EVIL~! alkeiper

The difference is that many of WWE's house shows aired on regional sport networks. MSG shows aired on the MSG Network, NESN carried shows from the Boston Garden, Prism carried the shows from the Philadelphia Spectrum. Those shows had announcers and were intended to air on television. NWA arena cards were videotaped but not given commentary or put through post-production. I can't see three hours of videotaped house show like that being entertaining.

I'm pretty sure that the onus is not on the dude who suffered a BRAIN INJURY to request the examination. It may well be, I'm not crystal clear on the law though. And then Michael Benoit would need to explain how Benoit worked, negotiated contracts, etc. for the next three years without showing side effects. How he never lost reality and deliberately injured another wrestler, yet was too damaged not to recognize that killing his wife and child was wrong. I mean honestly, if we were discussing this in Current Events and did not know the murderer, all the discussion would revolve around lawsuit abuse.

That might be a moot point if Benoit never requested an examination. I could be wrong on this, but generally it is your responsibility to inform your employer about your injury. I don't know if WWE would be obligated to aggressively pursue the issue. Beyond that, a lawyer would then need to prove that the concussion led to Benoit's actions. That would be very difficult to prove in a court of law.

I meant long term in center field. As a right fielder, he's one of the game's better young players of course.

He kept gauze pads for six years as evidence just in case he would get arrested and have to present evidence against Roger Clemens as part of a plea bargain? They're not like tax records. You don't have to wait seven years to throw them away.

Thanks to the Play Index, I can easily create a page for those players. http://www.baseball-reference.com/pi/shareit/N9k5 The list includes every player who played a single game in center, so Markakis is listed thanks to his nine games there in 2006. He's obviously not a long term answer.

I'd wager on pathetic. Next step will be to post on the Pit about what a horrible poster and mod I am, then trying to perpetuate a terrible "board war" that only her and Paul care about.

It's that people make unrealistic assumptions of either who will go in, or who should go in.

Decided to take a shot at some preseason rankings. I think 1-3 in the NL East and 1-4 in the NL West are interchangeable. NL EAST 1. Mets 2. Phillies 3. Braves 4. Nationals 5. Marlins NL CENTRAL 1. Cubs 2. Brewers 3. Reds 4. Astros 5. Cardinals 6. Pirates NL WEST 1. Diamondbacks 2. Rockies 3. Dodgers 4. Padres 5. Giants AL EAST 1. Red Sox 2. Yankees 3. Blue Jays 4. Rays 5. Orioles AL CENTRAL 1. Tigers 2. Indians 3. Twins 4. White Sox 5. Royals AL WEST 1. Angels 2. Mariners 3. Rangers 4. Athletics

From a legal standpoint, it would take an extraordinary feat to find WWE culpable in all this. I think they would need to find that Benoit had a mental condition that WWE willfully neglected. Simply employing a person in a dangerous occupation does not make them responsible.

I don't even know who I'm voting for. Primary I'll make a token non-Hillary/Obama pick since it does not matter anyway. General election I may just take John McCain over one of those two. It's not a promising crop at all.

I guess starting outfielder at Pawtucket wouldn't count as the 5th outfielder either? Gotta be sure to read the fine print when being guaranteed a starting position with the Red Sox; 3 of their 7 farm teams also bear the Red Sox name. Is that common in baseball, sharing the team name along the minor league affiliates, or are they just weird? It's fairly common, depending on the team. Minor league cities without a strong tradition tend to pick up their parent club's names. Allentown for example picked up the Indians, Red Sox and Cardinal nicknames in their day. Nowadays teams look for distinction nicknames in an effort to sell merchandise. Certain brands however like the Red Sox, Yankees, etc. sell more than any other nickname could.

I can't help but think that's an awful lot of trouble to solve a case which is utterly insignificant in the grand scheme of things.

Between this and the General Wrestling folder, I really hope Jericholic comes back and translates his posts into English.

By the way, any thoughts on doing a separate catch-all thread for 24/7 Online?

I enjoyed that show. George Steele was a bit of fun in the middle.

I paid $1300 in student loan interest last year. Hopefully that helps a bit. It's kind of amusing that the government gave me money for college, I pay back money and interest, and then the government kicks back that interest to me anyway.

I'm not particularly religious or anything, but I certainly send along my best wishes. I can't imagine going through this, either her or your family.

I guess starting outfielder at Pawtucket wouldn't count as the 5th outfielder either?

Well, there is the Pennsylvania football fan crack which is dangerous. (I'm from PA for one, and though I'm not a particularly big NFL fan I know several knowledgeable fans.) It is hard to believe a politician's first motive is not re-election, but considering Specter wins easily once he escapes the primary and he'll be 80 when his term expires, this is an odd way to approach P.R. The espn article did not even mention Spygate, just the NFL/Direct TV issue. With billions of dollars and corporates in the mix, it is natural that some politicians would get involved.

It's very good, probably every bit as good as it originally appeared on network television. It is in black & white.

Shocking I'm all for taking other factors into account. The problem is that whatever assumption you draw is going to be your decision. You can take the "quality of play improves over time" track, and if you do your answer is absolutely going to be the 2007 Patriots. Postseason dominance is most important? You've just chosen the '85 Bears. Wins mean everything? '72 Dolphins. Long term dominance? '46-'58 Cleveland Browns. You want to try and bring more into the discussion beyond a 20 second sports radio type opinion.

For most of these it's not whether it was a great match, but something you could sell a PPV on. I think "Matches that shouldn't have Main Evented a PPV" would be apropos. Eddie Guerrero vs. Bradshaw may have qualified, though thankfully the match ended up better than anyone anticipated. Ron Simmons vs. The Barbarian (for the WCW World Title!) is my addition to the thread.

Czech really seems to despise this type of discussion. I would avoid hypotheticals and stick with the facts, quantifiable data. Realistically, little separates a 16-0 team from a 15-1 team. We just witnessed the Patriots lose to a team with a 10-6 regular season record. If you can not ensure a winner with a six win advantage, how can you do it with one? You can look at points scored and allowed and try to establish quality based on that. The problem is when you plug it into expected W/L, the difference between the best teams of all time is a tenth of a win. How about long term winning percentage? The difference between the '72 Dolphins and the '86 Bears, if you take their two previous and two following seasons into account, is less than one percent. The NFL does not play enough games to establish quality with any certainty beyond a margin of error. In other words, maybe it is the unanswerable question.

I disagree with most of these. It's matches that shouldn't have been free. Not matches that could've been PPV events.