will never hear the media running campaigns to limit our Freedom of Speech, but they back the idea of banning assault rifles.

There will always be people that oppose firearms, maybe because they fear them, or maybe they do not understand them or their place in society. Most times people don't make that connection that is takes someone with a specific desire to cause harm for a gun to cause damage. They also do not realize that 1 in every 4 households in America have firearms, and there are 270,000,000 civilian owned firearms in the US.

When we hear these stories about a teen that tragically took their life because she was tormented, we say that kids today aren't taught to respect their lives and that if they just reached out for help or just held on cause it gets better, or a parent or a teacher stepped in and asked what was wrong. This is the exact message we should be giving when we hear about the next shooting. What we hear instead is, it has to be harder to buy guns, or we need to ban a certain kind of weapon.

What we need to do is get back to the basics and teach respect for humanity. At home, at school, at your aunt's house or neighbor's. We need to remember just how fragile and special life is. We need to become emotionally attached to people again, and not so dependent on technology. We need to become a compassionate world again, and not a place where children so easily get lost in the shuffle. We need to remember to love each other, and not shy away from expressing that to all humanity.

Rosemont Cubbies

Madness! Stupid! Sacrilegious! Just plain DUMB!

This is the thought that people used to have when someone talked about tearing down Wrigley Field. The tides, as it seems, have began to turn. With as much heated debate the Ricketts family has had over renovating Wrigley over the past several years, it seems fans are warming to the idea that the Cubs can play baseball anywhere.

But isn't Wrigley a historical landmark? Yes it is, but there isn't a contract which guarantees that the Cubs play their home games in Wrigley. The fact that Wrigley is a landmark has limited the Cubs, and the Ricketts, ability to make necessary stadium upgrades, repair minor damages, and make changes to generate additional revenue and in today's game of baseball, teams with revenue have an upper hand. Imagine the ability to grow players internally, have the ability to keep and resign the good players, as well as go out and sign the best free agents on the market.

I know the Cubs make a ton of money already, but the Cubs are limited in terms of revenue. They solely rely on ticket revenue to fund team needs. Free Agents - ticket revenue. New pitchers rubber - ticket revenue. New stadium announcer - ticket revenue. 3 more bags of peanuts a game - ticket revenue. All of their needs are from ticket revenue, which the city of Chicago and the local Alderman have handcuffed the Cubs ability to generate more through more seats and other attractions.

Speaking of Alderman Tom Tunney, this is the guy that Mayor, Rahm Emmanuel, refers all Cubs business to, and as the 44th Ward's Alderman possibly rightfully so. The mayor should be able to delegate business to others, that is what they are there for. However in this case it just doesn't work. Tunney time after time refuses or fights the Cubs in most everything they want to do. Add a couple of rows of bleacher seats, NO! Can't do that, it will interfere with the rooftops and their business. Make minor changes internally and, NO! Wrigley is a landmark. However, Tunney reportedly came to Cubs brass recently and told them that he would approve the Cubs plans for the triangle building, hotels, stores, restaurants and bars if the Cubs agreed to tear down the Centerfield scoreboard (a landmark in itself), to generate more business through rooftops. Nothing like dirty business in Chicago politics...

Outside of the rooftops and scoreboards and historical landmarks, Wrigley field is the ONLY reason Wrigleyville exists. Let's say that again, the ONLY REASON WRIGLEYVILLE EXISTS. Sure there would be a neighborhood, perhaps some bars and a couple of fast food joints, but the Cubs and Wrigley Field have created that neighborhood. Why would Rahm, and the Alderman cause issue with one of the cities largest cash cows and builder of so many other businesses in the area? I think they underestimate the real power the Cubs have, and their complete ability to pack up and move to a suburb.

The Cubs has generated millions of dollars for the city of Chicago, in tax revenue, and well as in tourism and additional businesses. The White Sox, the Bears (through the parks department), Bulls and Hawks have all used tax dollars for stadium upgrades or building new stadiums. I understand that the city and state of Illinois is broke, however, the Cubs should have been given some of the same possibilities with tax assistance. Regardless, team owners have said that they will privately fund all of the renovations and expansions the Cubs have planned, yet Tom Tunney has still denied their plans, handcuffing the Cubs with ultimatums and preferring to grow other local business over the sole purpose for those other businesses.

I know that Rahm and other democrats still have some issues with the Ricketts family, but holding them back from being able to grow and compete will eventually bite them. Here it is pure and simple. The Cubs are spending more now than ever before in international scouting, scouting here at home, spending more than ever in their minor leagues, creating a winning culture and a culture for growth and improvement from the lowest levels to the highest levels. They have been creating in-depth personal improvement plans for every player in the organization, and training programs which will assist them in that growth. Their minor league system has improved incredibly, and have legitimate players in most positions which could be Major League ready in a couple of years. If the team also has additional revenue from the hotels, shops, tickets, and other upgrades they have planned they will also be able to go out and outbid any team out there for free agents when the need presents itself.

I am a huge Cubs fan, and I could not imagine the team playing anywhere else, but you could not ignore the opportunities that would exist if the Cubs did in fact move. In fact I would be heartbroken if the Cubs moved from Wrigley, but that would end if it meant the Cubs could compete year in and year out. Again, how is that possible? Easily... more money means more skilled players here. Loosened regulations means more night games here, which are more conducive to winning. Ability to make changes to your stadium which allow for more revenue, allows them affordability to sign and resign players. Upgraded training facilities mean better prepared players. You can recreate the ivy, you can move the scoreboard, you can mimic the field, and you can do it in a way which adds value, revenue, and more ability to win.

The city can keep Wrigley Field, high profile high school and collegiate baseball games can be held there, summer league tournaments can come to Wrigley, and it could be used to help entice minor league teams or even future MLB teams to come here. Chicago can keep Wrigley, while the Cubs win elsewhere.

Twitter Dumb, Twitter Dee, Twitter Doo

The Twitter, tweeter, tiddly do has offered the world a new way to share information. Quick 140 character expressions from the likes of neighbors, friends, media, celebrities, and politicians. Most tend to use Twitter in a responsible manner, yet the aggressive competitive nature of the media, especially sports media has turned Twitter into a must have for a sports fanatic, who also must be up to date on the most current news and rumors.

This use of Twitter has almost ruined fact finding in sports media, and area in which there seems to be no accountability to factual reports any longer. These individuals are the same guys who vote on Heisman award winners, MVP's, Rookie of the Year, and in some cases Hall of Fame inductees.

Lets get this straight, the same guy that decides not to vote for Barry Bonds as a Hall of Fame player due to character issues can also report far fetched trades or signings wrongly and not be ridiculed for it? Further, they can see kingly change their strong minded opinion on PED use, and those players, and no one holds them accountable?

Now don't get me wrong, I do not want the likes of Barry Bonds, Roger Clemens, or any other abuser of Performance Enhancing drugs to be in the hall as a player either. I would like the story to be told. I would like the hall to recognize it. I wouldn't mind if they had a different wing which lists the accomplishments of these players. I however do not think the plaque of one of these types be allowed to be next to the likes of Mickey Mantle, or Yogi Berra, or Ryne Sandberg, or Tony Gywnn.

The difference between my opinions and those in the media, well no one comes to me for news or information which is used to determine their own opinion. This is where the likes of Jon Heyman loses credibility. In an excerpt from a 2011 Sports Illustrated article, Jon says this:

While I do believe Bonds took steroids (whether it was knowingly or not doesn't much matter to me, though if I had to guess, I think he knows everything that goes in his body), I don't believe all steroid users should be excluded from the Hall of Fame. I'm not here to sit in moral judgment of another human being.

[...]

As for Bonds, I don't think anyone could reasonably make the case that he needed drugs to be a Hall of Famer. When Bonds signed with his hometown Giants for $43.75 million in December of 1992 to become the highest-paid player in baseball history he was already the best player in the game, and he earned that contract through only good genes (his dad, Bobby, was also an incredible combination of speed and power) and hard work. He had a small head at the time, and he maintained that, at least in the literal sense, for several years to come.

He also states famously: "a baseball Hall of Fame would be empty without Bonds."

But apparently he is on leaving the ultimate baseball shrine, empty...

This is the same guy who consistently reports on false trades or signings, interested teams, or frontrunners. His apology list is longer than his accomplishment list, well if he would actually apologize. This is a reporter with a success rate lower than your local weatherman (not counting Tom Skilling, he's always right).

This is a guy that gets to judge on your Hall of Fame players. He is a guy that gets to judge others integrity. He is one who ultimately gets to write the baseball history book of this era.

Is he the kind of guy that should wield that power? A guy that so easily says, oops I changed my mind?

The new leader, or is he?

Today Chicago woke up to a tweet from Jimmy Johnson from Fox Sports, as well as the guy that lead the Dallas Cowboys to multiple Super Bowls, but more famously known for his perfect head of hair. In this tweet Jimmy claims that the Bears have hired Marc Trestman of the Montreal Alouettes, and a man that lead the likes of Rich Gannon and Steve Young to career and MVP years.

Jimmy is tapped into the NFL and knows both coaches mentioned very well. Jimmy also has no reason to put this information out there without there having some legs to the story. However there is a lot of doubt around Chicago and the league if this is indeed accurate.

Phil Emery, the Chicago Bears General Manager, has stated a very specific interview process and he reportedly has interviews scheduled throughout the weekend with other candidates. This would completely throw out that plan. Could the Bears and Emery be so overly impressed by Trestman that they threw out the script and are jumping on a hire? Could Trestman be strong arming the Bears forcing a move? Could this be a stunt that a longtime friend in Johnson is doing to help Trestman in negotiations with other opportunities?

I can't answer that.

After initially thinking this is the worst case scenario for the Bears, and laughably the most likely. The Bears, one of the most storied franchises in all the land, go out and grab the most under the radar, least likely to succeed coach. Seems that this has been their approach on so many other occasions, Dave Wannstedt, Dick Juron, and even Lovie Smith was a relatively unknown guy. But, after looking at his resume, and seeing what others are saying about Trestman, he just might be the perfect fit for this franchise.

*Courtesy of the Chicago Sun Times and Neil Hayes

 

Trestman is an offensive genius (as described by some), a Quarterback guru, would instantly give the Bears validity on the offensive side of the ball, and by all reports elevate the play of Jay Cutler. That's the most important part right? Elevating the play of Jay Cutler?

 

Some around the league do not think that Jay is willing to elevate his play. They have decided that all he wants to do is run around, buy time, and showcase a big arm. This is especially the sediment of Troy Aikman, another Fox Sports employee, and notable QB as well. Troy has been wishy washy on Cutler over the years, at times backing the QB, and others calling him out. Recently Troy has gone on record saying Culter is who he is, and doesn't look interested in changing.

 

I take into account what some analyists say, but often times I discredit statements since they aren't around the team, haven't listened to the players, haven't seen them throughout a month, season, career. I see the Jay Cutler that goes out there and competes, and competes to win. A guy that expects excellence from his teammates, and expects them to be where he expects them to be and produce at a high level. Should Jay's lack of production be placed on those around him, or is it on Jay himself for not elevating the play of others?

 

I think there is a little blame to be placed on everyone, but mostly the finger needs to be pointed at the organization. The organization pulled the trigger on the deal to bring Jay Cutler, franchise Quarterback, to Chicago, but since he has been here they have added 1 offensive piece and subtracted multiple more. Jay hasn't had 3 consecutive seasons working in the same offense in his career. He has had multiple coaches and voices teaching him the game, which typically leaves it up to the player to pull what he's learned and interpret that information.

 

A guy like Marc Trestman instantly gives the Bears an offensive presence and identity. He would also answer the questions people have on Jay Culter. That is eventually what we, as Bears fans want.







Lovie, the search, blame Cutty

So guys, a lot has happened since my last installment of the worlds toughest to read blog. Either way here's a brief rundown.

Lovie Smith fired after 9 seasons and a 10-6 record.

Bears interviewing 13 different people to be the next Head Coach.

And as always, its Jay Cutler's fault.

First, I don't agree with the Lovie firing, not yet anyways. Here is a guy that has consistently won in Chicago. Has created a top defense in Chicago, and by all accounts is a good guy and role model for those under his wing. Sure he ultimately was held accountable for the teams offensive woes in his 9 years, but his defense was and is one of the best this league has to offer. Why is that? Well because of stability. The Bears defense has had the same approach for 9 seasons. The players know exactly what is expected of them, and if they didn't do what was expected they were gone.

That can't be said for the offense however. Lovie Smith had multiple offensive coordinators, which have brought new terminology and lingo to the team. New processes and blocking schemes, new routes and new reads. None of those offenses worked, and honesty none if them were given an opportunity to work.

We will more than likely have another offense come in (Mike Tice is still employed and has the OC job till the new Head Coach makes a decision) which would give Jay Cutler his 4th offense in a Bears uniform, and 5th in his career. Basically saying, every year the offense is learning something new, and not refining something they know.

I don't like the firing, this year. Years past and possibly next season I agree with it, but now no. Biggest reasoning, this team will NOT hire a better Head Coach this year than Lovie Smith. In fact, I will say Lovie will have better luck with his next job than the next Bears HC will have in this one. Secondly, the roster is in flux. Meaning, it is old with large dollars tied to on the fringe type players. Lance Briggs is climbing the age ladder, Julius Peppers isn't young any longer, Devin Hester has lost something. We have old dollars in the secondary and on both lines. If a new coach comes in, he will have a process of moving players out while transitioning the team to what he wants to do, and that will take time and patience (something we seem to of lost). Why not allow Lovie to finish off his contract, even in a lame duck scenario? Let him move on with his players once its done, or resign him if he succeeded.

Since I learned I didn't have a say in Lovie staying or going, perhaps I'll have a say in who is next to lead this team. We have heard all the big names, Like the Jon Gruden's of the world. We have even heard the name of an old nemesis, Mike Holmgren. I don't want those guys. They are either out of the game, used to plush lifestyles now, or will demand too much money and power. Who I want, is simple, Bruce Arians. Sure he's the hot name right now. Sure those guys rarely pan out. I am telling you though, he is the real deal.

Arians is the guy that Ben Roethlisberger was pissed at when he was let go by the Steelers. He is the guy that helped a rookie QB in Andrew Luck turn into a mature and very good Quarterback, and one that will move into elite status soon. Not only is he able to teach the Bears what a 2013 offense should look like, he has Head Coaching experience. You see, during the 2012 season he was the interim head coach of the Indianapolis Colts. He should get a ton of respect for taking a pretty talentless team to a 10-6 record and into the playoffs. You don't have to work through those first year stumbles cause, he's already done it.

Finally, if all else fails of course we just blame Jay Cutler. ESPN's constant attack of Cutler has continued with them asking, "How much blame to you give Jay Cutler for RGIII's injury?"

Really!? Now I get the premise... Did RGIII stay in the game out of fear for being ridiculed like Cutty was. Thing is, it is always ESPN's prerogative to match Cutler's name negatively with anything. From Tom Jackson saying he's a bad guy cause he didn't say hi to someone, or this new garbage, he just can't win. This is one of the many reasons I've turned away from anything ESPN (outside of Waddle and Silvy) and just don't plan on supporting them any longer. I used to listen religiously to ESPN Radio all day, bought the ESPN Radio iPhone app, watched SportsCenter, followed them on Twitter, all of it. Now however, they push their ideas or push for their ratings. It's no longer about bringing you sports, especially teams you've never seen. They've become opinionists and no longer are reporters.

That's been my 2 cents for the week, hope to be back with more info soon!

Shhh don't tell

What have we learned this baseball offseason? Don't trust a Cubs employee. From Ryan Dempster to Carlos Marmol to Anibel Sanchez, the Chicago Cubs front office is closer to a group of high school girls than the frat boys they're made out to be.

Its an offseason like this that one would hope they make Life-Lock: Baseball Franchise. One would also assume that Carmine, Theo Epstein's computer system doesn't have an anti-virus program.

The Cubs haven't lost out on anything, really. They may have dodged a bullet, and a shock to the rebuilding plan had the signed Sanchez, and although it might have been nice to pull off the Atlanta deal you don't see the Braves make many mistakes when they've decided to deal players.

Baseball fans ask, who related to the Cubs has the loose lips, and apparently girls are hoping Theo and Jed Hoyer have loose lips (Theo has been known to turn some ladies eyes and Jed was named the 5th most sexy baseball GM by Yahoo! Sports).

Undeniable that the Cubs have improved their club this offseason, but at what cost? Will future bigger names think the potential deals that leaked are a negative? Will this deter or cause the Cubs to overspend in the coming years when going to the free agent market?

Well... Who knows for certain, right? I mean blown secrets are one thing and $10 million a year for 4 years is certainly another.