Does this sound like a good "line-up"?

Yes the 17-55 feels like a cheap POS.
Karin - the 24-70 70-200 combo is unbeatable in my opinion. I had an extremely good copy of the 24-70 and the newest owner is very very excited as it trumps his 24-105 by a good margin.
Personally for sports I never used the IS so I traded it for the 70-200 non is. If you can afford (2400.00) the new version of the 70-200 IS then get it!
I think a 7D is in your future

Mike - I am considering the 7D, but won't be able to afford it anytime soon. Some of the money for this stuff will either have to wait for my husband's bonus money (unlikely), or for my birthday, which isn't until the end of July... so I'm not expecting it all anytime soon. But good things are worth waiting for. ;o) I like your avatar btw... I take it that's the Emperor from Star/Clone Wars? My kids have been watching every movie about a thousand times. I remember seeing Star Wars and Empire Strikes Back five times in the theaters when they came out! Damn, I'm old.

Yes it sure is! From Return of the Jedi

Mr. Clean wrote in post #9642974
Yes the 17-55 feels like a cheap POS.

Wow people make out the 17-55 to be built the same as a 18-55 kit lens.

While it has "average" build quality, it does have awsome optics and IS, find me another lens with those same features for $1000. The 24-70 IS (rumored to be coming out) will cost a hell of alot more then that.

I do kinda think they should make a new version with some sort of weather sealing so it could be used on the 7D which has a bit of weather sealing.