I’m like everybody else with this Los Angeles thing. I’m on page 24 of a 300-page book, and it’s not all that interesting so far. But I hear the end is compelling, so I’d rather speed past the next 230 pages and go straight to the climax. Tell me what the end game is.
Being on the same page as Peter King is a frightening experience. It makes me re-think my life choices. It's not that NFL teams relocating doesn't interest me, it's just that it would only interest me if it were MY team favorite team relocating. It's like seeing someone else's vacation photos. It's interesting in a way, but not terribly interesting since it didn't happen to you.
“What’s your gut feeling about the number of NFL teams playing football in Los Angeles in 2020—zero, one or two?” I asked Eric Grubman, an NFL senior vice president and the league’s point man on the L.A. market, on Friday.
“I don’t know the number,” he said near the end of a 35-minute interview.
It could be ten teams that move to Los Angeles or maybe the entire NFL will move every single team to the Los Angeles early. IT'S TOO EARLY TO TELL. Don't bother Eric Grubman with your speculative multiple choice questions.
“But the least probable of those numbers is zero. I would say we’ve gone above the 50 percent probability that we’ll have at least one team there.”
That team? The London Jaguars. The NFL will give London a team and then have them play their home games in Los Angeles. Everyone wins. London gets a team, the NFL gets a team in Los Angeles and players don't have to worry about a transcontinental flight to play a football game. Never doubt Roger Goodell's leadership and problem-solving abilities.
It’s been two decades and two months since the Los Angeles area had NFL football.
And Oakland hasn't had a professional football team in a decade! (looks for someone to high-five, but there is no one around)
The San Diego and Oakland franchises have announced their intention to bury the hatchet of a 54-year rivalry to initiate a joint $1.7-billion stadium project in the Los Angeles suburb of Carson. And last Tuesday the Inglewood, Calif., city council unanimously approved plans to build a football stadium that would be anchored by the move of the Rams from St. Louis. That doesn’t mean the Rams are signed and sealed for Inglewood, former home of the Lakers and Kings, just that the locals are promising to build a palace if they come.
(wakes up and can't remember what he just read)
So if it gets built, then they will come?
The Chargers are still trying to get a deal done to stay in San Diego. Ditto the Raiders in northern California. The Rams? No one quite knows what the Rams are doing.
This could go for their relocation efforts or their decisions about certain positions on the Rams depth chart. I read in "Sports Illustrated" this week the Rams consulted Sam Bradford on a coaching hire this offseason and all indications (which could be a smokescreen) are that they still count on him to be healthy this season. I hope it's not true.
For years the Rams tried to get a better stadium than the Edward Jones Dome, and the franchise was rebuffed because of the immense cost. But now, faced with losing the Rams, the state and city are working double-time to come up with a solution that—if nothing else—would make it difficult for 24 owners to vote in favor of the Rams returning to Los Angeles. (Franchise moves must be approved by a 75 percent majority of the 32 teams, though no one is sure if Kroenke will abide by that bylaw or just pull up stakes and force the league to stop him.)
Oh okay, so just moving and making the NFL stop him is an option? That seems rather hasty and not an intelligent move. Doesn't Kroenke know that Roger Goodell will suspend him for two games if he just up and moves his team across the country? I'm kidding of course, Roger Goodell works for Kroenke, so he would probably reward Kroenke's intestinal fortitude and the initiative he took by taking two draft picks away from the Patriots and giving them to the Rams.
This is the first time anyone outside the league or the committee charged with keeping the Rams in St. Louis has seen the renderings of the proposed $1 billion, 64,000-seat open-air riverfront football stadium on the banks of the Mississippi River. Grubman has been to St. Louis on several occasions to meet with the group working to keep the Rams in town and working to clear 90 acres on the riverfront and get funding for the stadium, and he’s bullish on their prospects. But prospects for what?
Prospects to have an NFL team play in that stadium. It seems pretty obvious, Peter. If the Rams aren't in the stadium then the Rams hope to draw another team to the St. Louis area.
Keeping the Rams—even though Kroenke has not been part of the discussions at all, instead choosing to have Rams COO Kevin Demoff head the team’s delegation in dealing with the transition? Preparing for a rainy day, and taking one of the teams (San Diego or Oakland) that doesn’t get a stadium built and sees the prospect of a shiny middle-American palace in a top-25 market? No one knows. But the venue is currency in these stadium-driven times.
(Peter King's phone rings) "Helloooooooooooooooooo...."
(Marvin Demoff's voice comes through with contempt) "Dammit, be a man. I saw your Tweet about having lost your child for three minutes one time as a way of empathizing with Ivan Maisel. I know what you were trying to do, but at least be a little bit less tone deaf. Is it that hard? Losing a child permanently, versus having three minutes of panic. Maybe just focus on Tweeting or writing what I tell you to write."
(Peter King) "The people on Twitter were so mean to me about that. I don't get---"
(Marvin Demoff) "Exactly, you don't get it. Anyway, my son has had to speak for Stan Kroenke for far too long. Do a story in this week's MMQB about the Rams moving to Los Angeles and I'll get you a copy of the stadium rendering to show in the column. When talking about the possible relocation, be sure to mention that Kroenke has left my son as the point man on this issue while saying nothing himself. If it goes sideways and bad feelings happen, I want those feelings directed at Kroenke, not my son. Can you do that?"
(Peter King) "When have I ever let you down my favorite employer?"
(Marvin Demoff) "I'm not answering that because I don't have time to hear you cry. Just write it and mention how Kevin Demoff is heading the team's delegation and Kroenke hasn't done his part. I'm hanging up now, so don't bother saying anything else."
(Peter King) "I will do it, I promise. Hello? Hello?"
“It’s definitely a legitimate option,” said Grubman. “I see no fatal defect to it.”
Other than the St. Louis taxpayers partially footing the bill for an NFL stadium that doesn't actually house one of the 32 NFL teams. Other than that, no fatal defect in this idea at all.
The NFL told any team investigating Los Angeles to be sure to include in the stadium design the ability to add a second team. The St. Louis plan in Inglewood does that—obviously, so does the Carson site. No one expects two stadiums to be built in Los Angeles. But, increasingly, there is an expectation that one stadium will be built in greater Los Angeles, and it will house one or two teams.
Or maybe 10 teams. GRUBMAN DOESN'T KNOW THE NUMBER YET!
Which leads us to this unfortunate part of the story: Kroenke seems (and I say “seems,” because of his actions, not because of his words—there have been none)
(Marvin Demoff smiles)
St. Louis is by far the most aggressive with the best plan to keep the Rams, right down to an agreement to clear a 90-acre blighted plot downtown to make way for the stadium. And get this: Missouri Gov. Jay Nixon has an agreement with skilled construction workers in eastern Missouri to work round the clock (three eight-hour shifts a day, every day) so the stadium could be finished in 24 months … without workers taking overtime. That’s significant because if the first shovel goes in the ground by this August, the NFL could have a pristine new St. Louis stadium built in time for the 2017 season.
Meanwhile, a 10 mile stretch of I-85 that cuts through the middle of North Carolina took 3-4 years to be widened and the job still isn't completely done. If only it were a 10 mile stretch earmarked for an NFL stadium it would have been done in a year.
The preferred goal of San Diego and Oakland is to stay in San Diego and Oakland. Or, as Grubman said: “St. Louis is being aggressive and specific. San Diego recently has shown potential to be aggressive, but has not yet been specific. Oakland has been neither aggressive nor specific.”
It sounds like a multiple choice test that a 3rd grader would take.
"St. Louis has been aggressive and specific. San Diego is a little aggressive but not specific. Oakland isn't specific or aggressive. If Los Angeles wants a team that is aggressive but not specific, then what team would they not want to do a deal with?"
“We’re trying to move with speed and certainty, with no ambiguity,” Peacock said over the weekend. “This is the right moment in time for a new stadium in St. Louis. We have a lot of young people moving to our urban core, which you couldn’t have said a few years ago.
The urban core of St. Louis is perfectly built to become a dynasty, assuming the city can keep their core together for a 6-8 year stretch and provide enough high paying jobs.
“Stan has all kinds of options. We understand that. We can’t worry too much about that. I would be more concerned if we weren’t having regular dialogue with Kevin [Demoff] and Eric Grubman about all facets of the plan. We are relying on the integrity of the league’s bylaws. If you assemble all the important pieces—the control of the land, the stadium financing, the cost-certainty, the stadium plan—I don’t know … If we do everything we say we’re going to do, it’s hard to imagine 24 owners would vote against it. If we do our job, I can’t imagine 24 votes to approve the Rams moving.”
That's very optimistic considering Kroenke seems hell-bent on moving at this point. It also sounds like Peacock is lining up a potential lawsuit to point out the city of St. Louis did everything within the NFL bylaws to keep the Rams in St. Louis just in case this whole thing goes south (or west, as the case may be).
But is it enough? And if Kroenke leaves, will it be enough to attract another team? I’ve thought about this a lot, and several people connected to the story say I’m not the first one to suggest this is the end game: Rams move to Inglewood. Chargers can’t get a deal done in San Diego and join them in Inglewood. Raiders, left without a stadium option, take the St. Louis deal. And by 2019, Derek Carr will be the quarterback of your St. Louis Raiders.
I'm betting one of those people connected to the story is Kevin Demoff. He wants to at least float the idea that St. Louis is open to another NFL team playing in the yet-to-be-built stadium since he is currently working on the Rams' transition team. I'm not sure it's right that St. Louis would be given the Raiders after dealing with Jeff Fisher's lack of urgency over the past few seasons.
So we let the process play out, knowing that by the time the NFL turns 100 the second-largest city in the country should finally have a team (or two) back. Whichever teams they may be.
I don't really understand why it is so important that Los Angeles have a team or two. It seems the NFL is doing perfectly fine without the second-largest city in the United States having an NFL team, but I'm stupid, so perhaps I don't understand just how great it would be for Los Angeles to finally have another NFL team.
I screened NFL Films’ annual Super Bowl champion video the other day (“Super Bowl XLIX Champions: New England Patriots,” by Cinedigm, on sale Tuesday nationwide). Highlights from the hour-plus video that caught my eye:
Immediately after spending a page and a half on the Rams, Raiders and Chargers potentially relocating, Peter hands out notes from a video that he saw. Yes, it is the NFL offseason.
Tom Brady screams like a banshee a lot. He gets excited often, and when he does, he yells at the top of his lungs, like a high school kid who just won a big football game.
Tom Brady is just like a child! It's so precocious of him to yell like this. Who would have ever thought that Peter King would try to give child-like characteristics to a grown man? It's only one of his favorite things to do. The ultimate joy for Peter is to see a grown man act like a child, which is why he is so fond of Brett Favre. I imagine Peter's browser history is full of fetish videos involving grown men acting like children.
The clips from mic’ed up players are strong. Gronkowski, in disbelief, on the sideline in Indianapolis after a bumper-car/athletic long touchdown reception: “I don’t even know how I did that. I have no clue.”
I have a hard time figuring out how many of these NFL players do the things they do on the field. It's like their bodies and abilities defy logic and what the human body should be able to do in such a violent game. Sometimes I figure it out though and think there is a good explanation:
Before the Patriots called the option pass from Edelman to Danny Amendola in the second half, offensive coordinator Josh McDaniels went to Edelman and said: “I don’t need any lead time with the double pass, do I?’’ Edelman said to him, “What do you mean?” McDaniels: “I don’t have to tell you it’s coming.” Edelman: “Nah.” And soon it came, and Edelman executed his first NFL pass perfectly
By saying, "I don't have to give you lead time, do I?" for a specific play McDaniels has essentially given Edelman lead time on the specific play. The fact McDaniels indicated he had thought about running the play told Edelman to prepare for it.
Before the last Seattle drive of the Super Bowl, with the Seahawks trailing, a mic’ed Brady says: “D’s gotta make a play. Gotta intercept one.”
Riveting. It's almost like Brady willed the interception to occur. Very precocious of him to cheer for his defense in this manner.
As anyone who has tried to find real-world sports books for young readers can tell you, the pool is not very deep. That’s why I was pleased to see veteran sports writer Sean Jensen and former Bears great Brian Urlacher collaborate on a rare Young Adult Sports Biography (that’s the Amazon term for it, I think) called “The Middle School Rules of Brian Urlacher.” It’s about Urlacher’s formative years in New Mexico.
Brian Urlacher wrote a children's book? You know what that means? That means he is being very precocious to write a book meant for younger readers. I'm sure Peter only reads young adult books because he finds it exhilarating for adult writers to pretend they are children.
Urlacher: I wanted to give young people a look at my real life. Growing up is hard for everybody at times, and it wasn’t easy for me. I wasn’t a good athlete. People are surprised about that, but in my eighth-grade year, the only time I got in basketball games is when we were up by 20 or down by 20.
Oh, Urlacher wasn't very good at basketball, but he was on the basketball team. I think his definition of "not being good" at a sport could be different from mine. In my world, when someone isn't a good at a sport then he/she doesn't make a sports team in high school or middle school. It's interesting to think how "not being good" at a sport could mean a person makes the team, but doesn't play much.
Me: Ever tempted by drugs around that age?
Urlacher: Nope. I never tried weed. Never wanted to. Later, people would say to me, “You ought to try weed.” And I’d say: “Why break my streak now?”
Plus, Urlacher can't just inject weed into his system, so there's no fun in using it.
Me: I like that you bring up the fact that you were a normal kid in middle school, because kids need to know you’re not fully molded in any way by the time you’re in seventh or eighth grade. It’s pretty rare for a kid in middle school to know exactly what he or she is going to do in life.
Urlacher: Exactly. There were guys I knew in eighth grade who I thought might be NBA players, and then, in high school, they’re not that good at basketball anymore.
They aren't good at basketball anymore. These guys play basketball overseas or sit the bench in the D-league right now. They are terrible at basketball!
“Yes, I was expecting the ball. But in life, these things happen. I had no problem with the decision of the play calling. I mean … how do I say this? When you look at me, and you let me run that ball in, I am the face of the nation. You know, MVP of the Super Bowl … I don’t know what went into that call … I mean, you know, it cost us the Super Bowl. But would I love to have had that ball there? Yeah, I would have. I would have. But the game is over, and I’m in Turkey.”
—Marshawn Lynch, to Turkish sports network NTV Spor while on a trip to Turkey. He was referring to the Seahawks passing on their last offensive play of the Super Bowl from the Patriots’ 1-yard line, rather than handing it to Lynch for a run.
This is probably part of the reason that Lynch doesn't talk to the media. He says something and then it is dissected five different ways to determine it's "real" meaning. Lynch wanted the football with the Super Bowl on the line and thinks there may have been other reasons to not give him the football in that situation. Every player would want the football and some players may wonder why they didn't get the football. That's pretty much the end of the story.
“You can’t have a Hall of Fame without me being in it. It’s just not legitimate.”
—Simeon Rice, to SB Nation. Nice career: 122 sacks in 174 career games. Not a career crying out for induction, in my opinion.
Oh, so we are basing the comment by Simeon Rice that he should be in the Pro Football Hall of Fame based solely on sacks? Simeon Rice averaged a sack every 0.70 game during his career. Michael Strahan had 141.5 sacks in 216 career games. That's an average of a sack every 0.66 game during his career. I guess Strahan's career wasn't crying out for induction? Oh yeah, that's right. Strahan played for the Giants, smiled a lot and was friendly with the media before he became a part of the media. I guess that makes his career sack total look a little better using the "Theory of Jerome Bettis."
What's really concerning for me here is that Peter King has a Hall of Fame vote. He bases his opinion that Rice shouldn't be in the Hall of Fame on only career sacks, but Rice actually had more sacks per game during his career than Strahan did. Basically, by using only sacks as the criteria then Peter King is saying Strahan doesn't deserve induction either. Peter has a Hall of Fame vote. I'm scared of how he evaluates players now.
Factoids of the Week That May Interest Only Me
I present this pronunciation guide as a public service, because I’ve heard the Oregon quarterback prospect’s name pronounced three different ways. If a guy’s going to be a very high draft choice, we should know how to say his name.
Correct: “Marcus Mar-ee-OH-da.”
Incorrect: “Mair-ee-OH-da’’ and “Mair-ee-adda.”
Never stop being a haughty dipshit, Peter. It fits you too well to stop doing dipshit things like handing out pronunciation lessons to your readers.
Mr. Starwood Preferred Member Travel Note of the Week
Why would American Airlines, making the gate announcement for the JFK-to-Boston flight at 7:30 a.m. Saturday, announce, “This flight is completely full,” in an attempt to get excess bags checked?
They just want to appear in MMQB this week. Much like every other company, American Airlines craves attention, positive or negative, from Peter King.
I chose my seat online Friday night—29D, in an otherwise open row—and there were plenty of seats all over the plane. So we boarded, and it was barren, maybe one-third full. The last six rows contained 36 seats (six rows, six seats per row, three on either side of the aisle) and had a total of five people in them. I mean, why lie?
Just to annoy you, Peter. That's the only reason they do this.
With the Bucs' OC situation last year, Josh McCown was practically a player-coach. He could be an enormous help for Manziel if JM embraces.
— Mike Garafolo (@MikeGarafolo) February 27, 2015
The Fox Sports writer is absolutely right: McCown had to be much more than a quarterback last year in Tampa Bay because of the season-long illness to former Bucs coordinator Jeff Tedford.
At least McCown did something last year in Tampa Bay. He certainly didn't do a great job of playing quarterback.
That’s just the way McCown is wired anyway—he’s a helper.
Josh Freeman was paid $2 million by the Vikings two seasons ago to be inactive during most of the games that he was a member of their organization and Peter King ripped on Freeman nearly every week in MMQB. Josh McCown earned $4.75 million to have a 56.3% completion rate, throw 11 TD's, 14 interceptions, and post a rating of 70.5 over 11 games, yet he is credited by Peter for being a "helper" in Tampa Bay last season. Funny how Peter's criticism for quarterbacks is rarely consistent. Peter didn't say anything really in MMQB this past season regarding Matt Schaub stealing money from the Raiders, but he goes out of his way to praise McCown for making $4.75 million and playing poorly because he's a "helper." Yet, Josh Freeman is still the scum of the world for making $2 million and only starting one game for the Vikings during the 2013 season.
Ten Things I Think I Think
1. I think these transactions caught my eye in the past week:
Peter isn't sure, but he thinks these transactions caught his eye. It's hard to say, because Peter's eye is always wandering around, trying to stare at someone while in public or looking for precociousness in everyday life.
a. Titans tackle Michael Roos retired. Some applause, please, for Roos, one of the underrated left tackles of his day.
(No one applauds because this is a sports column and it doesn't make sense to start applauding while reading MMQB)
c. Atlanta cut Steven Jackson and Harry Douglas. Jackson turns 32 in July; understood. I’d be interested in the 30-year-old Douglas (85 catches in 2013) if I were confident he’d stay healthy.
Douglas has only played in less than 15 games once in his career, which was last season. He's played in every game four of the six seasons he has been in the NFL.
d. Green Bay cut linebacker A.J. Hawk, who is a pro’s pro.
Translation through all of this hyperbole: Peter likes A.J. Hawk as a person so he calls him a "pro's pro." I think calling a player a "pro's pro" is just something sportswriters write when they want to write something positive about a person but can't think of anything specific.
2. I think there are some teams that have a load of cap room entering free agency, but the one that struck me is Tennessee, with $47 million. This is a vital off-season for the Titans, who have averaged five wins a season in the past three years. If I’m GM Ruston Webster, I’m starting by re-signing free-agent pass-rusher Derrick Morgan, an underrated presence in the front seven.
He was the #16 overall pick in the 2010 draft and has never had more than 6.5 sacks in a season. I don't know how he can be underrated. He's a decent pass-rusher, but he's never really been great. I'm confused as to why Peter thinks Morgan is underrated.
3. I think I’m glad there wasn’t the kind of overreaction I’d expected to Michael Sam signing to appear on “Dancing With The Stars.” I don’t think there should be any negative reaction, period. One: A man has to make some sort of living. If no team is going to sign Sam to play football, and he wants to continue to work out and chase his dream of being an NFL player, he’s got to find some way to support himself financially so the dream can continue to be chased.
And of course, like many 20-somethings who are out there chasing their dream of being an athlete or an actor/actress, he's forced to do some dancing in his spare time to help support himself. Sam is just doing it to make ends meet and being a dancer doesn't define who he is as a person.
4. I think Peyton Manning and the Broncos are likely to agree to a restructured contract soon—a redone deal that will make neither side happy.
If no one is happy then it's the perfect compromise, right? That's how a good negotiation followed by a compromise works. Both sides feel like they got fucked.
Why? If I were Manning, I’d hardly think I deserve a pay adjustment, after throwing more touchdown passes than anyone else in football over the past three years.
Peter has kept driving this point home that Manning shouldn't think he deserves a pay adjustment based on his performance, while missing the point that Manning may need to take a pay adjustment in order to keep the offensive weapons he loves having around him. If Manning doesn't like change and wants continuity then he may need to cough up a few dollars in order to help this continuity happen. It's life and the economics of it all.
And the Broncos would want it to be less than it’ll end up being, most likely. But there’s little doubt it’s going to get done.
Manning has no obligation to take less money, but he can't privately bitch about the lack of continuity around the team's offense and still make the amount of money that he is due to make for the 2015 season. The Broncos can't blow their salary situation out of the water over the next 3-5 years just to appease Manning for however many more seasons he wants to continue playing.
5. I think, as the competition committee convenes in Florida this week for its annual week of fact-finding and investigating rules adjustments, I forecast an uphill fight for the two issues of most public interest: defining what is a catch, and making every play replay-reviewable...As to making every play reviewable, remember Fisher’s words to me: “So if someone throws a touchdown pass against us to win the game, I’m going to throw the challenge flag. Somebody [committed a holding penalty] out there. Somebody did something. You start there and then go … I mean, I don’t know. Replay was designed to overturn obvious errors. It was never designed to include penalties.” Doesn’t sound like the committee is inclined to consider that very seriously.
This has to be among the stupidest reasoning that can be used to not make every play reviewable. Each coach only gets two challenges (or a third if they win the first two challenges), yet Fisher shows a complete lack of understanding by acting like 15 challenge flags will be thrown per game if all plays are reviewable. Peter should have called Fisher on the use of this reasoning. The fact the committee isn't taking the idea to make every play reviewable seriously can't have anything to do with the stupid reasoning that Fisher uses here. He's acting like there isn't a limit on how many calls can be challenged because he doesn't like the idea to make all plays reviewable.
8. I think Josh McCown is certainly not the long-term answer at quarterback in Cleveland, but I think he provides a bridge that’s different than what Brian Hoyer would provide.
McCown was a bridge that cost $4.75 million last year, but Peter won't criticize McCown in the same way he criticized Josh Freeman because of what a great little "helper" McCown is.
With McCown, he can fill almost any role. He can start for a while.
He can fill every role, but perhaps not fill every role successfully. There is a difference.
He can back up Johnny Manziel. He can start while tutoring Manziel. He can back up while tutoring Manziel. He can be a third quarterback if the Browns draft their quarterback of the future. Basically, McCown allows the Browns to keep their options open on draft day, and he buys them time if they don’t draft a quarterback to see if Manziel is a legitimate option to start this year.
Because teams usually spend $5.25 million on their third string quarterback. Again, I could be wrong in underestimating what a great little "helper" McCown is, but this is an awful lot of positivity coming from Peter for a 35 year old quarterback who failed miserably as the starter for the Buccaneers last year.
9. I think Brett Favre’s Packer Hall of Fame induction ceremony should be held in Lambeau Field, not jammed into the Lambeau atrium.
I think I never want to hear the name "Brett Favre" again or else I would want to jam something into my Lambeau atrium.
10. I think these are my non-football thoughts of the week:
c. Spring training is a week old, and I’m already A-Rodded out—for the season.
And it's only going to get worse before it gets better.
g. Maybe Rajon Rondo is more trouble than he’s worth.
h. Rajon Rondo is more trouble than he’s worth.
Peter doesn't watch a lot of NBA games, but he thinks that Rajon Rondo is a real problem child. Of course, Peter doesn't think that maybe Rondo has always been this way and been worth the trouble when he was in Boston, but that doesn't matter because he only pays attention to whatever current event just happened when drawing his conclusions.
i. Three questions.
j. Why is court-storming allowed?
One question: Why are there questions under "j," "k," and "l" instead of these questions being a part of "i"?
l. Why is this the first year since its inception that I cannot name one player in the Big East?
Because for one reason or another you don't watch a lot of college basketball. Simply because Peter doesn't pay much attention to a sport doesn't speak to the relevance of that sport (or conference, as the case may be here) as a whole.
p. Beernerdness: It’d been a while since I had a Flower Power IPA (Ithaca Brewing Company), but I will not be such a stranger anymore. Had one the other night, and it’s one of the best IPAs in the country.
It's the Meryl Streep of beers. Always good and you can never have too much of it.
r. Speaking of worker bees, Adnan Virk is ESPN’s Cesar Tovar. Virk is everywhere, and he’s good at everything.
s. You’ll have to look up Cesar Tovar, but let this be the start of your MMQB homework assignment.
Hey, how about not being a haughy dipshit and just provide the information rather than condescendingly request your readers go search out the information? You know, do the same thing you expect others to do for you when you aren't aware of something.
u. The hearts of so many in the journalism community (and in the feeling world at large) go out to the Ivan Maisel family, as a desperate search for college son Max, missing since last Sunday near Rochester, N.Y., continues. Certainly nothing anyone can say or do can be of much solace at this point. But Ivan (a former SI colleague who covers college football for ESPN), you should know how many people deeply feel for you and wish you and your family all the best in this awful time.
Below is the Tweet I referenced earlier. Peter did his best to empathize and came off as tone deaf as possible in doing so.
I do believe Peter's heart was in the right place, but pointing out he lost his child for three minutes in a grocery store as an example of how losing your child for over a week must feel and the child is presumed dead...that's just pretty typical of Peter. He seems to live in his own world at times and this Tweet was one of those times.
The Adieu Haiku
Suh’s franchise-tag cost:
One year, $27 mill.
Don’t dare moan if tagged.
On the Haiku Pointlessness Scale of 1-10 this is probably only a 4. At least it provides information, but every week I wonder why the Adieu Haiku is still a part of MMQB.