10 comments MMQB Review: Can We Lock Out the Lockout Talk? Edition

I wanted to remind everyone if you want to help Respect Jeters Gangster give donations to the Childrens Health Fund, then just follow the link and donate. You will be entered into a raffle for tickets to an August 7th game between the Red Sox and Yankees by making a donation. Just make sure you let it be known that you were directed to the website by RJG. That way you are entered in the raffle. It's a good cause, so give if you can.

Last week Peter King told us all about how Mike Martz thinks the 2010 Chicago Bears are similar to the 1999 Rams, outside of the four or five Hall of Fame offensive players the Rams had on that team of course, and he also stood by his stance that he was done predicting what Brett Favre would do in regard to retiring or not retiring this upcoming year...by making another prediction on whether he thought Brett Favre would retire or not. This week he talks a bit about the potential lockout, since we aren't going to hear enough about this over the next year, and tells us a little bit about his summer schedule, which may include a visit to Fenway Park to see the Red Sox play, followed by Peter saying something incredibly outrageous or obvious about the game of baseball or its players (like Derek Jeter is the greatest player of his lifetime).

I've been thinking there's a strong likelihood the 2011 NFL season will be interrupted because the players and owners won't reach agreement on a new collective bargaining agreement.

I've been thinking that a lockout is an absolutely terrible idea for the NFL. Considering Peter King can be wrong about so many things, I am hoping he is wrong about this one as well. The odds are on my side on this one.

But two things happened in the past week that made me feel like there might not be a job action.

If Brett Favre agreed to not retire if there was football in 2011 and the NFL and the Player's Union finally realized a lockout was a bad idea?

One: Commissioner Roger Goodell, who could have gotten the modified overtime proposal for the 2010 regular season passed by the owners last Tuesday at the league meeting in Dallas, chose not to call for a vote. The union leadership opposes the new overtime policy. It has the potential to add plays to the season; more plays, more risk of injury. The players may not see this as an olive branch. I do.

I think Peter is wrong. I don't think this is an olive branch, but maybe a realization on the part of Goodell that a fight over the new overtime rule in the playoffs is a fight worth having because (a) the new overtime rule idea is pretty pointless to only enforce in the playoffs and (b) he wants to piss the union off with his preferred big change of adding to more games to the NFL schedule and making each season an 18 game season instead of the current 16 game season. It doesn't make sense for Goodell to piss the union off with a small issue like overtime rules in the playoffs, when he instead wants to push through the 18 game schedule...and irritate the union with that.

So Goodell isn't probably extending an olive branch, but realizing if he is going to fight a battle the union opposes, it may as well be a battle he really, really finds worth fighting. The 18 game schedule is something he and the owners probably really want, while the overtime isn't as high on the list of changes they really, really care about. That's just my opinion, but I don't think Goodell is really concerned with getting along with the union right now, he is probably less concerned with the overtime issue at the expense of failing to gain more money for the owners by extending the season two more games.

I may be reaching, but Goodell's four-year tenure has been marked by the ability to make tough calls and have all sides of a dispute walk away not happy with the decision necessarily, but at least understanding why the decision was made.

Or in the case of most of the decisions Goodell has made, the person who was not happy with the decision had no other option but to just quietly accept the decision or the punishment because of the position the Goodell is in as commissioner. Goodell is the Commissioner of the NFL, with almost absolute authority, so questioning his decisions does no long-term good. Not that Goodell has made bad decisions, but what is even the point of Ben Roethlisberger, the Patriots (for Spygate) and Mike Vick fighting the decision Roger Goodell has made? Their silence doesn't mean they understand the decision, it just means they aren't going to lessen the punishment by publicly complaining.

Spygate. The revised, and much tougher, Personal Conduct Policy.

The revised and much tougher (compared to the Tagliabue Era) Personal Conduct Policy is already starting to show some cracks in it (at least in my mind) on how a player can be suspended for merely being accused of a crime. Not that a guy like Ben Roethlisberger didn't deserve to be suspended, but the NFL is at a point now where the mere accusation of two separate crimes could lead to a suspension. Who knows if this situation will happen again, but the fact remains Roger Goodell can now suspend players for merely being accused of a crime. There doesn't have to be guilt, just the appearance of guilt. I am not questioning this, just remarking on it and how it could play out in the future.

Again, not that this isn't just. I just believe the Personal Conduct Policy has started to show some cracks in reference to the application of it in situations where a player hasn't been convicted of a crime. The Mike Vick, Roethlisberger case, Stallworth, and Pacman Jones case were easy to fit under the Personal Conduct Policy, but I have a feeling the Personal Conduct Policy may end up having a larger reach than originally expected in the near future. Let's give it more time to judge whether the policy is just or not. It's worked so far, but that doesn't mean it will always work.

And if you saw the collegial respect Goodell and Patriots owners Bob Kraft showed each other when the Pats' owner introduced Goodell for the commencement here, you'd see the heavy-handed sanction for Spygate is a distant memory in Kraft's mind. He's one of Goodell's staunchest allies.

Well yes, they are staunch allies now. The union and the owners are about to go head-to-head over a new labor deal. The owners and the commissioner are staying on the same page and showing unity right now. They are allies by necessity because the one thing they value the most, money, is at stake for them. Not that Bob Kraft hates Roger Goodell or anything, but it is easier to be friends and let old grudges go, with someone you know is completely on your side in a battle over millions of dollars.

What should every commencement speaker do at this time of year? Simple: Tell kids how to get jobs. Goodell's advice began when he graduated from Washington & Jefferson College just outside of Pittsburgh in 1981 and wanted to work in football. Anything in football.

It is always exciting to hear someone who has good job security and has never been through a difficult job market like we have now in the United States tell others how to find a job. No offense to Roger Goodell, but I am pretty sure the son of an ex-United States Senator didn't have to work incredibly hard to find a job after college. Hell, he even basically picked the exact field he wanted to work in for the rest of his life, which 70% of graduates probably can't do. He got a gig with the NFL, which is where he wanted to work, right out of college. It may take other graduates years to get where they want to be professionally, no matter how many times they write letters or annoy the company they want to hire them.

So kudos to Roger Goodell for his hard work, but I don't know if I wanted to get a job in the NFL if I would get a job with the NFL or receive welfare benefits first no matter how many emails I wrote.

"I wrote more than 40 letters to the NFL,'' he said. "Everybody. The results: a big pile of rejections. Some plan, huh? But I was determined and persistent and kept writing. Finally, there was a polite but somewhat dismissive reply from a weary executive at the NFL to, quote, 'Stop by if you're in the area.' So I told him, 'I'm in the area.' ''

"I got in my car,'' Goodell said, "and drove all night from Pittsburgh to New York, and I was on his doorstep the next morning. Six months later, 12 or 13 more letters later, they offered me a three-month internship. So it doesn't matter how you get in that door. Just get in that door.

Again, not to be jaded, but I am sure being the son of an ex-United States Senator had a little something to do with him eventually being let in the door for an internship. Goodell did work hard to get in the door, but I have a feeling it was already slightly ajar for him.

"It is definitely frustrating because I don't know how much time Jim has spent in California. I love the state of California. Obviously, I am pretty biased towards where I grew up in, but it is a little bit naive that he makes comments like that. It is frustrating because I feel like there are a ton of great quarterbacks out there that have played in the league for an extended amount of time. He unfortunately said some things that aren't always the best things to say but I guess that is kind of the way that he is."

-- Buffalo quarterback Trent Edwards, on Hall of Fame Bills quarterback Jim Kelly's statement that Buffalo needs a new quarterback, and that that quarterback shouldn't be from California, in an interview with XX Sports Radio in San Diego, via sportsradiointerviews.com.

I think the best part about this mini-argument between Kelly and Edwards is they are debating whether the Bills should have a quarterback from California or not...and that is the reason the Bills need a new quarterback, because Trent Edwards is from California? How about we leave the state of California out of this and say the Bills need a quarterback who has proven himself to be competent? Edwards didn't have a terrible year in 2008, so it is possible he is the guy. How about Jim Kelly also notices the Bills need things other than just a new quarterback (just not a running back. They are good there)? There are so many issues regarding why the Bills are struggling that should be discussed here, that has nothing to do with where a quarterback should be from.

Jim Kelly was working with a great offensive line, Thurman Thomas at running back and Andre Reed, James Lofton, and Don Beebe at wide receiver. Frank Reich was effective in the Bills system too, so it is not like Kelly made the early 90's Bills offense. Nothing against Kelly, but there aren't many players of that caliber on this 2010 Bills team, so while Edwards may not be great, the guys around him aren't great either.

Bob Papa and I will be discussing the Pro Football Hall of Fame (snubs, prospects for the 2011 Class, and anything else that comes to mind) this morning from 8 to 11 on Sirius NFL Radio Channel 124 and I'm sure the vexing wide receiver subject will come up early and often. Six receivers have caught 1,000 balls or more, with only one in the Hall of Fame (Three aren't eligible yet.)

I am going to go ahead and say I think "catches" isn't the best way to solely determine if a player should be in the Hall of Fame or not. In college football, the player with the most catches in the country isn't necessarily the best wide receiver in the country and the same goes for the NFL. Different receivers play in different offenses that can inflate/deflate their catches per game. There needs to be more criteria when comparing these players than just catches. Catches and yards should be an important part of the discussion though.

In the next five years, five or six more could swell the ranks of 1,000-catch wideouts. So which ones do the 44 selectors put in? As one of the 44, I think the receiver dilemma is the biggest one facing us. The number of candidates is going to be so big that it's going to be difficult to get 80 percent of the voters to agree on any one wideout.

The increase in the amount of passing that has gone on in the NFL over the last few years will also play a major role in the increase of receivers who have 1,000 catches. Here is the list of players Peter King thinks should be in the Hall of Fame based on catches and how many he projects them to have at the end of their career:

Player	Rec.	Projected Rec. (If active)	Hall status
1. Jerry Rice	1,549	N/A	Elected in 2010
2. Marvin Harrison	1,102	N/A	Eligible in 2015
3. Cris Carter	1,101	N/A	Entering 4th year of eligibility
4. Tim Brown	1,094	N/A	Entering 2nd year of eligibility
5. Isaac Bruce	1,024	1,024	Not yet eligible
6. Terrell Owens	1,006	1,080	Not yet eligible
7. Andre Reed	951	N/A	Entering 6th year of eligibility
8. Art Monk	940	N/A	Elected in 2008
9. Randy Moss	926	1,100	Not yet eligible
10. Torry Holt	920	970	Not yet eligible
11. Hines Ward	895	1,075	Not yet eligible
12. Derrick Mason	863	950	Not yet eligible
13. Reggie Wayne	676	1,050	Not yet eligible
14. Andre Johnson	587	1,000	Not yet eligible
15. Larry Fitzgerald	523	950	Not yet eligible

Obviously this will be an issue in the future for the Hall of Fame committee, but this shows why catches shouldn't be considered as the sole criteria for Hall of Fame entry. Hines Ward and Derrick Mason do not deserve to be in the Hall of Fame. If Hines Ward makes it, then it will only be for the same reason Lynn Swann made it, and that is because his teams were good and he played in a large East Coast market. Steve Smith (Panthers) is a better receiver than both of these players and he isn't even on this list because he only has 500+ catches and is 30 years old. Does that mean he is a lesser wide receiver than Mason or Ward? No, it doesn't. He is clearly superior to both of them. I think the voting for the Hall of Fame needs to be based on more than just catches.

And numbers will be ridiculous. Lynn Swann's a Hall of Famer; he caught 336 balls in his career. Larry Fitzgerald's similarly acrobatic, only 27, and already has 187 more catches than Swann.

We could take Lynn Swann out of the Hall of Fame and I wouldn't be sad about it. He was an athletic receiver who played on great teams, but he isn't one of the best receivers of all-time.

I'll be filing a Monday Morning Quarterback column primarily on football next Monday, and again on June 28, upon my return. On June 14 and 21, we'll feature replacement MMQB columnists, a practice we started last year (Sean Payton and Trent Green, among others), and that will continue while I'm on vacation July 5, 12 and 19.

Ugh. Replacement MMQB columnists. It depends on who the replacements are before I decide to cover them or not. I want to, but last year's replacements weren't that exciting if I remember correctly. Though if Sean Payton writes one while he is on Vicodin then that will be much more exciting than a normal MMQB.

My last mailbag column until late July will be tomorrow.

NOOOOOO!! But where will I get to read about Peter getting an attitude with his readers when they ask him a question he doesn't like?

The good news?

My job over there is going to be a mix of covering the U.S. team and writing mini-MMQB columns after the three games in the first round of the tournament, and then covering some other games and stories of interest.

Yes this is great, there will be mini-MMQBs. Now I just have to remember everything about soccer and learn the dynamics of each World Cup team so I can make fun of Peter for what he says. It's only been 10 years since I paid attention to soccer, I should be able to catch up quickly, right?

1. I think the problem with LenDale White is pretty simple: In order to have a chance to walk into Seattle as a tarnished running back and win a job, he had to do everything perfectly. And he didn't, whether it was because he was on the verge of a four-game suspension to start the season because of failing a test for a banned substance or because he came in thinking he had a job won.

I, for one, am shocked that LenDale White came into the Seahawks training camp and assumed he had already won the job and didn't seem to want to work for it. He always kept himself in such great shape and took care of his body, it is just so shocking to see a guy who has a work ethic like that not make an NFL team.

Miami had the 12th overall pick in the first round and spent lots of time in the film room studying Derrick Morgan, the Georgia Tech edge rusher. But Bill Parcells was determined to get back the second-round pick he lost in the Brandon Marshall trade with Denver, and so passed on Morgan (who might not have been the pick anyway; DeMaryius Thomas was a strong candidate for the choice). The Dolphins, in essence, traded that 12th pick for two starting defensive players -- Jared Odrick, a run-playing defensive end, and Misi, possibly the edge-rusher they've been missing.

(Cheap shot alert) Meanwhile, the Broncos had Brandon Marshall, Tony Scheffler, and Jay Cutler and now have Demaryius Thomas, Tim Tebow, and Richard Quinn to show for it. This of course isn't including the 1st round pick they traded for Alphonso Smith last year and then he didn't get to play much as a rookie. The Broncos did get other players and picks back for those players they traded, I am just not sure they will start this year or have the impact the players they traded will have. I feel bad for Broncos fans.

4. I think, just to be sure you know exactly where I stand, I'm opposed to New Jersey getting the game. For many reasons -- playing Russian Roulette with the quality of play due to weather risks most notably -- but one that no one seems to care about is this: Thousands of people will pay the ridiculous prices people pay for Super Bowls (my guess is scalpers and brokers will be getting $5,000 and more) for unprotected seats at the Meadowlands). How'd you like to settle into your seat for the pregame ceremonies at 5:30 p.m. and be there 'til the trophy's presented at 10:45 ... with the chance of either sleet, snow, bitter winds or 23-degree wind chill, or more than one of the above?

Here is the part I am not sure Peter King understands about this situation. There is a supply and demand that goes into equation. If there is due to be snow, bitter winds, or sleet then some people aren't going to be paying $5,000 for a seat. These people will see the weather forecast a week in advance and I think the price of the tickets will get lowered if there is bad weather. The scalpers can't sell the tickets if no one wants to buy them at the price they are offering. I don't hate the idea of a Super Bowl in New Jersey, simply because I don't give a shit about the people who are at the game and think it would be interesting to see a Super Bowl played in bad weather. Of course it does start a chain reaction where all northern cities with a stadium are going to want to host a Super Bowl.

In 2014 if my favorite team makes it and there is snow or inclement weather, I may change my mind and hate the idea.

7. I think one of the surprises of training camps come August will be the readiness of Brady Quinn. Denver coach Josh McDaniels likes what he sees in Quinn, has tinkered with his drop and delivery (slowing him down, which was vital, since Quinn's drop always looked like someone just pulled a fire alarm), and will let the quarterback drama play out there.

I know I keep bashing on Tebow and I really don't mean to do it as much as I do...but why draft Tebow if you just traded for Brady Quinn? If McDaniels is such a quarterback genius then didn't he think he could help Quinn and there was no need to draft Tebow? Maybe the Broncos are thinking of trading Quinn when he has high value or something and let Tebow take over. I don't know. I think trading for Quinn to backup Orton was a great idea and didn't get why the Broncos threw another first round pick into the mix. Quinn really hasn't had a real shot in the NFL yet (somewhere Browns fans are disagreeing...maybe).

I still think Kyle Orton wins the starting job, but Quinn has a shot to unseat him, and Tim Tebow a very outside shot.

Don't tell that to Woody Paige. He has Tebow down as the starter this year. He has almost said as much in his weekly odes to Tebow that used to be his sports columns.

a. Congrats, Roy Halladay. There haven't been many pitchers better than you over the last 10 years.

Congratulations on your no-hitter Roy Halladay. I would call it a perfect game, but there were three calls in particular I am thinking of where a "ball" call would have resulted in a walk, but the umpire called a clear ball or borderline pitch a "strike." Two of those in particular in a 3 ball count were pretty close to perhaps being a "ball."

I am kidding. That was a great perfect game, though I can't help but think about some of those "strike" calls when I remember the highlights. Of course the umpire had a wide strike zone for both teams, so the Marlins should have adjusted and stopped taking pitches. The way Halladay is pitching he could throw another perfect game this year and there would be no talk from me about the strike zone at that point.

d. Same with the NBA Final. Rooting for a seven-game series there, and the teams seem so even that I bet we get it.

According to Tim Keown it is only an exciting series if it goes seven games.

e. I don't see how I can ever go to a BP gas station again, unless I'm on fumes, for the rest of my life.

That's the way to show them Peter. Tell BP they won't get your $40 every three weeks. They'll be sure to change their ways then. Everything was cool until BP learned they lost Peter King's business.

Actually, I may be overestimating Peter's gas costs since he can pretty much walk anywhere he wants to in Boston.

g. Coffeenerdness: Like your coffee as dark as I do? I recommend Vermont Organic Coffee's Dark Star dark roast. Now that'll wake you up. No bitterness either.

If I drank this coffee at Peter's behest and actually enjoyed it, there would be plenty of bitterness on my part.

One more MMQB until Peter goes to South Africa and does mini-MMQBs. Perhaps these are some things Peter will say when he gets to South Africa:

"These South African people sure don't have much weight on their bones. I wonder why more of them don't try to gain weight?"

"I never knew Apartheid was the terrible malaise on society it truly was until this week."

I'm going to have to study up on soccer.