Writers of Pro Football Prospectus 2008

13 Jun 2005

MMQB: Dynasty Divined

I love ya, Pete, but it may be time for an intervention.

Posted by: Aaron Schatz on 13 Jun 2005

132 comments, Last at 22 Jun 2005, 8:14pm by Richie


by Matt (not verified) :: Mon, 06/13/2005 - 12:15pm

Even if the rest of it is crazy, the jab at Joe Theismann is great.

by RyanW (not verified) :: Mon, 06/13/2005 - 12:21pm

The most interesting thing from this article -- by a long shot -- was the fact that Belichick is only three wins behind Bill Walsh on the NFL's all-time victories list, and that Walsh's record was only 102-99.

by Mike B. (not verified) :: Mon, 06/13/2005 - 12:24pm

How, exactly, do I get this job? Write one or two good columns a year, and spend the rest of the time writing about coffee and your daughters, and shamelessly promoting your favorite team. Sheesh.

by MDS (not verified) :: Mon, 06/13/2005 - 12:26pm

Worst MMQB ever.

by MDS (not verified) :: Mon, 06/13/2005 - 12:30pm

RyanW, Bill Walsh's record was 102-63-1. Belichick's record is 99-72. King was trying to say Walsh leads Belichick by a score of 102 to 99. I think Belichick is one of the all-time great coaches, but I don't really see what's so impressive about being within three wins of Walsh when you've already got nine more losses than Walsh.

by zip (not verified) :: Mon, 06/13/2005 - 12:30pm

"10. I think the NFL rushing leader this year will be Willis McGahee."

So I slog through 3 pages of this crap, and then with his final line, he jinxes my team!

by RyanW (not verified) :: Mon, 06/13/2005 - 12:32pm


Thanks for clearing that up. Now I take back my original comment -- there was nothing interesting in this MMQB.

by zip (not verified) :: Mon, 06/13/2005 - 12:34pm

Re: #5

Wow, that's really poorly phrased in the article. Now that see Walsh actually has a better winning percentage than Belichick, that makes the "factoid" extra-dumb.

by senser81 (not verified) :: Mon, 06/13/2005 - 12:35pm

re: post #2

The 102-99 was the comparison of Walsh's regular season and postseason wins (102) to Belichick's (99). Interestingly, Belichick has coached 10 seasons and has had only 5 winning seasons. Walsh's record is 102-63-1; Belichick's record is 99-72.

by B (not verified) :: Mon, 06/13/2005 - 12:36pm

What's amazing about Arrested Development is how good it is in the first two seasons. The all time great sitcoms (Simpsons, Seinfeld) didn't hit thier stride till the 3rd or 4th season.

by Band of Brady's (not verified) :: Mon, 06/13/2005 - 12:42pm

second worst MMQB ever - maybe his daughter wrote it.

by zip (not verified) :: Mon, 06/13/2005 - 12:44pm

#11 - what's the worst one, then?

this one was 75% fictitious, and filled with silly, fake, feel-good quotes. I can't believe he's done worse.

by Peter King (not verified) :: Mon, 06/13/2005 - 12:47pm

This just in:

I no longer drink grande vanilla wet half-caf, skim-milk, extra foam, cappacinos.

I switched to coffee flavored ice cream. Its cold, creamy, and the consistency of the scoopistas at the Ben & Jerry's scoop shop is as awe inspiring as a glimpse of a towel-wrapped Bret Favre from across the sauna.

by Domer (not verified) :: Mon, 06/13/2005 - 1:00pm

Ok, #13, I can't even go near a Starbuck's now for fear of giggling out loud just thinking about that.

by Aaron (not verified) :: Mon, 06/13/2005 - 1:01pm

OK, I realize that this column is a little, um, weird, but let's not go overboard in our criticisms, lest I have to get out my editing pen (or keyboard). Thanks. Play nice.

by Lionel J. McGillicuddy, Esq (not verified) :: Mon, 06/13/2005 - 1:03pm

1. Koren Robinson won't play for the minimum.

2. What's the stat analysis behind the notion that Chad Morton will winn two games for you?

3. Wait, I thought he was doing for Saban earlier in year what he did for Brady at the beginning of his column? Now they're Saban-mind-locked robots? Come on! Besides, don't we all really suspect that Manning and Culpepper are better QBs than Brady, but that Brady plays on a better team? And that it doesn't really matter anyway because, like Montana and Marino, they're all very good QBs anyway?

4.a. Katie Holmes is a multi-millionaire starlet dating a multi-zillionaire star. She doesn't play junior varsity field hockey, so maybe she doesn't give a damn what MMQ thinks about her romantic life?

b. "Indians-Giants for the first time in 50 years. Great stuff." Unless you care about major league baseball and hate the travesty that is inter-league play. Stick to the Xs and Os, Latte Monkey.

c. "One of the five funniest shows ever." Has he explored this in depth? He's becoming... Larry King... of CNN fame ... trying to fill a column for USA Today... "Mack makes a fine truck"...

e. Football nerdness: Gives you more real football news and analysis without the pap about how Brady is the greatest quarterback of all time. Do you think after his "wet" expository, King spat? Or swallowed?

5. "I like his sense of what makes a player good." Please tell us why his view differed from, say, Polian? And explain his unusual acquisition and development of WRs?

6. "They want him to retire a Patriot." Unless, of course, his LTBE start getting a little scary, at which point they'll cut his ass.

7. "I think Travis Henry will end up in Tennessee, unless he's still on the market in mid-July, which I doubt, and Fred Taylor's still slowed by injury." TH is becoming the Where's Waldo of the NFL. Hey, I thought MMQ told us a couple of months ago he was destined for Saban's Miami? What, the Dolphins need more than six RBs? How about every day I randomly toss out an NFL team. I guarantee I'll hit the right one before mid-July. Today, I say he's going to Atlanta. Tomorrow, Baltimore. Wednesday, Cleveland. Thursday, Dallas.

8. "(TH) will end up being moved for a first-day draft pick in the 2006 draft, which would be a good deal for both sides." Except that it would be a horrible deal for a team that gives up a top draft pick to pay top draft pick kind of money for a RB with a lot of mileage, who ended up a second stringer on Buffalo. If the gods smile on this deal, make MMQ the manager of football operations for the Cards. They deserve each other.

9. I think the funniest holdout of the year has to be massive underachiever Cletidus Hunt in Green Bay. Last time I checked, Hunt was paid $1.75 million, which is chump change for a starting DT, and that's pro-rated, so if he's hurt he'll only get the $700,000 base and a portion of the upfront cash. And doesn't he have GB where he wants them? It's not like they went out and grabbed a premier D-lineman in the draft or free agent market. He's worth more. Let him ask for more. Or is this just an outbreak of Milloyism? (by the way, Hunt paid for the minimum during his first three years in the league, or about as much time as it took to learn the way the game is played in the NFL).

9. "I think I like Detroit's signing of R.W. McQuarters for decent money a lot more than I would have liked the risk for the big money it would have had to pay to get Ty Law." Except that Law has been a better DB than McQuarters, but doesn't care for King. Curry that source like vindaloo, Peter!

10. "I think the NFL rushing leader this year will be Willis McGahee." Unless, of course, he's splitting carries with Travis Henry, who isn't moved by the mid-July MMQ-imposed trading deadline for a first round draft choice by the astute GM on some team that plays its home games on Mars.

by Arthur Daley & Jim Murray (not verified) :: Mon, 06/13/2005 - 1:05pm

We are rolling in our graves.

by mactbone (not verified) :: Mon, 06/13/2005 - 1:33pm

On SI.com's front page they have a picture of Brady with the caption "Is this the season in which Patriots quarterback Tom Brady wins his third Super Bowl MVP award?"
Is the Super Bowl MVP the most overrated award in the NFL? How often does it actually go to the best player in the game compared to how often it goes to the QB of the winning team as some sort of default?

Also, if you want to check out the giant SB rings Kraft bought go to http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/scorecard/

by elhondo (not verified) :: Mon, 06/13/2005 - 1:42pm

I think Mr King might want to check the Fox website. Arrested Development is supposed to come back in re-runs this summer and new episodes in fall.

by Pat on the Back (not verified) :: Mon, 06/13/2005 - 1:44pm

Am I the only one who finds it really creepy that King used the verb "climaxed" when discussing Brady's play?

by Jon (a now inconsolable Patriots fan) (not verified) :: Mon, 06/13/2005 - 1:48pm

Given how cruel the universe is to those who make elaborate, uncritical predictions, surely by the end of the week Tom Brady will rupture his achilles while returning a punt after Belichick loses mind due to drinking tainted Starbucks and signs Mary-Beth King to play wingback in his new all-option offense. DAMN YOU, KIIIIIIIIINNNGG! [Shaking my fists at the sky.]

by zip (not verified) :: Mon, 06/13/2005 - 1:51pm

Re #16:

"hate the travesty that is inter-league play."

This is something I have often heard, and never understood. Since this discussion is obviously not going anywhere grand, (unless you considered decreasing veiled suggestions about Mr. Kings, uh, taste in men to be grand), could someone explain to me why interleague baseball is a travesty?

by Pat on the Back (not verified) :: Mon, 06/13/2005 - 2:06pm

I wouldn't say it is a travesty so much as it is more of a sham and a mockery. I think most peoples beefs with interleague is

1) It unbalances the schedule, making teams fighting for the same division get different opponents
2) The leagues have different rules, and only used to have to adapt on the fly in the World Series, thus eliminating one of the interesting side-effects of the WS. Of course, most people who hate interleague view the DH as a travesty, as well, so maybe not that big a deal
3) It is cool when the WS has two opponents who never have faced each other, creating both novelty and an element of mystery (do 101 AL wins mean the same as 94 NL wins?).
4) About half of the "regional rivalries" make absolutely no sense.

by Ray (not verified) :: Mon, 06/13/2005 - 2:06pm

I only skimmed the first couple of pages. Any time I started actually reading I got nauseous. It makes me appreciate Len Pasquarelli even more. Anyone else notice that Friday's Tip Sheet was 9 pages, and actually contained information?

by Paul (not verified) :: Mon, 06/13/2005 - 2:08pm

#22 - interleague play is definitely not a travesty. I hear this reference from the sports press often; yet, I know of no one who truly thinks this. I suspect some AL fans don't like interleague play when their teams play at NL parks, because the loss of the DH seems to hurt AL teams much greater than when an NL team has to add the DH. Let's face it: it's easier for an NL team to adapt to the DH than it is for an AL team to adapt to "traditional" baseball. I think that MLB should continue interleague play but reverse the home field play so that there is a DH at the NL team's home and no DH at the AL teams' home. This would provide a more-balanced home field "advantage" as well as allow home field fans see a different type of play than otherwise.

by Trogdor (not verified) :: Mon, 06/13/2005 - 2:13pm

"Son, they won't miss you. That is, of course, unless you've been taking Reggie White and now are the hard-trying, productive player you should have been all along."

I challenge anyone to explain to me what the hell "unless you've been taking Reggie White" means. At first I thought maybe he meant they wouldn't miss him unless he dug up Reggie's corpse on the way out of town, but that doesn't work right. Maybe he means he's been taking some magic Reggie pills that will make him play like Reggie? That's the best I can come up with. Anyone else have a guess?

Arrested Development was a tremendous show. I absolutely loved it. Best thing Ron Howard's ever done, by far, and I'm a big Richie Cunningham fan. But what I don't get is the universal love of Seinfeld. I just never found that show to be all that great. I thought it was OK in the first run, good for a decent laugh and some minor chuckles per episode, but nothing special. And it doesn't hold up well in reruns at all for me, I find it way more annoying than amusing now. It's not anything near as good or lasting as The Simpsons, in my opinion. And this paragraph had more useful football content than this MMQB, because by referencing the Simpsons the door is now open to Simpsons football references. Johnny Unitas, now there's a haircut you can set your watch to.

by RyanW (not verified) :: Mon, 06/13/2005 - 2:14pm

To me, a bigger travesty is the fact that each team plays division opponents 18 times a season. The unbalanced schedule makes for particularly boring baseball (bordering on tedious), especially early in the season when teams play the majority of their games against division rivals.

by zip (not verified) :: Mon, 06/13/2005 - 2:20pm

1) It unbalances the schedule, making teams fighting for the same division get different opponents

Doesn't this happen in the NFL's 16 games season, where each game is a hell of a lot more important?

2) The leagues have different rules, and only used to have to adapt on the fly in the World Series, thus eliminating one of the interesting side-effects of the WS. Of course, most people who hate interleague view the DH as a travesty, as well, so maybe not that big a deal

Fair enough. But if it's an "interesting side effect," why not explore it more often?

3) It is cool when the WS has two opponents who never have faced each other, creating both novelty and an element of mystery (do 101 AL wins mean the same as 94 NL wins?).


4) About half of the “regional rivalries� make absolutely no sense.

Why would "Regional rivalries" need to be a reason to play the game? I realize that MLB markets some weeks like that, and teams that don't have obvious natural rivals end up playing random teams, but does that really matter? Both teams still want to win; if "your team" is involved you stil have a vested interest in the outcome.

Boston fans certainly get more pumped when the Sox play the Yankees, but I would assume they're equally pumped by the Sox playing a random AL team, or a random NL team. A win's a win, right?

In any case, thanks for the explanation.

by Richie (not verified) :: Mon, 06/13/2005 - 2:21pm

Worst MMQB ever.

I'm usually a Peter King apologist, but I have to agree.

But then, what else can he write about in the middle of June?

by Band of Brady\'s (not verified) :: Mon, 06/13/2005 - 2:30pm

Zip - the worst was 2 years ag. I was his inning by inning description of his daughters softball game. btw i hope the guy owns starbucks stock.

by Vern (not verified) :: Mon, 06/13/2005 - 2:31pm

This appears to almost be a shot at SI. King's way of saying "ok, if they're going to force me to make dumb picks in June, and wrap a whole column around it, then fine, here you go SI..." He picks winner, final score, quarter by quarter score, inujuries both during the game and mid-season acquisition, and almost everything else. Someone alert TMQ!

I'm a rabid Pats fan and had to cringe a bit. Not even the fan sites would post something like this.

by B (not verified) :: Mon, 06/13/2005 - 2:50pm

How can you not appreciate an article that includes a fake tidbit like this:

"...coach Mike Tice, rewarded during the week with a new five-year, $6 million contract, making him the 24th-highest-paid coach in the NFL"

by Russell (not verified) :: Mon, 06/13/2005 - 2:58pm

I'm a big PK guy, but I have a hard time sticking up for this week's effort. Please, Pete, if there's nothing going on in June, take a couple weeks off!

by MDS (not verified) :: Mon, 06/13/2005 - 3:15pm

But there are things going on in June. What bugs me about stuff like this is that King is a good reporter with great sources in the league. Why couldn't he:

1. Talk to some of his sources about which NFL Europe and Arena players impressed NFL teams.
2. Talk a little bit about why Randy Mueller, a white guy, could be hired by the Dolphins as GM even though the Dolphins didn't interview any black guys. Why does the NFL have different hiring policies for coaches than for GMs?
3. Address the issue of the Redskins having to forfeit some practices because they were going too hard in minicamp.
4. Crunch the numbers on the Rosenhaus clients to see which ones are most likely to get their deals re-worked.
5. Talk to some scouts to see if they think LJ Shelton has anything left.
6. Ask around to see if people are concerned that the Glazer/ManU deal could have negative consequences for the NFL.
7. Talk about whether Az Hakim can get his mojo back now that he's reunited with Dick Vermeil.
8. Find out what the NFL is doing to make sure its employees aren't scalping tickets like Mike Tice.
9. Find out whether the league is lobbying Congress to back off on its threats to institute mandatory testing legislation.
10. Give us an update on the labor situation.

These are some of the things I would do if this were my full-time job.

by Jerry F. (not verified) :: Mon, 06/13/2005 - 3:18pm

"Doesn’t this happen in the NFL’s 16 games season, where each game is a hell of a lot more important?"

But in baseball the schedule used to be balanced, and now they've unbalanced it for a few real rivalries and a bundle of fake ones. If they just matched up divisions and let the rivalry games happen every three years, it would keep things balanced and make those rivalry games more of a treat.

From PK's fake article: "Tom Brady is 28, and it's likely that no player -- at least since a young Gale Sayers ran wild for the Bears 40 years ago -- has ever secured a bust in Canton by age 28."
I think Barry Sanders definitely had his Hall space wrapped up by 28. You could probably say the same about Emmitt Smith too.

by Paul (not verified) :: Mon, 06/13/2005 - 3:21pm

MDS (#35) You're hired. When can you start writing for this website?

by Lionel O. Perrywinkle (not verified) :: Mon, 06/13/2005 - 3:30pm

Actually, MDS, any one of those could have been this week's column (with the gratitous number of plugs for lattes and whichever summer sport his daughter elects to pursue tossed in).

He could have dragged that until the camps.

by Arthur Stamoulis (not verified) :: Mon, 06/13/2005 - 3:42pm

He won't support Art Monk, but Brady gets in at 28? He won't cast a vote for Mike Tinglehoff, but Brady (slurp, slurp) gets the nod?

Terrell was hurt, like Sayers, early in his career. Two Super Bowls. But King says, 'No way,' but Brady, playing at a less risky position, gets in? One could make the case that Davis was the best tailback in football for two or three years. At least Davis was the league AND Super Bowl MVP.


Can anyone really say, without a doubt, that Brady is the best passer in the NFL?

The MMQ criteria:

"The only way I'd vote for a 78-game player during the modern era is if he was clearly the best at his position, or he possessed a talent that few players in history have had."

So, Brady is "clearly" the best QB in the NFL? Or does he possess a talent few other players "in history" have had?

I see Brady as a Troy Aikman kind of guy. Not really the best of his time in technique or ability (see Marino, Dan), but a great player on a great team of players who helped each other excel.

At least Aikman stuck around and put up good career numbers to earn his way into the HOF.

by david mazzotta (not verified) :: Mon, 06/13/2005 - 3:43pm

Did Peter King just pick the Vikings to win the NFC Championship?

by B (not verified) :: Mon, 06/13/2005 - 3:46pm

No, he picked them two weeks ago. Last week he picked NE to win the AFC champinship, so this week was his superbowl prediction column.

by Pat (not verified) :: Mon, 06/13/2005 - 3:48pm

Bleah. What an awful, awful MMQB. Especially since he's been touting his "prediction" for something like 3 weeks. Now he spends a 2 page spread on it.

But this does raise a point: he's fawning over the Patriots here. I mean, fawning, completely. What happens if they fall flat this season? It's entirely possible - injuries, or the loss of Crennel and Weis is bigger than we think. So if that happens, does he suddenly second-guess all of the raving about how they're the next coming of the 70s Steelers?

by Pat (not verified) :: Mon, 06/13/2005 - 3:51pm

Oh, and the only reason that he picked Minnesota over Philly is because Philly can't possibly go to the NFC Championship Game yet another year in a row. But NE can win another Super Bowl in a row, apparently.


by Otis R. Pufferdoodle (not verified) :: Mon, 06/13/2005 - 3:53pm

Pete Prisco had a more interesting dissection of the king of the Hill saga in Atlanta. Click on name for CBS article.

By the way, Prisco's top 50 NFL players is here:


Manning top, Brady just below him.

Unfortunately, he has Ray Lewis as the fifth best NFL player. He's not even the fifth best linebacker in the AFC North.

He's not even the best linebacker on his own team anymore.

He has the very underappreciated Ed Reed at seven.

Ugggh. Shockey is his top TE. Come on??????

OK, come to think of it, MMQ was better than that crap.

by mawbrew (not verified) :: Mon, 06/13/2005 - 3:56pm

This was bad. After the first few paragraphs I just skipped to the list at the end.

IMO, King doesn't take the stuff on the 'net very seriously and we don't see his best work there. I'm not even sure if his stuff on the net is edited (see #26).

My favorite MMQ moment was when King shared his wish that Martin Sheen were actually POTUS. Not surprisingly that missive created a minor tempest. King seemed stunned that such an overtly political comment would create any reaction from his audience (somehow this guy got to be 50 without figuring out that folks can have pretty stong opinions on politics). To top it off, this professional writer claimed that he 'obviously' was referring to Sheen's character (Bartlett) on the West Wing and not the fella whose name he actually mentioned (Sheen).


by Drew (not verified) :: Mon, 06/13/2005 - 3:59pm

I can't remember the last time I enjoyed a Peter King article, and this one was no exception. For my own sanity, I just added "http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2005/writers/peter_king" to my internet browser's inappropriate content list. I think it will make me happier in the long run. I'm not kidding.

by Carl (not verified) :: Mon, 06/13/2005 - 4:05pm

"Talk to some of his sources about which NFL Europe and Arena players impressed NFL teams."

Why was Dave Ragone playing in Europe anyway? Not shabby.

I thought Martin (18.4 ypc, eye for endzone) looked pretty good. Should fit in well in SD.

Metcalf will probably be a third-down option for TB.

Chapman was impressive, but his team is a bit stocked at the position.

The Titans' Smith was a very fine acquisition and will probably start on special teams.

Another Smith will probably end up starting for the Cards. They could use speed on the line, or a tweener LB on third down.

But I didn't scout Europe like you guys did. I really don't like the level of play there. It's like watching a Division III game sometimes.

Did anyone catch the USA Today snippet on Seymour? Maybe he doesn't want to stick around for his retirement watch when he can earn more than he's getting now on a six-year deal inked while a rookie?

by MDS (not verified) :: Mon, 06/13/2005 - 4:07pm

Well, I'll take issue with you there, Drew, because I do still enjoy some of King's stuff. I actually think he can be really insightful when he focuses on actual NFL news. It just bothers me that he chooses to write stuff like this instead.

by mawbrew (not verified) :: Mon, 06/13/2005 - 4:08pm

Re: 43

There will be about a thousand preseason Superbowl Champion predictions made by Sportwriters and 'analysts'. The vast majority will be wrong.

By the time the trophy is actually won, these predictions are inevitiably forgotten.

by Dave S (not verified) :: Mon, 06/13/2005 - 4:14pm

This is the type of attention that we don't need as pats fans. I much prefer when all the empty headed and glazed eyed media screwballs gush about Mike Vick, and Peyton's big play ability when it really, really, really counts (i.e. not against the Texans). It is much better for us pats fans when we are annually declared dead in the water and overrated, starting with Brady.
The scary thing is that Peter King is like Pete Prisco, he is always wrong! Yuck!
In response to #16, I don't know how anybody could rate Peyton or Culpepper ahead of Brady in the area of winning games, and not just against the Texan secondary, but try superbowls and playoffs. If Peyton had Brady's lame Wide Recievers, complete lack of a running attack before Corey showed up, and amateur, undrafted offensive line, as well as playing constantly in blinding snow or rain, and playing all year in 2003 and winning a superbowl with an undisclosed and major shoulder injury which required surgery in the offseason before the third superbowl, then we could compare Brady's real value as a clutch, old school, bare-knuckle winner to Peyton's real value as a clutch winner.
Culpepper has more fumbles than any
QB in history from the pocket, this behind the biggest O-Line and with a great run attack, and the most talented Receiver ever in Randy Moss. Who was Culpepper throwing to when the Cardinals
kicked him out of the playoffs?
I bet Mcnabb would have made your list of QBs we think might be better than Brady, if only he didn't stink so bad in big games (see Manning, Peyton).
And, yes, with no doubt the worst
MMQB ever. The man in the Crisco bathtub should become a coffee salesman,
since this is clearly his area of

by Richie (not verified) :: Mon, 06/13/2005 - 4:22pm

From PK’s fake article: “Tom Brady is 28, and it’s likely that no player – at least since a young Gale Sayers ran wild for the Bears 40 years ago – has ever secured a bust in Canton by age 28."

This could be an interesting discussion/analysis.

by Glenn (not verified) :: Mon, 06/13/2005 - 4:22pm

Let's face it: King keeps cranking out the same crap each week, and we keep cranking out the same criticisms. I always wind up defending his magazine material (which is actually good, and the big reason King has any cachet to begin with). But his internet stuff is now agonizingly intolerable - and this is coming from a huge Pats fan.

Every Monday here, it's deja vu all over again, so it's time to make an official and humble request of Aaron and the fine Football Outsiders staff: Please, consider Peter King's MMQB column no longer worthy of an "automatic" Extra Points link. To my mind, at least, it's not worth serious discussion, and hasn't been for months. I know we're all grovelling for summer NFL reading material, but these discussions become tedious and irrelevent. When King actually writes a real column with new insights and fresh perspectives, by all means, make the link. Otherwise, it devalues what makes Football Outsiders so teriffic a website.

Thank you.

by Hiram Q. Quadibblehooper (not verified) :: Mon, 06/13/2005 - 4:29pm

Dave S,

Your analysis kind of sounds like King's ("big games" et al).

A quick check of FO's DPAR/DVOA analysis would show that Brady ranked just behind Culpepper and Manning last year.

He ranked 10th in 2003 and 4th, again, in 2002.

Manning has been first the previous two seasons and 2000, and never lower than sixth.

Perhaps, one might conclude, the reality is that Manning and Culpepper play for teams without the best defenses, which keeps the franchise from succeeding as much as the passer.

Just a thought.

Oh, and by the way, Brady had four more turnovers during last year's regular season than Culpepper, and five more than McNabb.

by Richie (not verified) :: Mon, 06/13/2005 - 4:31pm

If Peyton had Brady’s lame Wide Recievers, complete lack of a running attack before Corey showed up,

I wonder if Tom Brady QB'ed for Indianapolis, if the Indianapolis defense would suddenly give up 6 fewer points per game?

Anyway...this is a useless argument. I just hope Manning can win a Super Bowl this year (with the Colts beating Brady in New England in the playoffs) so we don't have to hear this argument any more. I'd be happy to have either QB playing for the Dolphins in 2005.

by charles (not verified) :: Mon, 06/13/2005 - 4:33pm

Manning-Brady seems like the hot topic but am i crazy in wanting a deion branch-marvin harrison debate. If branch could stay healthy for 16 games next year he could put up some pro bowl numbers. IMO the same way people compare brady to manning you should compare branch to harrison. Brady's regular season numbers don't compare to manning's but in the playoffs brady steps up over manning just like branch steps up over harrison in the playoffs.

by Glenn (not verified) :: Mon, 06/13/2005 - 4:36pm

See how irrelevent King has become? Another Brady-Manning debate thread looms instead. Stop the madness!

by Ima Pseudonym (not verified) :: Mon, 06/13/2005 - 4:39pm

I second Glenn's motion - only link to MMQB if it contains some content that is at least vaguely footballesque.

by Carl (not verified) :: Mon, 06/13/2005 - 4:40pm

The Vikings helped Culpepper "with a great run attack?"

The Vikes rushed only 387 times last year (or, about 40 fewer touches than Ricky Williams turned in for the Dolphins in 2003).

While the 4.7 ypc isn't bad, the Vikes had the top-rated offense because of their passing, not their running, which was kind of a sideshow.

Did I miss something last year?

by Jerry F. (not verified) :: Mon, 06/13/2005 - 4:44pm

"we are annually declared dead in the water and overrated, starting with Brady."
Hardly. By a few people maybe, but as a whole the media has fawned over the Pats, and especially Brady, for several years now. Even after their 8-8 season there weren't all that many people ready to declare them "dead in the water." This article is just one in a long line of articles glorifying the Pats. They've been doing fine with this type of attention.

by Jerry F. (not verified) :: Mon, 06/13/2005 - 4:50pm

"only link to MMQB if it contains some content that is at least vaguely footballesque."

Of course, we don't have to read it, or respond to it. If it generates a lot of discussion, why shouldn't they link to it? Rather, people should just stop worrying so much about certain of King's proclivities. So he talks about his daughter sometimes, or travelling, or coffee. You can always scroll past these things, or not click on the link in the first place. At least there are some changes to his coffee stories from week to week; the complaints about them are always the same.

by Carl (not verified) :: Mon, 06/13/2005 - 4:51pm

On a more important topic: Field position.

I just noticed that the top team last year for net punting yards (punt avg - return avg) was the New Orleans Saints.

Why didn't I notice that last year?

Tennessee -- always good defensive and special teams coaching -- was fourth. The games I caught last year made me think they were the best.

New England (29th) proves that perhaps this stat isn't all the important.

KC was last, which is how I remembered them.

The Colts had a great punter and a lackluster coverage team. Hmmmmm.

Tom Tupa punted more than anyone else last year, which seems right, followed by Arizona, Chicago, the Bengals and the 49ers.

No surprises there.

by bobstar (not verified) :: Mon, 06/13/2005 - 4:55pm

I, too, propose that FO ceases to automatically link to MMQB. Consider linking to Pasquarelli's columns, much more information, far less dreck.

by Carl (not verified) :: Mon, 06/13/2005 - 5:00pm

Pittsburgh was the best cold weather punting team (followed by San Diego and Atlanta!).

SD also had the best kickoff coverage in cold weather (what's up with that?).

By the way, FOs, why doesn't New England upgrade their punting special team?

Pats are middle of the pack on kickoffs. Colts are abysmal.

St. Louis is great. Why hasn't Martz claimed credit for this?

by Pat on the Back (not verified) :: Mon, 06/13/2005 - 5:04pm

Just regurgitating the arguments. I don't mind interleague, though I would like to switch the DH parks during it and I would also like the schedule balanced. At least make the division races fair, even if the WC never is.

Also, the NFL has moved more towards a balanced schedule, since only 2 games are based on strenght of schedule under the new alignment, with the other 12 against common opponents for division foes (and 2 against each other).

Everyone else,
Before this becomes a full-fledged King/Manning/Brady thread, I suggest we all just relax for this week and hope it is better next week because, personally, I think this thread has climaxed.

by Carl (not verified) :: Mon, 06/13/2005 - 5:05pm

By the way, Neil Rackers is a great kicker. How did I miss him last year? Probably because I never saw him in person.

Kick off average Vinatieri 23.3 yds.

Kick off average Akers 23.2.

Jose Cortez was quite a pickup for the Vikes, too.

by Carl (not verified) :: Mon, 06/13/2005 - 5:07pm

Pat, you can tell the conversation has jumped the shark when I start talking about punting on cold weather Sundays.

by Carl (not verified) :: Mon, 06/13/2005 - 5:10pm

Hidden stat o' the year:

P Manning

Games played 16
Sacks 13

E Manning
Games played 8
Sacks 13

by Dave S (not verified) :: Mon, 06/13/2005 - 5:10pm

No doubt Culpepper had his best year last year, one year recently I thought they had the number two rushing attack, no? I tried to be a Culpepper fan for years but he always was so not clutch, and his personal story is touching, with no dad and a mom in jail when he was born, if i remember correctly, but is he clutch?
Sorry to bring up the Brady/Manning deal but I was responding to a very generic statement from reply #16. I will admit that Manning probably has better refined QB skills from a lot more playing time in the pros and college and a lot of talent. But is he clutch? Until they start giving out superbowl rings to everyone, can he come through against a top defense in the biggest game. Brady does not mind getting hit to make a pass, Peyton seems to run around and throw off his back foot all sloppy against a decent defense.
I judge a QB by a baseball bat test- if you hit Brady and Manning repeatedly with a bat, who would back down sooner and become gunshy? Just look at how manning plays when he is being hit. Not
just blitzed, so he can burn a defense, but hit repeatedly in the mouth. He dances off his back feet and throws sloppy passes. This is not your flashy statistics against the Texans, this is championship football in the biggest game against the hardest hitting defenses, like those you might find in the AFC East.
Come on folks, really, who is more clutch when it comes to winning?
I would take Harrison over Branch any day, I like Branch okay when he is not injuried half the season but Marvin makes unreal, jaw-dropping catches that frankly make Manning look good. Branch is more clutch perhaps, more gutsy, I'll give him that. But why would Marvin be willing to get hit in the playoffs when Manning runs for his life and whines to the refs after every pass.

by Carl (not verified) :: Mon, 06/13/2005 - 5:14pm

The Colts led the NFL last year in tackles.

The Steelers were last.

I knew the Colts led the league in broken tackles, but NFL doesn't account for that.

Bills led the league in assisted tackles. S-W-A-R-M.

Most penalized team? Seattle.

And I thought they were soft.

Least penalized? Bills. Knew they weren't soft.

by Richie (not verified) :: Mon, 06/13/2005 - 5:24pm

Hidden stat o’ the year:

P Manning

Games played 16
Sacks 13

E Manning
Games played 8
Sacks 13

How much is a QB to blame for sacks? I don't have access to any historical stats info.

How does a QB's sack stats compare from year-to-year? How does number of sacks correlate to winning percentage?

Do all QB's get sacked more often as they age?

by Eric P (not verified) :: Mon, 06/13/2005 - 5:31pm

H. Q. Q.,
While it sounds cut and dry to say that Brady never finished first in DPAR/DVOA while Manning has, and a couple of others have consistently finished ahead of Brady in that ranking, it does nothing to head off the debate about supporting cast. In Aarron's own explanation of those statistics, a particular QBs ranking is not really just his ranking, but rather his ranking while throwing to his receivers, being blocked for by his OL, and with the threat of handing off to his RBs.

Oh, and for those with the snide "if they only had Brady's defense" comments, please point out a playoff game that Manning's Colts lost where Manning played decent and the defense was less than adequate. There haven't been any. With the exception of the victory against the Chiefs in '04, the times the defense has been bad the offense has been limited to single digits (and sometimes that digit is a 0)! You'd expect more from an offense that should be expecting to carry the day, everyday, wouldn't you?

by Richie (not verified) :: Mon, 06/13/2005 - 5:37pm

Come on folks, really, who is more clutch when it comes to winning?

Are you being sarcastic?

by Morton P. Swigglepooper (not verified) :: Mon, 06/13/2005 - 5:38pm

Tom Brady
64 games 1243 passes 2018 completions
13925 yds 6.9 ypp 97 td 52 int
244 rushing yds 2 tds

Aaron Brooks
72 games 1323 passes 2340 completions 16274 yds 7.0 ypp 107 td 67 int 1132 yards rushing 11 tds

Uhhh, doesn't Brooks look better -- at about the same place in his career -- as Brady?

Brian Griese
69 games 1351 attempts 2144 completions 15208 yds 7.1 ypp 96 Td 71 int 548 yards rushing 5 tds

Hmmmm... What if Griese played for the Pats? Well never know how well he'd play because Dave S hasn't beaten him with a baseball bat to see if he's "clutch."

Now, for the real deals:

D Culpepper

74 games 1540 passes 2393 completions 18604 yds 7.8 ypp 129 td 74 int 2323 yards rushing 28 td

Hmmmmmm. 10 more games than Brady, but what a record! I like that 7.8 ypp

C Pennington

42 719 1091 8091 7.4 53 27 228 5

When you really look at his numbers, Brady looks a lot like Mark Rypien, with a few more SB trophies, or a Joe Theismann, without the broken leg.

Maybe even a Kurt Warner:

63 games 1295 attempts 1965 completions 16501 yards 8.4 ypp 108 td 69 int 232 yards rushing 2 tds

Why don't we just wait to see how his numbers come along before we send him to Canton?

by Morton P. Swigglepooper (not verified) :: Mon, 06/13/2005 - 5:43pm

Oops. I got the dataset headers mixed up. Substitute completions/attempts. You get the point.

Dave S should beat me with a bat.

by Basilicus (not verified) :: Mon, 06/13/2005 - 5:45pm

Umm, sorry, did we just have a Brady/Manning debate turn into a Harrison/Branch debate...wow, this truly is developing into one of the greatest rivalries in American sports history. By the way, why is SI publishing fanfiction now?

by Rick "32_Footsteps" Healey (not verified) :: Mon, 06/13/2005 - 5:46pm

At the very least, FO should consider only giving King the freebie link during the football season. I think he gets really rusty during the offseason, leading to articles that look embarassing. I mean, could you imagine if some other major media organization posted pieces like that onto their site?

Oh, right, like the Boston Globe does. It's done wonders for their readership and credibility.

As for interleague play... well, I guess the reason I personally don't like it is because it goes against tradition in a sport with such a rich one. But then, I am willing to concede that tradition is not a very good reason to keep something around. On the other hand, I don't see why people make it sound like interleague baseball is such an incredible idea. Especially in this day and age, it's not hard to follow any team, so it's not like I can't see whatever team I want.

However, that said, I would probably like American League baseball much better if it didn't have the DH. Like most fans of NL teams, I disdain it.

by B (not verified) :: Mon, 06/13/2005 - 5:52pm

New Orleans led the league in net punting? I guess when you punt that much, you get to be pretty good at it.

by Richie (not verified) :: Mon, 06/13/2005 - 6:02pm

Oh, and for those with the snide “if they only had Brady’s defense� comments, please point out a playoff game that Manning’s Colts lost where Manning played decent and the defense was less than adequate.

I'm just not the kind of guy who is going to say one player is greater than another purely because his team wins more games. In football especially, a player's performance is usually tied tightly to the rest of his team's performance.

I don't remember how that 41-0 disaster against the Jets in 2002 went down, but I'm guessing Manning wasn't the only one to blame. Usually playoff games like that can get away from a team quickly. The tackle misses a block on the first possession, the QB throws an INT because he's being blindsided, and next thing you know you're down by 28 points.

by Purds (not verified) :: Mon, 06/13/2005 - 6:11pm

re: "You’d expect more from an offense that should be expecting to carry the day, everyday, wouldn’t you?"

That is the problem for the Colts, the O MUST carry the day every day, and any off day, they lose.

Also, let's look at the supporting cast thing: Hmm, was that Brady who ran for 144 yards against the Colts in the playoffs last year? No, it was Brady who threw for 144, and Dillon who ran for 144.

Oh, then it must have been Manning who dropped at least 3 passes, and then fumbled twice after he did manage to catch the ball. No, oh yeah, that was the Colt receivers, not Manning.

Get over it, Brady lovers. Yes, he wins. No doubt. But yes, he's had better players surrounding him on his team. I laugh at the people who try to convince us that the Pats have no real stars -- sure, lots of teams have linebackers who can play TE, get grabbed by a DE, get hit in the head with a pass, and then still have the athleticism to catch the TD ((11:09) T.Brady pass to M.Vrabel for 2 yards, TOUCHDOWN. Penalty on PHI-J.Kearse, Defensive Holding, declined.)

Unfortunately for Manning, one defense in the league had figured him out, and that's NE, and he needs to beat NE to go to a SB. Stats that matter for Manning?

Regular season record in 2003-4 vs all but NE? 24-6
Regular season vs NE? 0-2

Playoffs vs all but NE? 3-0
Playoffs vs NE? 0-2

Finally, not an excuse but a mitigating factor: all 4 games vs NE have been at NE, and this year (2005) the kind people who run the NFL scheduling have deemed that the Colts should get the chance to go to NE again.

by Paul (not verified) :: Mon, 06/13/2005 - 6:18pm

Agreed that today's MMQB is weak and often is with increasing ffrequency; but let's put it into perspective, MMQB is free and it's late spring... He's probably writing these from a chaise lounge with an iced latte by his side. That said, King is often excellent in SI (hardcopy) and is always excellent on radio (e.g., WEEI, WFAN). Cut him some slack.

by B (not verified) :: Mon, 06/13/2005 - 6:22pm

Unless Raymond James stadium has been relocated, I'm pretty sure one of those NE/Indy games was in Indy (2003 regular season, Edge stuffed on 4th and goal to end the game.)

by Eric P (not verified) :: Mon, 06/13/2005 - 6:31pm


Do you think even the Pats D can figure out a way to win consistently if the offense gets shhut out? I'm still waiting for an example of a playoff game where the D caused them to lose, despite the offense playing average. Every playoff loss has seen Manning post one of his 2 or 3 worst games (QB ratings wise) of the season. There hasn't been a single loss where you can say "even Manning couldn't save that D." That's because the Colts D has been surprisingly effective during the playoffs. Manning and the O have been remarkably ineffective.


Again, I challenge you to point out the playoff loss where you could primarily attribute it to the defense.
Last season the Pats had Dillon, but before that? Let me guess... A.Smith was one of the most underrated RBs in the history of the league, right? Not to mention that I'd bet at least 75% of people with an opinion would say Edge is better than Dillon. Even if they're even, what's Manning's excuse again?
Oh, I see. Brady is helped out immensely by his TE-playing LB. That's something Manning doesn't have. Poor Peyton. Has to make due with Pro-Bowler s and first rounders at TE.
Finally... Not all of the games have been at Foxboro. The famous goalline stand game in 2003 took place in the dome. Sorry, better look for another excuse. At least it gives the Manning apologists something to do during their extra long off-seasons, I guess.

by Morton P. Swigglepooper (not verified) :: Mon, 06/13/2005 - 6:33pm

Brady is Mark Rypien with a few more SB rings.

Manning is Marino.

by Morton P. Swigglepooper (not verified) :: Mon, 06/13/2005 - 6:34pm

By the way, Warner had a great YPP avg, didn't he?

by Michael Jackson (not verified) :: Mon, 06/13/2005 - 6:43pm

I just wanted all my friends at Football Outsiders who supported me during these difficult months to know that I valued your help.

Between hearings, sidebars and the trial itself, I want you to know that I thought a great deal about the Manning/Brady conundrum.

I like Brady. He's dreamy. And he's so clutch.

by Aahzmadius (not verified) :: Mon, 06/13/2005 - 6:50pm

Ack! Quick, someone post the link to the Brady/Manning debate thread!

Also, what does Tampa Bay's home stadium have to do with anything, B?

by Trogdor (not verified) :: Mon, 06/13/2005 - 7:09pm

Please direct all irrational Brady/Manning debate to the appropriate thread. Click my name for the link. Thank you.

by Trogdor (not verified) :: Mon, 06/13/2005 - 7:15pm

Richie, here's an article about how QBs have an effect on sack rate. Not sure if it's all you were looking for, but it's a start.

by zip (not verified) :: Mon, 06/13/2005 - 7:34pm

87 posts about a stupid super bowl story, manning/brady/etc, and some people even talked to me about interleague, all in 6 or so hours!

Quite the website you've got taking off here, Aaron.

by andrew (not verified) :: Mon, 06/13/2005 - 8:15pm

This is what happens when Paul Zimmerman goes on vacation.

by mactbone (not verified) :: Mon, 06/13/2005 - 9:21pm

He's back from vacation and just wrote an article about the Tyson fight.

I appreciate PK during the season but most of his offseason articles just don't provide much insight. I'd rather just get a once a week bag of e-mails or more indepth analysis of the previous season and why teams won or lost.

by Richie (not verified) :: Mon, 06/13/2005 - 9:24pm

I see that Chris Chandler had sack % around 12% the first 3 years of the study, then it suddenly dropped to 5%, yet his QB-mate in Chicago that year (Kordell Stewart) was getting sacked 9% of the time (after only 4% the year before).

by Walt Pohl (not verified) :: Mon, 06/13/2005 - 9:30pm

The only reason Manning isn't as clutch as Brady is because the American League uses a DH. Take that away, and you'll see who gets all of the Super Bowl rings.

by Countertorque (not verified) :: Mon, 06/13/2005 - 9:33pm

The worst MMQB article ever was when he eulogized his stupid dead dog.

by zlionsfan (not verified) :: Mon, 06/13/2005 - 10:39pm

Rick Manning vs. Brady Anderson? That is a tough debate. I'm glad I don't have to choose.

Re: interleague play. I dislike it (although it does bring the occasional gem, like when you get to hear Vin Scully call your team's game). Baseball already has enough games that don't seem to mean that much. I don't really care if the Tigers never play Arizona, Texas, or San Francisco. Besides, it's made worse by the asymmetric league structure.

IMHO, the main argument against interleague play is that it takes away one of the unique things about baseball (half the teams never play the other half, except for a title). If baseball ends up trying to be like all the other sports, who's going to want to watch it?

[purist]Yes, I dislike the DH as well.[/purist]

I also skipped through the whole Patriots-Vikings pap.

I think I think that Peter King is ready for preseason to start.

I think I think that if you subscribe to the magazine and read the web site, you're getting a raw deal. I feel like I get about half the value I should from each.

I think I think that if MDS had sources and wrote a column once a week, I'd pay to read it ...

by Aaron (not verified) :: Mon, 06/13/2005 - 11:02pm

The people who have never liked Peter King's schtick, well, they still don't like Peter King's schtick, and hearing them attack Peter King is a bit of a waste of time.

But for those of us who really enjoy King when he's on, I'm curious, how can he get his fastball back? How can he regain his status as one of the top football columnists?

My ideas:

1) Eliminate the Tuesday Edition of MMQB. If SI.com won't eliminate it during the season, at least eliminate it during the off-season. Go back to King's columns from a year ago (one is linked) and he doesn't have to pad his off-season MMQB's because half of the column was the mailbag.

2) Keep him away from his favorite topics. Peter needs to limit himself to one mention of the Patriots or Brett Favre every two weeks. He needs to give fresh eyes to something he doesn't write about much, like the Seattle defense or Carolina running backs. Every time you feel like writing about Brett Favre, stop and write about Detroit. Every time you feel like writing about the Patriots, stop and write about the Buffalo defense.

3) Chill on the hyperbole. Chad Morton is worth two wins a year? No, Peter, come on.

4) Give more reasons for your pronouncements. The Vikings pick to win the NFC was interesting because you backed it up with some ideas. "Willis McGahee will lead the league in rushing" would be more interesting if it was followed by a couple sentences explaining why we should believe you.

5) Branch out a bit. Lately King has written too much about QB, RB, WR, and CB and not enough about offensive or defensive linemen, or for that matter linebackers and safeties. That's a whole pool of players to say new things about.

6) No more fan fiction.

by Brikke (not verified) :: Mon, 06/13/2005 - 11:23pm

Re. #72:

"Why don’t we just wait to see how his numbers come along before we send him to Canton?"


Despite this great site, there is SO much more to QB than numbers. Numbers and stats are an important part of the story, but not the be all end all. Watching game after game can you honestly put Brady in the same class as
Brooks and Griese?

by Bill (not verified) :: Mon, 06/13/2005 - 11:40pm

8. I think the funniest holdout of the year has to be massive underachiever Cletidus Hunt in Green Bay. Son, they won't miss you. That is, of course, unless you've been taking Reggie White and now are the hard-trying, productive player you should have been all along.

Is King implying that Hunt is injecting Reggie White's ashes into his body?

by Basilicus (not verified) :: Mon, 06/13/2005 - 11:45pm

Number of comments in the four Extra Points articles previous to this: eighteen, thirteen, five, and twelve. Number of comments in the Extra Points article containing a Brady/Manning debate: ninety-seven.

by vikesfan (not verified) :: Tue, 06/14/2005 - 2:08am

Wow, just wanted to point out the five times the word clutch was used in #67. And, I might be biased...but if we're really considering a "baseball bat test" I'd take Daunte and his 260 pounds over Brady or Manning.

by nath (not verified) :: Tue, 06/14/2005 - 2:48am

The worst MMQB article ever was when he eulogized his stupid dead dog.

I really enjoyed the one a couple weeks ago where he briefly mentioned that the family cat they didn't like very much died.

by nath (not verified) :: Tue, 06/14/2005 - 2:57am

The worst MMQB article ever was when he eulogized his stupid dead dog.

I really enjoyed the one a couple weeks ago where he briefly mentioned that the family cat they didn't like very much died.

by Matthew (not verified) :: Tue, 06/14/2005 - 8:09am

I think now...and have pretty much always thought that Len Pasquarelli blows this man out of the water. The Starbucks zombie thing feels like fingernails on a chalkboard.

by Brian (not verified) :: Tue, 06/14/2005 - 10:54am

Embarassing -- I've intentionally stayed away from football because I do a baseball blog, but the jump of this MMQB is just like the fantasies I used to have about Randall Cunningham and the Eagles finally reaching and winning the Super Bowl. It's the stuff of star-crossed adolescents and really puts a dent in his journalistic credibility IMO. This, especially, is sickening:

"You're the best quarterback I've ever seen,'' Belichick said in Brady's ear.

"Well, you're a pretty good coach, too,'' Brady said, smiling, and, because he's funnier than he looks, threw in this Wolverine zinger: "But we're in Michigan. So I can't say you're better than Lloyd Carr.''

by MDS (not verified) :: Tue, 06/14/2005 - 11:30am

What I found odd about King and his dog eulogy was how much more he wrote about his dog dying than he did about his mom dying. Click on my initials and scroll down to No. 2 of the things he thinks he thinks.

by Ima Pseudonym (not verified) :: Tue, 06/14/2005 - 12:14pm

Thanks, MDS - hadn't read that one before. His defense of his beating out a 7-yr old for the Tejada foul ball reminds me of when Martha Stewart boasted on one of the afternoon talk shows about how she got a valuable set of china from an old woman for just a few bucks, and wouldn't sell it back a few minutes later when the daughter came out to explain that it was a family heirloom and wasn't supposed to have been put out for sale.

Given all the traffic on this thread - could it possibly be time for another columnist tribute? How about some sort of cross-over tribute: like Dr. Z writing an off-season mmqb. or PK doing GE's tmqb....

by Pat on the Back (not verified) :: Tue, 06/14/2005 - 12:46pm

Since I have no desire to engage in the current debate, I'm still addressing baseball.

My mild defense of the DH, since I don't really mind it but don't really like it, would list the following fan-friendly pros over the "stretegic loss" cons:

1) It reduces the chance that a pitcher throwing a great game gets lifted prematurely for pitch-hitter in a close game. Seriously, when a great pitcher is on, the last thing you want to see as a fan is his night cut short

2) It allows paying fans to see the stars more often. For example, a good friend from San Fran who lives in AZ trekked 4.5 hours to the BOB to watch his favorite player, Barry Bonds. Unfortunately, Mister Bonds' roid soaked tendons were in dire need of a rest, and Barry had the night off. The DH allows aging stars to stay fresher and still contribute, and allows the fans to see their favorite players more often.

3) For those who like more offense, well, the DH tends to hit better than the pitcher. Not applicable to pitching nuts, but then again the masses seem to enjoy high-scoring games more on the whole.

4) Much easier to keep score of the game, as NL games I always inevitably end up with 2 or 3 lines of PHs that are below the actually grid, and it is annoying to keep changing names.

by Reginald Q. Picklefluffer (not verified) :: Tue, 06/14/2005 - 12:52pm

I say we put Martha Stewart, Peter King and Len P in a room with Dave S.

Dave will beat the trio repeatedly with a baseball bat. The one who emerges to type readable copy about the "tuck" rule, R.W. McQuarters or the move of the Patriots to play their home games in Tampa Bay gets the "clutch" award.

Then Carl can talk about punters.

by J (not verified) :: Tue, 06/14/2005 - 1:26pm

Sure, I agree there would have been better topics for King to write about, but quite honestly, the only people reading his articles now (mid June) are the hardcore football fans grasping for any fix they can get. I am one of them. I wake in the morning, click on post-gazette.com, just hoping for alittle news of the Steelers. Anything! Most days I am disappointed, but I will keep clicking - one of these days, hopefully sooner, there will be new Steeler's news everyday. Until then, I think King deserves a break. He has to know the only people reading his articles now will read regardless of the contents. In recent weeks, people here at FOs (not the staff of FOs - the readers) keep complaining, but they keep on reading his stuff just looking for a fix.

by Pierre Portmanteau (not verified) :: Tue, 06/14/2005 - 1:41pm

If you're clicking on the PG, you deserve to go without decent football coverage. Heck, the cross-town rival does a much better job reporting about the Steelers.

The PG is the Boston Globe of the AFC North. Please, make them stop!

by MDS (not verified) :: Tue, 06/14/2005 - 1:51pm

I don't know if it's a good idea to link as I have to the Tuesday Edition and start up a whole new argument, but what the hell:

King writes, "quarterback is a singular position in football, and maybe in all of team sports, because of how much influence he has in determining whether his team wins or loses. I've always thought of Phil Simms as a winner as much as he was a very good player, and the winner side of it counts for more than anything in my mind."

Come on! He couldn't have picked a better example for the exact opposite of what he's trying to say. Phil Simms was on a Giants team that won with ball control and defense, and when he went down with an injury, that team promptly won a Super Bowl with Jeff Hostetler at the helm. Simms is the perfect example of how quarterbacks on teams with great defenses get too much credit.

by Glenn (not verified) :: Tue, 06/14/2005 - 2:23pm

Tues MMQB....4 Questions:
1) Future NE Hall Of Famers. King admits that he's talked about this before.
2) Will Brett Favre have a good year? Gosh, how could PK resist answering that one?
3) Brady as a "fortunate" QB. Good, I can't get enough of those "Brady's a system QB" discussions. Maybe next week he can compare him to Peyton Manning.
4) Brady wouldn't date Lindsay Lohan. PK says he was trying to be hip with that reference.

Aaron, I respect what you're saying above in looking for ways to improve King's internet efforts. Too bad he ain't reading FO to get the message.

by Starshatterer (not verified) :: Tue, 06/14/2005 - 2:41pm

I find it interesting that Peter King, an actual HoF voter, finds both Brady and Belichick to be "automatics as of right now."

Leaving aside the question of whether Brady is more like Montana or Rypien, he seems more "automatic" than Belichick at this stage. All Brady has to do at this point is not screw up too badly for the rest of his career; Belichick needs to overcome some lingering resentment among the sportswriters who do the voting.

by Richie (not verified) :: Tue, 06/14/2005 - 2:43pm

Then Carl can talk about punters.

THAT was funny!

by senser81 (not verified) :: Tue, 06/14/2005 - 3:28pm

re: post #110

For whatever reason, King has been fascinated with Phil Simms' playing career. I remember one article in which PK wrote Simms was the most underrated QB in NFL history, with Bob Waterfield being the most overrated QB in NFL history, and then went to compare Simms' and Waterfield's passing stats. Forget the fact that Waterfield played in the 40's and 50's and was a top-notch defensive back, but on the surface Waterfield single-handedly won an NFL title for the Rams in 1945 (his rookie year), and won another title in 1951. Point being that Waterfield was the best player on his team, whereas Simms was probably the 8th or 9th best player on his team. Even in 1986, Simms threw 21 TDs vs. 22 INTs, and his rating was one of the worst in the league.

by Burger (not verified) :: Tue, 06/14/2005 - 3:41pm

This article was AWFUL. When was the last time he wrote an article that didnt involve brett Favre or Tom Brady ?

by the way... 31 TD's for Favre ??? isnt that a bit riduculous ??

and another thing, didnt Brady lead the league in TD's his second year ?

by Starshatterer (not verified) :: Tue, 06/14/2005 - 4:22pm

Burger (#115 )--

When was the last time [King] wrote an article that didnt involve brett Favre or Tom Brady ?

Two weeks ago Monday: May 30th (linked on my pseudonym).

He mentions, without elaboration, Green Bay as a wild card pick, but no mention of Favre or Brady by name.

by PK (not verified) :: Tue, 06/14/2005 - 4:38pm

Re: 115.

Burger, Favre has thrown for less than 30 TDs only three times in the last 11 years. He led the league two years ago, and hit 30 last year.

How is it "ridiculous" that he would throw for 31 this year?

by Burger (not verified) :: Tue, 06/14/2005 - 4:40pm

StarShatterer: Touche'

by Pat on the Back (not verified) :: Tue, 06/14/2005 - 4:50pm

Brady did lead the league in TD passes in 2002, with 28.

by Brikke (not verified) :: Tue, 06/14/2005 - 5:53pm

Everyone on this board is so much more knowledgeable and insightful than Peter King. They're also much more intelligent and analytical, and can break down and dissect football much better than PK. I can't believe SI hasn't hired any number of us to replace King.

by Trogdor (not verified) :: Tue, 06/14/2005 - 6:03pm

Nobody is claiming to be better than King. However, when King turns out a turd like this, we certainly are collectively and individually intelligent enough to spot it. And yes, this Monday Morning Quarterback has traces of his Sunday Evening Corn.

by JayHak (not verified) :: Tue, 06/14/2005 - 6:39pm

If reading the conspiracy theories of a delusional rams fan ranting about SB36 sounds like fun, today is your lucky day... click my name.

by Adam H. (not verified) :: Tue, 06/14/2005 - 6:53pm

I can't believe I just read all those comments (Alright I skimmed the baseball ones).

by JohnnyNH (not verified) :: Tue, 06/14/2005 - 7:46pm

King has been dismissive about Adam Vinatieri's HOF chances in previous columns and didn't even mention him in passing in today's post.

I understand the Hall's bias against kickers but Vinatieri has a much better shot at Canton than some of the other names King threw out (Matt Light!).

Yeah, he's mailing it in....

by Richie (not verified) :: Tue, 06/14/2005 - 7:47pm

Brady did lead the league in TD passes in 2002, with 28.

Wow. When the question was asked, I snickered. I didn't think he ever led the league. That year was the first year since 1993 (Steve Young, 29) that the league leader had fewer than 30 TD passes.

by Paul (not verified) :: Tue, 06/14/2005 - 9:45pm

I can't be the last one...

by Paul (not verified) :: Tue, 06/14/2005 - 9:48pm

Sorry for the double-post... Thoughts about the Mike Tyson $5 million rip-off?

by LnGrrrR (not verified) :: Wed, 06/15/2005 - 5:07am

Just for some more Brady love...he also set a record for completions in a Super Bowl. ;) lol
You know, if you go to the Brady-Manning debates, I think it was their third meeting where we said, "THIS meeting will answer the question of who's best!"

And we're still waiting...

by Jeremy (not verified) :: Wed, 06/15/2005 - 10:35am

I don't see how PK can suggest that Brady would -- horror of horrors! -- go from the ridiculously stunning Bridget Moynahan to the freckly skeleton named Lindsey Lohan.

I tell ya -- the Pats just get no respect, no respect at all.

by Pat on the Back (not verified) :: Wed, 06/15/2005 - 12:29pm

That is a fantastic site. I would email the guy to compliment him on his inappropriate use of the word "oxymoron", but I think the black helicopters picked him up an hour ago...

by Eric P (not verified) :: Fri, 06/17/2005 - 6:00pm

Black helicopters?

Those are pigeons!

by Richie (not verified) :: Wed, 06/22/2005 - 8:14pm

Why no MMQB link this week?