21 comments How About A Partial Peter King Friday?

The answer to the question posed in the title should be, "hell yes," otherwise if it is not scroll down and I have included other topics in this diverse post for today so it's not just Peter King-centric for those that get tired of discussing/criticizing him.

I am still excited J.S. posted something yesterday so I thought I would let him have the floor for the day. He also posted what I will call the "JaMarcus Russell challenge" below and if I had th skills I would be the first one to post something mocking JaMarcus Russell. If anyone has the skills and the ability, give it a try. You will probably get 100,000 hits from bitter, angry Raiders fans before the end of the week.

Everyone don't forget to update your College Football Pick 'Em and Yahoo Fantasy Football teams for this weekend. My slow college football comeback has begun.

Also, we will be featuring useless sports commentary and bad journalism on Twitter, so if you are on it and care to follow just do so. The address is on the side of this page. I have decided to give it a try and see how it works. I may look back in two months and say, "Remember when I was on Twitter?" Regardless I thought I would at least give the medium a shot. The biggest problem is keeping my thoughts to less than 140 characters.

Let's start off with Peter's Tuesday mailbag for this week.

With 28 of the 32 NFL teams finished with a quarter of their seasons, let's hand out some early hardware. Of course, things can change pretty quickly in this league.

As was mentioned in the Saturday post about Bill Simmons, guessing how anything is going to end up at this point in the season is pretty pointless. This same principle also generally goes for mock drafts and any type of preseason predictions in any sport...but it still doesn't stop sportswriters from making these predictions.

Last year, Trent Edwards was my NFL MVP through Week 4, and Jim Zorn the coach.

What is Peter's minor obsession with Trent Edwards? He had previously listed him as an "up and coming quarterback" on several occasions, believes he is in the same class as Joe Flacco and Matt Ryan and he named him NFL MVP through 4 weeks last year even though ranked 12th in the NFL in TD passes, 10th in passing yards, and 10th in passer rating efficiency, so he wasn't even one of the best quarterbacks in the league, much less the MVP. Peter then compared him to Tom Brady. Read it if you don't believe me.

I actually can't argue with too many of Peter's selections "quarter of the NFL season" selections, partially because they aren't that bad and also because it is hard to argue when 75% of the games haven't even been played yet. It's like voting for the Academy Awards after only watching 25% of a movie and then trying to rank it among the other movies you have only watched 25% of.

Most Valuable Player
1. Peyton Manning, QB, Colts.
2. Drew Brees, QB, Saints.
3. Adrian Peterson, RB, Vikings.

Offensive Player Of The Year
1. Peyton Manning, QB, Colts.
2. Joe Flacco, QB, Ravens.
3. Drew Brees, QB, New Orleans.

I would love to know how Adrian Peterson is third in the MVP race but isn't in the Top 3 for the Offensive Player of the Year race? Does Adrian Peterson play defense or special teams exceptionally well (or at all) and I am not aware of it?

Here's a little tip to amateur list makers out there: If you are going to make a list for MVP that includes three offensive players, generally it makes sense to have all three offensive players be in the same order for Offensive Player of the Year as well. The same thing goes for defense. If you have a defensive guy in the Top 3 for the MVP, that player had better be #1 for the Defensive Player of the Year as well.

Adrian Peterson will be back in contention before the end of the year, but the Monday-nighter knocked a little of the shine off his star.

Much like Peter didn't feel comfortable on the Monday after Week 1 to include an MVP list without Philip Rivers and Tom Brady, and felt the need to make a note saying they would eventually be on the list, he does the same here with Adrian Peterson. It's good to see Peter either knows in advance how Peterson is going to perform for the rest of the year or has already made up his mind he wants Peterson to be in his MVP race.

Assistant Coach Of The Year

3. Dante Scarnecchia, offensive line, Patriots.

You may know what I want to say here for why Peter made this choice...Ok Patriots fans, don't kill me for being a hater. First, I didn't know there was an actual Assistant Coach of the Year Award, so I am pretty sure this is something Peter made up, and second, how is Scarnecchia doing any better job this year than he has done any other year? The Patriots usually have a good offensive line, I just don't think he's doing any better of a job this year than he has done any other year. Also, I am sure Scarnecchia is a great teacher but he also has Tom Brady standing behind his offensive line. It is no coincidence the teams that have the lowest sack totals in the NFL have Peyton Manning, Matt Ryan, Eli Manning, and Drew Brees as their quarterbacks. Of course I have no better suggestions for third in the Assistant Coach of the Year race but I thought I would let it be known what I think about Peter's #3 ranked guy.

Free Agent Of The Year
1. Darren Sharper, FS, Saints.
2. Brett Favre, QB, Minnesota.
3. Correll Buckhalter, RB, Broncos.

You didn't think we could go an entire mailbag without mentioning his name do you? I am tired of debating Favre, so I won't do that...but was he really a free agent? Was he really free to sign with any team in the NFL? I am pretty sure he was never on the free agent market and I am also pretty sure only one team actually was able to bid for his services. So on a technicality I say he gets kicked off this list and possibly Brian Dawkins or someone else makes the list.

Did you know Jared Allen played hurt last night?

Funny, he wasn't on the injury report. Of course unless the injury report had the words "Brett Favre" on it, no one probably paid attention anyway.

Sick, actually.

Sick isn't hurt Peter. If so, I would be at work "hurt" today.

(By the way, someone blew their breath in my face yesterday and then announced to me she had the flu...it was awesome and such a great feeling)

As I talked to a coughing-and-congested Allen by his locker after the Vikings' 30-23 win over the Packers, one of the Minnesota trainers passed him a pill envelope, with, I presume, a couple of decongestant tablets.

Brett Favre probably had stolen the envelope earlier in the night to make sure there were no Vicodin tablets contained in it.

Is Jared Allen allowed to take Ny-Quil or would it set him off on an alcoholic binge? Did anyone get this joke at all?

From Anthony of Carlsbad, Calif.: "I, frankly, agree with Rodney Harrison's statement about Tom Brady being soft. Calling the roughing penalties was bad enough, but when Brady (while standing, mind you) turns to the ref and demands the call, gets an approving nod and a flag from the ref, then pumps his fist over it, well that just looks like a coddled brat who cried to mommy and got his way.''

Dammit Anthony, that was a joke that Rodney Harrison was playing on the air to amuse Tom Brady! God, can't analysts make inside jokes to their friends on-air without the public believing what he/she is saying is the truth? It's not like Harrison's job at NBC is to disseminate information about football using his opinion. If that were indeed his job, then yes I could understand why everyone would be confused by him disseminating his opinion on this matter, but he's there to make sarcastic inside jokes. They pay him for this. (End sarcasm)

Tom Brady isn't soft, he just lobbied for the call and got it. After last year's season getting cancelled due to his injury, we can't have Brady miss any more games.

From John Kaleto of San Diego: "What do you think will be the Broncos' record in four weeks, after they play New England, San Diego, Baltimore, and Pittsburgh?''

PK: Six wins, two losses. Don't ask me to predict which ones they'll win and which ones they'll lose.

Thanks Peter. Glad you think you know the Broncos record but you can't seem to tell us who you think they will beat. Very helpful.

-I saw this interview posted on Monday and it was linked in the comments by Dan. I don't know how many of you have seen this already but Peter King was interviewed by the Wall Street Journal and it was pretty typical Peter. Here are high(low)lights of the interview:

(How Peter felt when his editor devoted an editor's letter to him)

PK: I think Terry's view is: I want everyone to know we have this guy, we love him, we put him out on the front lines, we hope people appreciate him as much we do. It was ridiculously humbling. I could have used a little less praise.

It sure doesn't sound like you could have used a little less praise. If that was a humbling thing for you perhaps there should be more things done to humble you...because it sounds like you appreciate yourself as much as SI appreciates you.

(On whether he offered to give money back to save jobs at SI)

It's something I did but I really don't want to talk about it.

That is very nice of Peter. He sounds like he doesn't want to discuss salary or how much he makes.

But I will say this: I make a ridiculous amount of money.

How ridiculously humble of you to say this.

I'm not saying I'm not worth it.

Oh, I am. You probably aren't worth it, whatever this magical, ridiculous number may be. It leads you to write things such as "What recession?" when you see people outside enjoying a beautiful day in a park, so yes however much money you make, whatever that ridiculous amount that has made you lose some perspective is, it's not worth it.

(On his favorite story)

Probably spending a week inside the Green Bay Packers in 1995.

I wonder who is favorite player to cover on that team was?

It was also fun watching how Brett Favre lived his life. He'd go home and help his daughter with her homework, he'd watch the Discovery channel, the Golf channel, the History channel.

Sounds suspiciously like the same life every other parent with cable television has. I don't think Peter would find other people's lives as "fun" though.

I guess at this same period Brett was skipping off to the bathroom to pop some Vicodin. Is that two Brett Favre Vicodin addiction mentions in one post? I am such an asshole...

(His favorite interview)

I would say the most interesting people and players I've interviewed probably would be Favre, Peyton Manning and Bill Belichick.

If given the chance, I probably could have chosen these three names without seeing the answers.
(Least Favorite interview)

I don't speak to T.O. anymore.

Is it because he is black?

I just think that life's too short to talk to nine-year-olds too often.

Take that all the nine-year-olds in the world! Peter King doesn't want to talk to you! Go back to your Hannah Montana and High School Musical fads, Peter wants nothing to do with you. If are a 9 year old child, DO NOT approach Peter on the streets of Boston, amid the massive amounts of dogs, and ask for an autograph or conversation. He will smite you and then walk away with his slightly bitter tasting new instant coffee selection from Starbucks.

(If he is ever worried he gets too close to an athlete)

There have been a couple of times. Sometimes you'll be at like one of these golf tournaments, and sometimes there will be the opportunity to get a little bit closer and stay at some of these guys' houses, things that are probably a little bit too much.

I understand how it is. You are at a golf tournament and have a couple of beers in you, a guy invites you back to his house, you know you should say no...but he is really pleading with you so you want to go, but know you shouldn't because you will wake up the next day hating yourself...what to do?

Peter's lone lesson he learned in his 20 years of covering sports is that sleepovers with athletes are not a good idea. Knowledge like this is why Peter is humbled to make ridiculous amounts of money he knows he is worth.

-Braylon Edwards got traded to the New York Jets. I would be lying if I said I knew if this would work out or not for either side. This does tell me Eric Mangini feels confident he won't get fired after this season because you don't make your team worse and trade for draft picks if you are trying to save your job.

In the deal, first reported by ESPN NFL Insider Adam Schefter, the Jets sent key special-teams player Jason Trusnik, wide receiver Chansi Stuckey and a pair of draft picks to Cleveland.

I sort of liked Chansi Stuckey, but I understand he isn't a #1 receiver type that the Jets need so he had to go. The draft picks are reportedly a third round pick that can turn into a second depending on how many balls Edwards catches and a fifth round pick.

My problem with this trade lies in the reasoning that is given for why Edwards didn't play well in Cleveland, other than the fact he rarely had a QB that could get him the ball. The reasoning is that he didn't play well because he wasn't happy in Cleveland, so he sort of shut it all down because of that. What's going to prevent him from shutting it down in New York if he doesn't like how the fans react when he drops a pass or doesn't get the ball enough? It's going to be a much tougher environment in New York than Cleveland when Edwards gets the dropsies.

It's true he has a year left on his deal, but that brings up a whole other set of problems I have with the trade. Edwards is going to want more money than his production has actually shown he is worth, so if he starts to produce this year is it a contract drive or the sign he is willing and able to be a top flight receiver for the Jets? Is he going to pout if he doesn't get a new contract? Remember, he held out of Browns camp before his rookie year, so this drama that has encompassed his unhappiness in Cleveland isn't a one time pout-fest for him. Obviously the Jets can't NOT re-sign Edwards because they traded a couple of draft picks for him and it just wouldn't seem to make sense to let him go after 12 games if the Jets gave up picks to get him.

I don't think it was a bad trade for the Jets, I guess any time a "diva" type wide receiver gets traded or changes teams I always wonder how long that player is going to stay happy at his new location.

-Rick Reilly has written a "column" about athlete's bodies in conjunction with ESPN the Magazine's release of the "Body Issue," which is a bad take-off of the swimsuit issue.

Reilly is an easy target because he doesn't seem to do a whole hell of a lot but write a 900 word column every week and gets paid an enormous amount of money to do this. He is an easy target but he is also a target that completely deserves any derision that comes his way. Read this week's "column" he has posted and try to convince me anyone with access to a locker room couldn't write a similar, and probably better, "column" than Reilly did. He's just not a good journalist, there's no denying that. He appeals to the lowest common denominator of sports fans when he is at his worst. His "columns" feel mailed in at times and he even has plagerized himself and others with the column ideas. He's not good.

On another note, why is ESPN so egotistical? I ask this because Bill Simmons recently got into a bitch-fight with Mike Francesca over whether the new "30 for 30" was similar to the HBO Sports documentaries. Francesca ripped Simmons a new one and Simmons bounced back saying HBO docs focus too much on older events, never mind the first three "30 for 30" docs are about a 20 year old hockey trade, the Colts moving to Baltimore, and a Larry Holmes boxing match. You can't really do a documentary on any subject and make it interesting if the topic is not slightly older.

Anyway, I digress. Simmons got invited on Francesca's show to settle this discussion and Simmons can't appear on the show because ESPN won't allow their talent to on networks/radio shows without permission. Why is ESPN so egotistical in this fashion? They have no problem "borrowing" print journalists like Stephen A. Smith, Woody Paige, Jay Mariotti, etc to do ESPN shows because ESPN is SO great and wonderful it actually helps the newspaper sell more newspapers (I am sure that is the reasoning from ESPN's point of view)....but they won't let anyone under their employ go on a different radio show for fear that ESPN employee will say something ESPN and it's sponsors don't agree with. I am not saying ESPN is the only perpetrator among sports networks in doing things like this, but they are certainly the biggest and the most obvious perpetrator. Working for ESPN seems like it is working under a dictatorship. They want their analysts/columnists to discuss the issues they want discussed, ignore the issues they want ignored, and to say the things they want to be said.

I don't think ESPN will start crumbling overnight but after Bill Simmons leaves in 2010, what does it's Page 2 staff look like? Remember what is used to look like? If I didn't like or agree with the previous Page 2 columnists at least I knew they wrote fairly well. Now compare what they have now. There are football non-experts (which is some of his appeal) like Gregg Easterbrook, pseudo-race baiters (what I mean by that is they make their money off talking about race a lot...it's true, denying has no effect on my thought this is true) like Scoop Jackson and JemeHill and whatever the hell Jeff MacGregor does, it doesn't seem to be much about sports. They have the television portion down pat, everyone will still tune in because they are really still the only game in town...and they keep hiring their competitors best guys which always helps with keeping the competition away.

I guess at the end of all my rambling I am just saying they should allow their employees to go on different radio shows without permission. I know they want to keep the integrity of the ESPN brand and all of that but ESPN has done well partially because newspapers weren't stingy with their talent and allowed their top columnists to branch out, so I don't see why ESPN has to be stingy and be so strict. Basically I just want to see Simmons-Francesca have an on-air fight. That's all I ask.

-I briefly made my predictions on the MLB Playoffs a couple days ago, so I thought I would make 1 more comments today.

Minnesota v. New York Yankees- The Twins are overmatched in this series. I think the one thing that could keep them in the series is if AJ Burnett bombs in Game 2. I don't think it was a very smart move to start Burnett over Pettitte. It sounds counterintuitive to want 2 LH's to start out the series when you have a chance to go LH, RH, LH, but you never actually know what you are going to get from Burnett. Pettitte isn't the pitcher that Burnett is but at least you sort of know what you are going to get from him. The Yankees are going to score runs. My bottom line is that I don't trust AJ Burnett. Also, I called both double plays Mark Teixeira hit into last night (well the second one wasn't a double play because Cuddyer got pulled off first base, but it would have been one). He can be so predictable at times.

I didn't get what Joe Girardi did with his bullpen last night either. He pulled Sabathia after a 6 2/3 innings, let Hughes finish the inning and start the 8th inning. Then Hughes had runners on 1st and 2nd so they brought in Phil Coke, but then Coke pitched to a hitter (who he got out) and Girardi brought in Joba Chamberlain. Finally in the 9th inning he let Rivera finish the game out. I know the goals is to make sure guys can appearances to stay sharp but this just seemed like overkill to me.

The only other thought I really have is that so far my predictions have been almost completely incorrect for the MLB Playoffs. I still want to say the Cardinals are going to come back and win the series against the Dodgers though I believe less and less of it with every Matt Holliday dropped fly ball. Never forget I am an idiot, unless I am right, in which case i am a genius.

Bill Simmons has a mailbag up AND Kent has tipped me off to a wide receiver myth column that has been posted. One day left for when I usually post and there are two articles worthy of dissection. These are good problems to have.