2 comments Jonny Gomes: Patriotic, Testosterone Filled American Hero; Possibly Not a Very Good Baseball Player Anymore But Why Should That Matter?

I haven't posted an article fawning about a player's grit and hustle on this blog lately. Without David Eckstein around there is a real lack of grit in MLB. It's sad, but no one can replace the grit with which Eckstein played the game. Eckstein was a gateway drug where sportswriters wrote cliche-laden columns about how, sure, Player X isn't actually good at baseball, but he brings intangibles that can't be measured and yet they just found a way to measure them and here's how many intangibles Player X has. Fortunately, David O'Brien is around to talk about Jonny Gomes and the profound impact of leadership and grit he has brought to a Braves team that lacks talent, but apparently needs a shit-ton of non-quantifiable things that can't be measured so don't bother questioning whether the fact he can only hit lefties is worth it. Of course Fredi Gonzalez has played Gomes mostly against right-handed pitchers, but that's a different issue. Here's some fawning over intangibles, which again, can't be measured, but trust David O'Brien, Gomes has a lot of them.

When Braves left fielder Jonny Gomes ran to his position in the middle of the second inning Monday, the Red Sox showed a highlight reel on the center-field video board that featured fist-pumping, muscle-flexing, helmet-flying moments from Gomes’ stint with the Red Sox, whom he helped win the 2013 World Series.

Very inspirational. It makes me want to listen to some Kid Rock and watch all of the "The Marine" films in a row while down Budweiser cans and not giving a fuck if I get some of my tobacco juice on the carpet. 

There was much energy and testosterone evident 

America, FUCK YEAH!

There is just something odd about typing how much testosterone was evident when Gomes takes the field. I can't explain it. It just seems like a sort of weird thing to type out. Gomes is a perfectly serviceable player, don't get me wrong. I'm not sure he merits this type of column.

as Gomes stirred up teammates and fans with one dramatic homer and diving catch after another in that highlight package.

It's a highlight package. Nearly any player can have a highlight package put together and make it look like the player was homering and making diving catches on a nightly basis. I'm not dismissing Gomes' achievements with the Red Sox or anything like that, but his job is to hit the baseball while fielding well for the Braves. He hasn't quite done that. His leadership is important, I'm sure, but not worthy of the hero worship.

So many moments that it was hard to believe he only played for the Red Sox from the start of the 2013 season until last July 31, 2014, when he was shipped to Oakland with Jon Lester in a trade-deadline deal.

Gomes' leadership was so important to the Red Sox they felt the need to share that leadership and patriotism with the A's. Then the A's felt other MLB teams needed the opportunity to share in Gomes' energy and testosterone, so they didn't re-sign him. It's nice these teams all want to share Gomes' great energy with other MLB teams. 

Gomes had that effect on Boston and Red Sox Nation, where his hustle and blue-collar attitude were greatly appreciated, along with his overt patriotism and front-and-center role in helping Boston sports teams and citizens come together –

This is a real sentence that was written. I haven't changed a word. Yes, the phrases:

-"Red Sox Nation" (all caps, of course)
-"hustle and blue-collar attitude"
-"overt patriotism"
-"helping Boston sports teams and citizens come together"

all appeared in one sentence. All this sentence is missing is a reference to "grit" and how intangibles can't be measured, but Gomes' intangibles can be measured and that's how O'Brien knows he has a lot of them.

a team that already had iconic David Ortiz and Dustin Pedroia, but quickly embraced Gomes’ fiery enthusiasm and indefatigable optimism. Along with his right-handed power and flair for dramatic pinch-hit homers.

This doesn't sound like anecdotal evidence. In 2013, Gomes hit two pinch-home runs. One in a 9-2 Red Sox win and one in a 2-1 Red Sox win. He hit zero pinch-hit home runs in the 2013 playoffs. In 2014, Gomes hit two pinch-hit home runs. One in an 8-5 Red Sox loss and one in a 5-4 Red Sox victory. So I'm seeing one dramatic pinch-hit home run while he was with the Red Sox, as one pinch-hit homer happened before the 7th inning. I'm not sure where the plural of it came from like there are limitless amount of dramatic pinch-hit homers Gomes hit, but it sure is fun to exaggerate a little bit when using anecdotal evidence isn't it?

Gomes, 34, hasn’t given the Braves much in the way of offense, batting .209 with three homers in 115 plate appearances, with a .615 OPS that would be a career low.

Ah, but who cares? It's fun to measure Gomes' contributions in terms of his actual hitting contributions until it no longer helps to prove the point of how he helps the team. At that point, just ignore Gomes is only good for hitting lefties at this point in his career and let's talk about intangibles. Those things that can't be measured, but Gomes has a lot of them. David O'Brien knows Gomes has a lot of intangibles that can't be measured because he just knows it. 

But he’s hit .300 (9-for-30) against lefties, had a couple of big pinch-hit homers and made a few diving catches, including a spectacular one in the fourth inning Monday that robbed Pedroia of an extra-base hit and likely prevented a run when Brock Holt followed with a single.

Now I'm confused. David O'Brien states that Gomes had a couple of big pinch-hit homers and as of the day that he wrote this fawning embarrassment of a column Gomes had three home runs on the season. Only one of them came as a pinch-hitter and it took a 5-5 game against the Blue Jays and made it a 6-5 game. Other than that, there are no other pinch-hit homers that he has hit for the Braves. So I'm not arguing semantics, but "a couple" doesn't mean one home run was hit. It means more than one home run was hit. The reason I bring this up is this goes to how O'Brien will exaggerate Gomes' contributions on the field in an effort to make Gomes seem more productive than he really is. If O'Brien will exaggerate what Gomes does on the field, wouldn't it make sense that he would exaggerate Gomes' contribution off the field too? So there is a possibility this entire column about Gomes' "unmeasurable" qualities could just be one big exaggeration? Hence, my issues with fawning columns about a player's grit and leadership skills. It could be true, but when the author plays loosely with numbers it brings into question whether he's playing loosely about the player's grit and leadership skills too.

“What he brings to the team, you can’t quantify that,” Braves shortstop Andrelton Simmons said. “You can’t put it in numbers. You can’t explain what it is.”

What O'Brien has put in numbers has been sort of shaky on the "truthiness" front so far. So, it's probably good the platitudes about Gomes are completely non-quantifiable. 

But Simmons tried to anyway.

Because, why not? That's the kind of column O'Brien is looking to write. May as well appease him. 

“He brings hustle, No. 1,” Simmons said. “He’s always playing hard, whenever he’s in the lineup. A lot of energy. Leadership and energy, that’s the two biggest things.

Wow, so if Gomes brought no energy and wasn't a leader, but just happened to produce and hit the ball well...what would that mean? 

Even players who might have been a bit skeptical about Gomes’ ballyhooed leadership became believers after he joined the team.

By the way, who has "ballyhooed" Gomes' leadership? Sportswriters like David O'Brien. So he ballyhoos the leadership and then writes about how Gomes has ballyhooed leadership. It's sort of a story he reports on while helping to create the story. 

Braves manager Fredi Gonzalez, who batted Gomes in the cleanup spot Tuesday, 

This makes me throw up. Not only is Fredi hitting Gomes against mostly right-handed pitchers, but he's also hitting Gomes cleanup. 

was asked by a Boston writer on Monday if Gomes brought to the Braves clubhouse what he brought to Boston.

“Same,” Braves manager Fredi Gonzalez. 

That's not a good enough answer. Fredi will provide his motorcycling buddy Braves beat writer with a little hyperbole and cliches. No column about a gritty player is complete until there is cliches written throughout the column.

“He’s a team guy, comes in every day with a great mind frame. Everybody that’s around  him, he makes them better. Just the way he carries himself. He cares about winning and losing games. He goes about it the right way.

This all means very little. It's just a bunch of cliches thrown into a sentence. "A great mind frame" and "just the way he carries himself." Apparently other players don't care about winning and losing games while going about "it" the wrong way? What the fuck does all of this even mean? It's embarrassing to have these things written from a beat writer. What sort of specific information does it provide to the reader? None. 

Even when he was racking up 18 homers and 86 RBIs for the 2010 Cincinnati Reds, or 18 homers with an .868 OPS for the 2012 Oakland Athletics,  or 13 homers with 52 RBIs as a platoon player and pinch hitter for the 2013 Red Sox, his biggest impact still came in the clubhouse, many of those who played with him have said.

Since Gomes is hitting the ball terribly during the 2015 season then I hope his biggest contributions are still coming in the clubhouse. Otherwise, he isn't helping the Braves team at all. 

First baseman  Freddie Freeman said in the last week of spring training, when a reporter asked him about the team’s chances, that they believed they could win because Gomes had made them believe it.

It's the Cult of Jonny Gomes. He's like Scientology. You aren't a believer until you meet him and then you immediately become a part of the group, isolated from your friends, and unwilling to associate with others who don't think Jonny Gomes is just the absolute greatest leader and patriot in the universe. 

Gomes got a standing ovation as the highlight reel played Monday night, and he appreciated it.

Well yes, anyone appreciates it when their ego gets stroked a little bit. So of course he appreciated the highlight reel and standing ovation. I would too. 

“I’ve been in a couple of organizations, and I always though that was cool, when an opposing player comes back and you get the standing ovation,” he said. “It’s pretty cool, and obviously these are pretty knowledgeable fans and they appreciate the way you play the game.”

This is the type of article many sports fans hate. There are meaningless quotes from a player, cliches thrown about, and there's really no new information to be gathered. Great, Jonny Gomes likes to get a standing ovation and to be appreciated. 

“I guess, maybe unfortunately for them, but I’m not here to give advice, by any means,” Gomes replied. “Lot of good friends in that clubhouse, even on the (coaching) staff. But I wear a different uniform now. I’m here to put two MORE in their loss column.

Well, Gomes went 1-8 with 5 strikeouts against the Red Sox, so he wasn't really there to do much of anything except help try and help the Red Sox put MORE in their win column. I know I'm being hard on Gomes, but fluff pieces draw my ire. 

The tension level in the Red Sox clubhouse has risen as their slump has deepened, and another writer asked Gomes, only half-seriously, if he had any plans to stop by and chat with his old teammates, maybe help with some quick team-bonding like the old days.

Get these Red Sox players acclimated to the Cult of Jonny Gomes. Just one visit to the clubhouse and he can fix any chemistry problems that team may have. It works that quickly.

“I’m with another team now, the Braves,” Gomes said. “I bring my tools over to the Braves.

I'm being mean, so I'll hold off on making a comment about Gomes' "tools." He has 50 more at-bats against right-handers versus left-handers and that's not how he is going to have success with the Braves. Gomes' tools, unlike his energy and patriotism, only last as far as his playing ability will take him. So far, these tools take him in the direction of hitting the ball well against left-handed pitchers. But you can't put a price on his intangibles, which are those unmeasurable items that can't be measured, yet David O'Brien knows Gomes has a lot of them. These intangibles are probably deeply tied to Gomes' patriotism, which is important for a baseball player to have...as long as that baseball player is American of course. 

They’re in a tough spot, but at the end of the day, they’re two series away from first (place). I don’t know how much panic’s going on over there. But I know we’re 3 ½ back over here, and I’m excited to be here.”

Yes, excitement. The exact opposite feeling I got when I read this fluff piece from David O'Brien. If he can't find anything interesting to write, just don't do a fluff piece. That's pretty much all I ask. I get tired of reading about how a player provides value beyond the baseball field, all while that player's contributions on the field are glossed over in favor of cliches and talk about intangibles that NO ONE can measure, yet the author seems to know how to do exactly that. 

0 comments Safely Behind His Keyboard, Scoop Jackson Suggests Derrick Rose Should Risk Further Injury to Win an NBA Title This Season

I have no idea what goes on in Derrick Rose's head. I'm not sure anyone other than Rose really knows. What I do know is that Rose has suffered another injury which will prevent him from continuing to reach his potential and also potentially prevent the Bulls team from reaching their potential. Scoop Jackson has a sort of vague idea that he is pushing. He thinks when Derrick Rose comes back the Bulls should just go-for-broke. I'm not 100% sure what all this entails, but it seems to entail Derrick Rose playing all-out and ignoring whatever part of him that wants to hold back and prevent a further injury. It's remarkably easy for a sportswriter who is sitting behind a keyboard to suggest an athlete just go all-out and not worry about his health, because that sportswriter doesn't have to worry about anything other than bleary eyes while staring at his computer screen. Scoop Jackson admits this, but says that Rose should still go-for-broke and worry about the consequences later. The worst advice sometimes come from those who don't have to deal with the ramifications of their own advice. It's a brave man who can suggest another person risk his health in order to achieve a professional goal. Yeah, everyone else should rub dirt on it and continue playing. Easy to say while sitting on the sidelines and not dealing with the emotional, physical, and psychological effects of continuously being injured.

Now what?

There are so many answers to that small yet supremely meaningful two-word question that there's almost no place to start where any answer is the right one.

Well, there is a right answer. Go-for-broke NOW. Lay it all on the line and try to win an NBA title while holding nothing back. That seems to be the only right answer Scoop can find. I'm not sure if the Bulls weren't trying to go-for-broke and win an NBA title prior to Rose's injury, but apparently they were missing a certain panache that would satisfy Scoop's need for someone else to put life (okay, maybe not "life) and limb at risk for an NBA title.

With recent concerns over the six weeks Jimmy Butler is likely to miss with a high-grade ulnar ligament elbow sprain and small bone impaction and the unknown return of Taj Gibson from an ankle sprain (he's day-to-day but in a walking boot), the Chicago Bulls are back to the familiar territory of having to play "next man up" basketball until at least the opening round of the NBA playoffs.

Other NBA teams have injuries they need to play through as well. It sucks the Bulls lose so many key players, but perhaps these injuries are a reason why ignoring the chance of a recurring injury by coming back from injury too soon isn't in Derrick Rose's best interests. Of course, this column isn't about Derrick Rose's best interests, it is about Scoop Jackson's need for the Chicago Bulls to win an NBA title THIS YEAR.

But with direct, laser-aimed concerns about Derrick Rose and his possible (and quasi-promised) return to the court before the playoffs begin, the answer for all parties involved is simpler and far less unsure than we might think.

It's less unsure than "we" might think? I love knowing how "we" think, as told to me by a sportswriter.

I'm basically saying it's all-out-or-nothing time. It's "we don't give a damn anymore because we have nothing left to lose" time for both the Bulls and, more importantly, Rose.

I'm not 100% sure what this means exactly, but it certainly sounds like Scoop thinks the Bulls should just try and win the NBA title this year. It seems he also thinks Derrick Rose should play in the playoffs regardless of whether his injury is healed or not, since he has "nothing left to lose"...except for the continued health of his body for the 2015-2016 season of course. That is unless Scoop thinks the world is ending prior to the start of the 2015-2016 season and so it doesn't matter if Derrick Rose is healthy or not for that season.

It's go-for-broke, full-on-attack, us-against-the world mode. 10X Rule-style basketball. A beast mode of which Marshawn Lynch knows nothing.

This is basically bullshit, hyperbolic writing that lacks meaning without specific examples of how the Bulls can or should "go-for-broke" and "full-on-attack" the NBA. Derrick Rose should play hard in the playoffs, regardless of whether he is healthy or not. Great, what else is included in the Bulls going "10X Rule-style" beast?

For Rose, simply use that final minute of the second quarter of Chicago's Feb. 11 game against the Sacramento Kings as a capsule: eight points, 60 seconds. It was as if Rose finally said "Kobe" and turned the game back into what it had always been to him: His muse.

This was back when Rose was healthy, prior to the injury he suffered that will knock him out until around the time the playoffs begin. See, being healthy is what helps Rose to say, "Kobe" (in saying "Kobe" does Rose mean that he's about to suffer a season-ending injury?...that's what Kobe does in his older age) and take over the game. 

Can he get through this season unscathed, uninjured, without setback? That answer, over the course of the 46 of Bulls' 60 games in which Rose been able to play, is "no." So now that we know what we know, that's all we need to know.

Que'?

Derrick Rose can't make it through a season uninjured and that's all that we need to know. So doesn't this mean the Bulls should not count on Rose being healthy all season and go-for-broke with or without him? I wouldn't logically think the answer to this non-question is for Rose to just play injured since he can't stay healthy.

He knows what he knows, and for the remainder of this season, that's all he needs to know.

We are at the point in this column when Scoop Jackson is writing words that he believes to be very deep and meaningful, and they sound deep and meaningful, but they are really mostly gibberish disguised as insight. Confuse the reader, write words that seem meaningful and maybe they will ultimately actually come off as a meaningful. Derrick Rose knows that he is always injured, so he knows he will have a hard time getting through a season healthy. Logically, I would think Rose would accept this and try to play in as many games as he can or simply retire. The way Scoop Jackson looks at it though, this means Rose should accept he's always going to be injured and play through injuries because of NBA titles and such.

So this next phase of Rose's re-re-re-return -- if the Bulls are honestly desperate to win the Eastern Conference, play in the NBA Finals and win a championship this season -- has to be in direct correlation to what we've all learned, discovered and now see to be truth.

Yeah Scoop, but what if what we've learned, discovered and now see to be the truth isn't really the truth, but is a lie that is testing the will of the Bulls team to keep true to what they really know is true and all they need to know? What if Rose's re-re-re-return is merely an example of the truth the Bulls already knew and so what we know now isn't what they knew that they knew, but is all that Rose and the Bulls already knew and have known to be the truth? So this "new" truth isn't the truth but is just another example of what the Bulls already knew and they shouldn't adjust their strategy based on this "new" truth?

No more being conservative, waiting to see what might happen. Throw caution, concern and care to the Lake Shore Drive wind and worry about the results and collateral damage later.

This is easy for Scoop to say when he doesn't have to deal with the repercussions of another injury and not being conservative while throwing caution to the wind.

Once the Bulls' roster is whole again, the "next man up" mindset should seamlessly and immediately be replaced with a "started from the bottom now we're here" belief (or lie) that if it doesn't happen now for this team, it is never, ever, ever ... ever going to ever happen.

While possibly true, I'm not sure that Derrick Rose should come back from injury ASAP even if his injury isn't completely healed. The idea the Bulls may never, ever get back here again would be motivation for Rose to come back quickly, or it could be motivation for him to get healthy and hopefully get a chance to get back there, if not with the Bulls, but with another NBA team. It's so easy for Scoop to say "go for it all" while passively suggesting that Derrick Rose not give a shit about his injuries when he's not the one who has to worry about Rose's health for the next 60 years of his life.

For someone who doesn't have to pay Rose for the two years remaining on his contract, this is both easy and reckless to say.

I give no credit to Scoop Jackson for some self-awareness because he's not changing his behavior based on being self-aware. It is easy and reckless for Scoop to say, which is why the suggestion could be seen as somewhat absurd. If the Bulls know Rose can't stay healthy, then they should just not count on him being healthy, not expect him to play injured.

Again, I have no idea how injured Rose is or if he was too conservative with his previous rehabs and recovery from knee injuries. I don't know if another athlete could have returned more quickly or not. I'm not sure anyone knows this. I do know that NBA fans don't have a right to watch Derrick Rose play basketball if he doesn't want to further injure himself. It's shockingly easy to sit back and judge Rose for not playing through injuries, but sometimes injuries are more psychological than physical. Sometimes injuries just don't go away because a player wants to grit it out and there is life after basketball.

But at this stage, in this recurring act of this Theatre of Cruelty, what do the Bulls have left to lose? The window for the Bulls winning a championship with this "close to perfect" on-paper squad is very small as things stand

What the fuck is Scoop even talking about? What does he want the Bulls to do in order to "go-for-broke"? The trade deadline is passed and the Bulls can only hope to get players who have been bought out and are free agents. What the hell does he mean when he says the Bulls "have nothing left to lose" and what action steps does he want them to take? I'm very confused about the specific steps he seems to believe the Bulls should take in March so as to win an NBA title.

As in, this is probably their strongest, if not only, chance. Cleveland is not going to get any worse (even with LeBron James probably being at the beginning stages of the back end of his prime), and this is as vulnerable as it's going to be as long as LeBron remains in a Cavaliers uniform.

(Note: Neither are the Hawks, nor the Raptors, going to get worse. And Paul George is coming back. Neither are the Warriors, nor the Trail Blazers, going to get worse. And Kevin Durant and Russell Westbrook are coming back.)

The Bulls have to win the Eastern Conference before they can start worrying about whether the Warriors, Trail Blazers and Thunder are going to get worse or not. A step at a time.

Add to that contract ends coming up (Butler) and age creeping in (Pau Gasol, Mike Dunleavy) and the continued rumored uncertainty about Tom Thibodeau's future here, and the Bulls need to treat the playoff run once Rose returns as a straight-up "can't kill something that's already dead" last stand.

I still don't understand what Scoop is advocating for. Have the Bulls previously not tried really hard to win the NBA title or something? Have their previous playoff appearances resulted in the team just half-assing it in the hopes next year the team will be more healthy? I don't get exactly what Scoop wants the Bulls to do different in the 2015 NBA playoffs that they haven't done in the past...other than tell Derrick Rose to play basketball, regardless of his health.

And from a pure state of mental selfishness, Rose needs to do the same. In his mind, he should be in nothing less than a final-opportunity state of consciousness. Anything less wouldn't be fair. To us or him.

This is selfishness to suggest that it wouldn't be fair to Derrick Rose if he didn't come back as hard as he can regardless of his health. Obviously Rose needs to play as hard as he can while on the court, but if he's not 100% healthy then he either shouldn't play or play limited minutes. I know it's not what Bulls fans or Scoop Jackson wants, but I don't believe Derrick Rose has an obligation to incur further long-term injury simply because Scoop Jackson throws some vague words and hyperbole together suggesting it isn't "fair" if Rose doesn't do this.

He has to ask himself: Is the game more significant than the injury? He also has to live with the answer.

Exactly. Scoop doesn't have to live with the answer. Derrick Rose does.

At this point, seriously, what do either have to lose? The Bulls or Rose? If they fall short and don't win, so be it.

Maybe I'm stupid. I don't understand from the Bulls' perspective what they should be doing differently to go all-out and try to win an NBA title. I'm assuming from the way the Bulls team is built and the free agent moves they made in the prior offseason that they are trying really hard to win a title. What Derrick Rose has to lose is that if he comes back prior to being fully healthy then he could incur long-term damage to his body or he won't be able to play during the beginning of the 2015-2016 season due to being injured. 

At least all involved (and all watching, invested in and concerned) will know that a Broncos-signing-Peyton Manning risk was taken for something bigger than the wait-and-see existence that has been the Bulls organization's life the past three seasons.

The difference being that when Peyton Manning needed surgery while with the Colts he sat out the entire season and then got healthy so that he could play in future seasons at as close to 100% as possible. The Broncos took the risk on Manning after Manning had gotten healthy, they didn't trot him out on the field when they weren't fairly sure his neck could hold up to a full season of playing football.

And when the final buzzer sounds on this Bulls season, whatever is left on the court and whether or not Rose is still standing, it will be a source of unmatchable pride worth honoring for however long he is able to play basketball.

This is just an incredibly over-dramatic statement. This whole column is very, very dramatic and lacks specific detail.

For Rose, it will be the step he needs to take to begin not only the process back to being who he once was as a player and person, but also to begin his possible exit from Chicago. 

Yes, Derrick Rose should come back from injury and play as hard as he can regardless of whether he is healthy or not so he can begin his possible exit from Chicago. Okay. Because if Rose gets injured again then another NBA team is definitely going to immediately want him.

The burden both on him and for him has become unrealistic, at times unfair and, at this point, too heavy.

Says the guy who is writing a column full of dramatics about this being "all-or-nothing time" and suggesting Rose should go-for-broke and try to win an NBA title, regardless of his health, because that's what Scoop Jackson and (some) Bulls fans want him to do.

Anything less than winning a championship this season, with Rose the Finals MVP, is just a furthering of one of those Chicago nails deeper into his proverbial coffin.

So if the Bulls don't win a title and Rose isn't named Finals MVP then Derrick Rose will be considered a failure? Here is what Scoop just wrote about the burden on Rose:

The burden both on him and for him has become unrealistic, at times unfair and, at this point, too heavy.

Then Scoop follows it up by saying anything less than an NBA title this season with Rose as MVP will just make him seem like more of a failure. Apparently the rules of placing a burden on athletes doesn't apply to Scoop Jackson.

His home city has become too unforgiving, Michael Jordan's shadow too big and Rose too careful for anything good to come out of what's left of him playing out his contract as a member of the Bulls.

Unless he decides to ball out in his return.

So if Rose doesn't play in the playoffs and then comes back to win the NBA MVP during the 2015-2016 season, the city of Chicago will not embrace him at all? I don't believe you.

It's ridiculous and over-dramatic to say these playoffs are Rose's last chance to win over Bulls fans. If he came back healthy next year and played like he's capable of playing then he would win Bulls fans over again.

He's been so damn focused and concerned about having his basketball life back he has been unable to "just play." To smile, to laugh, to laugh at himself, to ball, to be Pooh.

Why have Rose and his doctors been concerned about rehabbing and making sure he's recovered from injuries in the past? They should have listened to Scoop Jackson, M.D. and told Rose to "just play" and everything will fall into place after that. Broken arm? "Just play" and you will be fine.

Which is all the more reason Rose needs to go for it with reckless abandon and anger when he returns. For the first time in more than three years, just live and play in and for the moment. This singular moment.

I'm sure if he feels up to it, then he will. Otherwise, I don't see why Rose would want to continue hurting himself to play a sport when he has 60 years left to live and pay for "living in the moment" while being a basketball player. I recognize that nearly everyone wants to see Rose on the court, but going for it with reckless abandon and anger isn't any good if Rose physically, emotionally and psychologically doesn't feel up to doing this. Maybe he's a wimp, who knows?

This moment that's left. Rose needs -- even if for a brief period of time, and at the expense of missing more time in the future -- to get "just playing" out of his system ... and back into his life.

These words, "just play" don't really mean anything. I hope Scoop knows this.

Because unless Rose gets back to that point, and until the Bulls reach that point with him, anything he does will forever be considered less than zero.

This is a falsehood. If Derrick Rose comes back healthy and plays well then it's not true that anything he does will forever be considered less than zero simply because he didn't win an NBA title for the Bulls. Stop the dramatics, stop the nonsensical writing about "just playing" and "going for broke" when there's really no indication what the hell this is supposed to mean, and finally, stop telling athletes what they are required to do for the sake of their legacy. 

9 comments MMQB Review: The Greatest Super Bowl Ever Until The Next Closely Contested Super Bowl is the Greatest Super Bowl Ever Edition

Peter King gave his readers vocabulary lessons in last week's MMQB. He also gave a few thoughts about the NBA season, all while stating that he knows nothing about the NBA and doesn't really watch professional basketball much. Peter was also upset at Marshawn Lynch for grabbing his crotch (Lynch grabbed his own crotch, not Peter's crotch...though it would be interesting if Lynch did grab Peter's crotch instead of his own), while enjoying a few good jokes about balls. This week Peter talks about the exciting Super Bowl that took EVERYONE'S breath away ("we" didn't know that would happen!), talks about the Pro Football Hall of Fame inductees, and sort of screws up his "Goat of the Week" again. A little bit. He blames one person when there are probably two or more people to blame. Russell Wilson seems to be off the hook for throwing the pass in the first place, which I'm not sure should be the case. Still the play call was bad, but I blame Wilson for 25% of the interception since he threw the ball.

Pacific Northwest: What are we doing throwing at the 1 with three shots to let Marshawn Lynch win the game?!

Exactly. Just an absurd play call. I thought the Patriots were going to let the Seahawks score so they could get the ball back to Brady.

New England: Great play by a guy we never heard of!

I had heard of Butler, so I imagine Patriots fans had heard of him too. Just because Peter King had not heard of Butler doesn't mean no one else had heard of him. Though assuming because he had not heard of Butler then no one else had either, and using "we" in making this statement, is typical Peter King.

The Super Bowl That Took Our Breath Away has a good ring to it.

Actually it doesn't because it sounds like a bad 80's song.

What happened there is the essence of what Bill Belichick is as a coach.

As Belichick spoke, offensive coordinator Josh McDaniels took his blue Sharpie and wrote two things on the top of his laminated play-call sheet he’d carry with him on the sideline in Super Bowl XLIX. Whenever McDaniels looked down at the sheet, he’d see these two bold reminders:

ADJUST

CORRECT PROBLEMS AND GET THEM FIXED

Said McDaniels: “What Bill said was, ‘This game is no different than any other one. It’s a 60-minute football game, and whatever issues we have, let’s make sure we correct them, coach them, and fix them. That’s our job.’

John Fox doesn't understand what you are talking about. Adjust? You mean, "Do the same thing you have done all season and refuse to double or put your best corner on the other team's best wide receiver if he is killing you?"

Example two saved the game for New England. Of that there is no doubt. Adjust. Correct problems and get them fixed. Early in the third quarter, with the Patriots getting abused by the size of out-of-nowhere Seahawks rookie receiver Chris Matthews, another undrafted rookie, cornerback Malcolm Butler from the University of West Alabama began playing in the nickel. Butler got the nickname “Scrap” for being a scrappy player in mini-camp, not backing down. The coaches liked him because when they’d quiz players about assignments, they could tell he’d been studying tape and knew how to anticipate what was coming.

That's probably because undrafted players work harder than highly-drafted glory boys. Obviously.

The Seahawks spread their formation at the one, despite having an Earl Campbell type of bruising runner, Marshawn Lynch, plus one timeout, on their side. “I knew they were going to throw it,” said Butler. “From preparation, I remembered the formation they were in and I knew they were doing a pick route.”

Well, Wilson didn't have to throw the ball on the pick route, but I guess that's a discussion for later in this MMQB Review. It's amazing how film study pays off. It's nice to read about NFL players that watch film and learn from it, rather than my favorite team sometimes looking like they haven't ever seen a forward pass before, much less a forward pass with this crazy formation.

Kearse was supposed to pick the corner trying to stay with Lockette. Wilson threw. Butler burst through the poor pick and made an easy catch.

I know the Seahawks were trying to stay away from Revis, but to expect Kearse to pick a big, physical corner like Brandon Browner? I don't know, that seems like not the best strategy either. Browner makes some bone-headed plays in the secondary, but he's big and physical.

Butler was shellshocked by it all, standing by his locker after the game, and Patriots PR czar Stacey James was explaining to him how his life was about to change, and suddenly owner Robert Kraft appeared. The shock in Butler’s face was precious.

It was precious. Not precocious, but precious. Peter has replaced the word he loves to use that gives grown men child-like qualities and replaced it with a word that gives grown men cute, child-like qualities. He just can't help himself. Butler looked so precious that Peter just wanted to lick him. He's not sure why, but Peter just wanted to lick Butler's face because of the preciousness that was radiating from him. Butler was like a new mother radiating love, lying in wait for her child to be handed to her for the first time, except the baby is Robert Kraft in this situation and Butler is the mother. Precious AND precocious.

“Mr. Kraft would like a photo of you with him and the Lombardi Trophy,” someone said, and Butler, in his skivvies and game T-shirt, trying to comprehend what was happening, sheepishly stood next to Kraft and smiled for the cameras.

Oh yes, Butler was in his skivvies and looking precious. Peter noticed both because he was leering at Butler for a full five minutes, just wondering what child-like quality to assign him during this moment so that Peter could close his eyes and remember this image for the rest of his life.

Now for the sandpaper to the cheek to all you 12s, the newest and most fervent and suddenly loyal fan base in the country.
 
That was the dumbest big play-call in Super Bowl history.

Maybe Wilson shouldn’t have thrown it.

Maybe. Very debatable. I was initially blaming Wilson for 50% of the interception since he threw the ball. Then I saw this angle of what he was looking at...

This is what Wilson saw on the big INT. I would have thrown that, too. pic.twitter.com/UFBtJRIUtp
— Rob Guerrera (@StatsNBCSports) February 2, 2015

A few things about that picture:

1. It's easy to second-guess based on a still picture hours after the play has occurred. So I feel silly analyzing a play that happened so quickly. Yet, I will continue to analyze.

2. I still think Wilson shouldn't have thrown the ball, but I completely understand why he did throw it. Please remember that Wilson is a professional quarterback. This is what he does for a living. To me, Lockette looks open, but Wilson has thrown this pass many times in practice and in games. He does know and should know how much time he has to sneak that ball in to the receiver.

3. Notice in that picture that Butler has already made a break on the ball and it's still in Wilson's hand. Butler is closer to the goal line than Lockette is and as Lockette continues his route toward the end zone, Butler will also get closer to the point where the ball is being thrown, so it's going to be a close completion.

4. Given the terribleness of the play call, as a professional quarterback I don't know if I still throw this ball with all that's at stake. If I do and given Butler is breaking on the ball, I would lead Lockette a bit less to where the ball went more into his body and he is the only person who can catch the pass. A throw more into Lockette's body could have shielded the ball from Butler. Here is another idea. See that wide open space in the middle where the Pats safety is standing at the "A" in Seahawks? Use that area to your advantage, rather than throw the slant to where it's a contested ball. This would cut the route off a bit, but Lockette probably could have straightened the route out just a bit seeing the open end zone he had in front of him, knowing there was a Pats defender right behind Browner who is supposed to have been picked. So if Lockette and Wilson get on the same page to straighten the route out a bit to avoid the traffic (and there are no linebackers in the middle of the field) or Wilson threw the ball more into Lockette's body, then it looks like a touchdown.

5. So my point is I don't blame Wilson as much as I did. But in a situation like this, that will be a close completion and Russell Wilson knows that. He's a professional, he knows how much time he has even if Butler doesn't jump the route. Given the fact the play was for a Super Bowl victory, I think Wilson had to know he would want to have Lockette straighten out his route slightly more while leading Lockette more to the left (Lockette's right) with the pass to take Butler out of the play completely (though the pass may have Lockette slightly short of the goal line and Brown could have tackled Lockette short of the goal line), throw the ball more into Lockette's body while not changing the route at all, or if there is any chance of an interception, just throw the ball away. He needed to be super-careful and he wasn't. I may have thrown the pass, but I'm also not a professional quarterback who has practiced this route repeatedly. From that picture, it's clear Wilson has a clear view of Butler and Lockette, so he knew he was throwing it into some traffic. It's 25%-30% his fault (and those are EXACT percentages).

6. Serious question. IF Wilson didn't see Butler, could it be possible that's because he's under six feet tall and had issues seeing over the linemen in that situation? 

Maybe he should have thrown it out of the end zone. But I’m not blaming Wilson for the play. It wasn’t an audible.

I wouldn't expect you to blame Wilson at all. After all, he gets the credit for great passes, why should he be blamed for a bad pass that he didn't HAVE to make? The play call was bad, but Wilson didn't have to throw the ball. If he didn't like what he saw, he could have had it in his mind to run right, scramble and make something out of nothing. He's very, very good at that type of thing.

The play came from the sidelines, from offensive coordinator Darrell Bevell. Though coach Pete Carroll took the blame afterward, it’s not his call, and it sounded very much like Carroll falling on his sword for a coach on his staff. Whatever, this was a play you simply do not call.

Look, I get it. It was a bad play call. But don't act like Wilson is a robot who has to do exactly everything he's told. He freelances all the time. I don't want Wilson to take all the blame, but at least point the finger at him a bit. Don't spare him because you like him.

New England didn’t call timeout. Belichick is brilliant, and I’m sure he had his reasons. (He said he’d have called time if the Seahawks had run the next play and not scored, but by then, with 20 seconds left, there wouldn’t have been enough time left to do anything fruitful if Seattle scored.) But I think that’s a huge mistake. If New England calls time there, and Seattle scores on the next play, the Patriots get the ball back, down 31-28, with about 50 seconds left. That’s far preferable to getting it back down 31-28 with two timeouts and, say, 18 seconds left.

I didn't understand that either. I thought the Patriots should have let the Seahawks score on first down or called timeout in that spot. It was an odd decision. If the Patriots were going to let the Seahawks score, they should have done so. If the Patriots were going to try and prevent a TD then they should have called timeout after first down just in case the Seahawks did score a TD. If they are digging in, at least give the offense more time if things go wrong.

One Patriot told me a couple of things that made sense. He thought Belichick bypassed the the timeout because the coach was comfortable defensively—as comfortable as he could be with who was on the field trying to stop Lynch—and that a timeout would have given Seattle a chance to stop and consider different plays, and why give the enemy more time to think?

I mean, yeah, that is the only reason I could think of. On the same line of thought, the Seahawks weren't exactly hurrying to the line and had plenty of time to think of different plays while the game clock ticked down.

Carroll’s explanation:

“We sent in our personnel. They sent in goal-line [defense]. It’s not the right matchup for us to run the football, so on second down we throw the ball really to kind of waste that play.

I've got so many things to say about this. It's not the right matchup to run the ball? Pete Carroll is going to let the opposing team dictate when the Seahawks run the ball? When did this start? He's never worried about it before. Also, they were going to throw the ball and waste that play? Just waste a fucking play? This just strengthens my argument Wilson should have thrown the ball away. If he knows it's a wasted play, he needs to tuck the ball down or throw it out of the end zone if he doesn't see exactly what he wants to see.

If we score we do, if we don’t, then we’ll run it in on third and fourth down. Really, with no second thoughts or no hesitation in that at all.

This is a dumbass explanation. What if the Patriots have their goal-line defense in at that point? What to do then? Why is Pete Carroll letting the defense dictate his offensive strategy and take away his best offensive weapon?

And unfortunately, with the play that we tried to execute, [Butler] makes a great play and jumps in front of the route and makes an incredible play that nobody would ever think he could do. And unfortunately that changes the whole outcome.

If Wilson knew the second down throw was a wasted play, his pass makes even less sense. If he didn't know it was a wasted play, then perhaps someone should have told him.

Of course, Bill Belichick is comfortable in close games. It’s the one thing I’ve always noticed about him.

The Seahawks played close games all the time over the past two seasons. They are used to close games, but this one just didn't turn out their way. Peter has ALWAYS noticed Belichick likes close games. "We" didn't notice, but Peter did. Now Peter is trying to push a "the Patriots and Belichick are used to close games" narrative like this isn't true for the Seahawks as well.

Check out the scores of the six New England Super Bowls in the Belichick/Brady Era:

Super Bowl 36: Patriots 20, Rams 17.  
Super Bowl 38: Patriots 32, Panthers 29. (NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!)
Super Bowl 39: Patriots 24, Eagles 21.
Super Bowl 42: Giants 17, Patriots 14.
Super Bowl 46: Giants 21, Patriots 17.
Super Bowl 49: Patriots 28, Seahawks 24.

But think about it: The Patriots are two miracle Giant passing plays—the David Tyree Velcro catch seven years ago, and the Eli Manning-to-Mario Manningham miracle completion three years ago—from a 6-0 Super Bowl record in a 14-year span … and being the greatest team since the AFL-NFL merger in 1970.

They are also a completed pass and two missed field goals away from potentially being 1-5 in the Super Bowl. What's your fucking point? It goes both ways.

“Even though we were behind in the fourth quarter,” McDaniels said, “we didn’t want to start abandoning the game plan, because you really can’t. They don’t allow you to do that. So I thought it took a lot of poise for our guys to understand, ‘Look, it’s not going to happen on four plays against these guys. We’re going to need a 12-play drive, or an 11-play drive, we’re going to have to convert some third downs and that was really the feeling on the sideline. It was stay with what we’ve talked about the last two weeks: patience and poise. We knew it was going to be an execution game. And it was! Meaning you have to catch a six-yard catch, get tackled, get up, do it again.

Then possibly skip the concussion protocol, get back in the game, try to figure out where the hell you are, and then catch the game-winning touchdown pass.

And then the Patriots agonized over the fluky but great Kearse catch while on the ground (“David Tyree on steroids,” Jonathan Kraft called it), and waited for someone to make a play, which Butler did.

If the Patriots had lost the game on that fluky catch by Jermaine Kearse I may have had to tap out reading a Bill Simmons column forever. He would have been absolutely insufferable with his whining and bitching about how the Patriots were three fluky plays (two fluky plays in reality and both of them didn't decide the game any more than the eventual game-winning touchdown really decided the game) away from being 6-0 in the Super Bowl, while forgetting John Kasay spotted the Patriots 20 yards in Super Bowl 38 by kicking the ball out of bounds. Because that wasn't fluky and happens all the time in the Super Bowl.

In the 49-season Super Bowl era, only one other coach-quarterback combination (Chuck Noll/Terry Bradshaw) has won four. Next opening night—Sept. 10, 2015, at Gillette Stadium—Belichick will be 63 and Brady 38, and the press box wags will say the Patriots are too old to repeat. “Age is a number,” Brady will say about 64 times between now and then. Sunday night in the desert, he and Belichick proved they’re not done yet.

Well, damn. Peter has that narrative all written out now doesn't he? He knows what "the press box wags" will say and he knows what Brady will say in response. What's weird is how Peter doesn't mention he is one of those "press box wags" that started to write the Patriots off earlier in the year.

I had a strange moment Saturday in an upstairs ballroom at the Phoenix Convention Center, site of the voting for the 53^rd class of the Hall of Fame.

You called a grown man precocious and he punched you? You stared at someone so long in public that you forgot where you were?

The list of 10: Jerome Bettis, Tim Brown, Tony Dungy, Kevin Greene, Charles Haley, Marvin Harrison, Orlando Pace, Junior Seau, Will Shields, Kurt Warner. 

I marked an X next to Bettis, Haley, Seau and Shields. Now I was stuck. Dungy and Pace were worthy, in my mind.

It's ridiculous to me that Bettis gets a vote over Orlando Pace and Marvin Harrison on anyone's ballot. That's a benefit of Jerome Bettis being all smiles and friendly with the media. He gets an honor he possibly should have received, but received the honor before others who I believe to be more deserving.

But as I winnowed, I found myself in a three-way mental tie for the fifth X: Brown, Greene and Harrison.

Few things are more exciting than to be in the mind of an Pro Football Hall of Fame voter. I like how Peter states he doesn't want to take his readers through the play-by-play of the Super Bowl, but he doesn't mind taking his readers through the play-by-play of his Hall of Fame vote.

I'll spare you the play-by-play. Greene is underappreciated, Harrison is the better receiver with the better quarterback throwing him the ball, but he didn't have the diverse skill set that Tim Brown had. That's about it.

I really wanted Greene in. I absolutely thought Brown was deserving. I marked the X next to Harrison. I just thought he was a better receiver by the eye test. But not by much. I folded the ballot, handed it to the auditor and sat back in my chair. Felt like I’d just run three miles.

Yes, being one of 46 people to have the privilege of voting for the Pro Football Hall of Fame is such a chore. Peter's diamond shoes are too tight and his wallet can't fit all of his $50 bills in it.

Some of my takeaways from the vote:

Good. Some of Peter's thoughts. We hardly get these in MMQB every week. 

I would have voted yes on 12 of the 15 modern-era candidates had they made it to the final five. Many in the room feel the same way. So it’s not that “we don’t think player X is a Hall of Famer.” It’s that we can only put in five per season, plus the three Seniors and Contributors.

I personally think this should be changed. I know the Hall of Fame is for elite football players only, but to only be able to elect five players seems like a small number to me, especially given they can elect three Senior and Contributors every year.

This was a cleanup year to me, with four new members (Charles Haley, Tim Brown, Jerome Bettis, Will Shields) who’d waited a combined 26 years for entry … Marvin Harrison is upset about missing for the second straight year, and I get it. It’s not going to get easier, either, with Terrell Owens, Hines Ward and Randy Moss joining Isaac Bruce and Torry Holt on the waiting list in the coming years

Yet another reason why there should be more than five candidates who can make it into the Hall of Fame in a given year. Players who deserve induction are going to have to wait or end up clogged in the pipeline waiting for their induction. I can't wait for Hines Ward to make it over Marvin Harrison. Hines is so friendly with the media and is a part of the media. He'll definitely make it and I'm sure some shit about "he was a great blocker" will be mentioned repeatedly.

The leading candidates to be finalists for future Hall of Fame classes:

2016: Brett Favre, Terrell Owens, Alan Faneca, Darren Sharper. 

2017: LaDainian Tomlinson, Brian Dawkins, Donovan McNabb, Jason Taylor, Hines Ward, Matt Light, Derrick Mason, Joey Porter. 

2018: Ray Lewis, Randy Moss, Ronde Barber, Steve Hutchinson, Brian Urlacher, Donald Driver, Jeff Saturday.

2019: Tony Gonzalez, Ed Reed, Champ Bailey.

Players are going to get jammed up in the Hall of Fame pipeline. I claim to be a Hall of Fame snob, but the way the Pro Football Hall of Fame does the voting they are testing my claim. I don't think the Pro Football Hall of Fame should just elect decent players, which is what I would characterize most of these names listed as, but I think Marvin Harrison should be in. If he smiled a lot and was from Detroit maybe he would be in this year.

Armen Keteyian has an eye-opening interview with NFL executive vice president of football operations Troy Vincent on Showtime’s “60 Minutes Sports” show that airs Tuesday night.

Two things surprised me the most. Vincent admitted it was Colts GM Ryan Grigson who turned in the Patriots for the suspected underinflated football.

Ah, so Grigson was the snitch? Maybe he's still salty about spending first round picks on Trent Richardson and Bjoern Werner.

And there was this exchange with Keteyian that, quite frankly, makes Vincent look just terrible, regarding the exhaustive investigation of the Ray Rice case by former FBI director Robert Mueller:

Keteyian: “Did you read the Mueller report?” Vincent: “No sir.” 

Keteyian: “You did not?”
 
Vincent: “No sir.”
   
Keteyian: “And as the head of game operations in your position, why not?”
 
Vincent: “The crime had already been committed … There was a ton of public speculation at the time what we did, what we didn’t do. We acknowledge we made a mistake. We didn’t apply the proper discipline. I’m not sure how much we can continue to keep talking about that particular …”

Ah, the NFL. Why would Vincent read the Mueller Report? He knew the "exhaustive" report that was requested by the NFL was just going to say some kind of mean things about how the league handled the situation and he knew what the outcome would be. What's the purpose of reading the report when you know the ending?

The Super Bowl Awards

Peter's awards get a new name for this week. Very exciting times.

Defensive Player of the Week
 
Malcolm Butler, cornerback, New England. Butler spent most of the postgame in a daze. He seemed unable to comprehend what just happened.

It was sooooooooo precious.

And it was his interception at the goal line with 20 seconds left in the game and Seattle driving for the winning touchdown that gives Butler a spot in New England sports lore forever. Just as Dave Roberts’ stolen base ignited the Red Sox to four straight wins over the Yankees in the ALCS in 2004, Butler’s interception always will be remembered from Bridgeport to Bangor. 

Malcolm Butler is the new Dave Roberts. I'm sure it won't get annoying when Bill Simmons refers to Malcolm Butler repeatedly in his mailbags/columns as the new Dave Roberts.

Special Teams Player of the Week
 
Ryan Allen, punter, New England. There wasn’t a tremendous special teams performance on Sunday night in Super Bowl 49,

But someone HAS to win the award. It's not like Peter can just not award a Special Teams Player of the Week for the Super Bowl or anything. He HAS to name a player to win the award. Don't blame Peter, thems the rules.

Goat of the Week 
 
Darrell Bevell, offensive coordinator, Seattle. For years to come, fans of the Seahawks and just plain fans will ask one simple question about Super Bowl 49: What in the world was Seattle doing throwing a slant pass on second and goal from the 1, with one of the game’s best short yardage backs in the backfield?

It's so easy to name just one person as the Goat of the Week when it's not really that simple. Darrell Bevell thought Ricardo Lockette could have come stronger at the ball, I think the play call should have been something different, Lockette could have changed the route slightly to avoid Butler better, I think Wilson could have located the ball better, and I think Wilson could simply have not thrown the pass. There are three people who can be blamed, even though it was a failure by more than just three people. I know Peter HAS to name a "Goat of the Week," but to simply blame Bevell isn't necessarily fair. After all, Pete Carroll called it a "wasted play," so it's not like there were high expectations for a touchdown. Bevell deserves the most blame, but to pin it all on him doesn't seem right. He didn't throw the pass and better execution would have made the terrible play call a non-issue. 

It’s a question that will torment the Pacific Northwest for years and will make it difficult for Bevell ever to fulfill his dreams of becoming an NFL head coach. It simply was an incredibly wrong call. 

While I get that, there's nothing that was off about the execution of the play call? Again, Russell Wilson isn't a robot and is entirely capable of making decisions on his own. He's very good at making decisions on his own. Bevell made a terrible call, but it's just too complex for me to remove any blame from Russell Wilson or anyone else responsible. When Wilson made a great play, like when he led the Seahawks to their comeback over the Packers in the NFC Championship Game, I didn't read Peter talking about what a great set of play calls that Bevell called. Peter talked about Wilson being super-clutchy and coming up big when it matters. Why is it when Wilson gets good play calls the attention goes to him for executing them well, but when Wilson gets a bad play call it's just assumed Wilson is a robot and poor execution will obviously just happen? I'm not blaming Wilson, I simply find it interesting that Wilson is not really taking a ton of blame for throwing the ball. It was a bad play call (for the 100th time), but Wilson should know better about what he sees on the field than he did in this situation. 

“Yeah, I’ve seen two of them.”
 
—Bill Belichick, when asked if he’d ever seen a catch like Jermaine Kearse’s on-his-back sideline reception that set up Seattle, first and goal, with 70 seconds remaining. Belichick was referring to David Tyree’s helmet catch in Super Bowl XLII and Mario Manningham’s sideline snare in Super Bowl XLVI.

Come on. The Manningham catch was just a great catch and throw. That catch wasn't anything like the Kearse or Tyree catch. I don't consider them to be the same at all.

“I’m just here so I won’t get fined.”
 
—Marshawn Lynch, at Media Day on Tuesday.
 
Lynch made a deal with the league: appear in media sessions (scheduled to be at least 45 minutes daily) for at least five minutes, or risk a heavy fine. So Lynch went and said silly things over and over.

What did anyone expect Lynch to say? He didn't want to be there and was forced to be there. I would probably have given better answers, but Lynch was forced to be there, so he was pissy about it.

Here you go #Browns fans: Browns signed Chris Matthews as an undrafted rookie out of Kentucky in 2011. Released before the start of season.
— Mary Kay Cabot (@MaryKayCabot) February 2, 2015

I mean, really? Matthews was released by the Browns in 2011. That's three years ago and he worked at Foot Locker since then. He wasn't exactly on the Seahawks active roster either, he was on the practice squad. It's ridiculous to even think the Browns should in some way be ashamed for cutting Chris Matthews three years ago when he didn't do jack shit in the NFL until two days ago. No other NFL teams wanted Matthews either. Its not like the Browns missed on a great prospect. Quit with the shaming of the Browns for things they shouldn't be ashamed of. The Browns have screwed up enough things in the past decade without new things they screwed up being invented.

TEN THINGS I THINK I THINK

1. I think this is what I liked about Super Bowl week, and the game:

d. Russell Wilson rebounding from a bad start—again—to be very, very big when it mattered, except at the very end.

As I always write, what if Wilson was great in the beginning of the game, but terrible at the end? The narrative would just switch around about how Wilson is big when it matters, but his statistics would be the same. And Peter, Wilson was good "when it mattered"? It's the fucking Super Bowl. Wilson's performance matters in the first two quarters also, so don't give me that cliched shit to protect Wilson and your opinion of him. His performance mattered in the first two quarters, it just so happens he didn't turn the ball over and the Patriots weren't able to score too many points on the Seahawks' defense, so Wilson's performance during the first quarter and a half didn't put the Seahawks in a big hole. I mean, it's the Super Bowl. Every possession and quarter matters.

h. Doug Baldwin wisely using umpire Bill Schuster as an unofficial but obvious pick, rubbing off Darrelle Revis and getting open for a big third-quarter touchdown.

This is the play where Richard Sherman was so impressed with the official's pick of Revis that he started taunting Darrelle Revis by putting his hands up in a "2" and "4" so everyone knew who got beaten on that play.

k. Fifty throws by Brady. Didn’t seem that many, but he was fast and efficient, a 74 percent passer against the greatest defense of the day.

It completely felt like Brady threw the ball 50 times. At least to me.

m. Phoenix. The city and the region do a great job putting on the game. Scottsdale is one of the great areas in America.

A REAL UNDERRATED CITY. PETER WANTS TO KNOW WHY NOBODY TALKS ABOUT SCOTTSDALE AS A GREAT CITY!

2. I think this is what I didn’t like about Super Bowl week, and the game

c. Doug Baldwin, Stanford man, getting a 15-yard infraction in the biggest game of the year for simulating pulling down his pants in the end zone and simulating something else while the simulated pants were pulled down.

Yeah, that was gross and immature. I would expect more from an adult. Hey Peter, want me to make a few jokes about balls that you can snicker at?

d. What possesses a human being to do that? In the Super Bowl, knowing all eyes are on you—and the eyes of the officials too? Just really dumb. He’s really got to do something about this everybody-hates-me mentality he has. It’s worse than Steve Smith.

Maybe it's a self-fulfilling prophecy. Baldwin thinks everyone hates him and then takes actions that ensures everyone does end up hating him.

3. I think you can add Bill Belichick to the list of those who have not been interviewed by the Ted Wells/Jeff Pash committee, according to Pro Football Talk’s Mike Florio. No Belichick. No Tom Brady. But 40-plus people have been talked to. Seems Wells and Pash and the investigators want to know as much as they can about everything before talking to the two most important people in the case.

I understand that perspective, but wouldn't they learn the most by talking to the two most important people in the case? Are Wells and Pash looking for information they can nail Brady/Belichick to the wall with or trying to catch them in a lie, so they will interview them last in an effort to not gain the most information, but to gain information that shows they are lying when they eventually do interview Brady/Belichick?

 5. I think Media Day is a ridiculous clown show that embarrasses and demeans everyone who plays even a little part of it. (And yes, I do want you to get off my lawn.)

Which is why it is silly to start questioning Marshawn Lynch's character and understanding of his responsibilities because he doesn't fully participate in Media Day (it's capitalized!) to the extent the media wants him to.

7. I think a few of us in the press box noticed something of a bitter-football justice trend in the playoffs this year:

• Part 1: Detroit gets officiating injustice against Dallas, and the Lions lose a bitter wild-card game.
• Part 2: Dallas gets a great catch overturned late against Green Bay, and the Cowboys lose a bitter divisional game.
• Part 3: Green Bay gets four interceptions but blows a 12-point lead in the final four minutes against Seattle, and the Packers lose a bitter NFC title game.
• Part 4: Seattle gets a golden chance at the 1-yard line in the last minute against New England with three plays to score, but Russell Wilson throws an interception, and the Seahawks lose a bitter Super Bowl.
• Part 5: Well, there is no part five. Yet. But New England opens the 2015 season in seven months and one week. The football gods might be on the prowl that night.

This is sort of a trend, but any time an NFL team loses a close playoff game there is going to be bitterness. So the trend isn't really the bitterness, but these games were all close, which means the team that barely lost will be bitter. The bitterness is a side effect of the close game. And also, don't turn into Gregg Easterbrook with the "football gods" crap.

9. I think this is one of the easiest smackdowns of Roger Goodell there can be. Two days after he said at his state of the NFL press conference that he was available to the press almost every day, he wasn’t available on 11 hours of Super Bowl programming to NBC. That is a ridiculous statement, for Goodell to say he is available to the press “almost every day.” 

He's going to stop saying stupid shit like this when the NFL stops making a ton of money due to tremendous fan interest or the owners make him stop saying stupid shit like this. Neither one is likely to happen before next season.

Just ridiculous. I also didn’t like his condescending tone to CNN’s Rachel Nichols, who asked a reasonable question about conflict of interest, during Friday’s press conference. Goodell has to understand he has a public perception problem

Just a problem? 

—no, a crisis—

Thank God you fixed it. 

that is not going away.

The crisis doesn't need to go away. Ratings are still through the roof, as is fan interest. Roger Goodell is just a heel in the show that is the NFL. He'll continue playing the heel for the owners if it means they can take daily baths in their profits. As soon as the ratings and fan interest goes away, the crisis will start to become an actual crisis and not just the bleating of fans who don't like Goodell, but watch the NFL anyway. 

The Adieu Haiku

This just in: Hoodies,
not business suits, are the rule
this week in Boston.

The Adieu Haiku still serves no purpose. It's the appendix of MMQB. What's the purpose of this haiku about hoodies in Boston other than to write a haiku? 

7 comments MMQB Review: Peter King Thinks "JFF" Stands for "Johnny F--king Failure"

Don't ask why I curse all the time in my posts but won't curse in my titles. I don't know. 

Peter King wondered last week if J.J. Watt could be the NFL MVP since he plays defense AND is on a team that may not make the playoffs. Everyone knows if you play defense on a losing team there is no way you can be the most valuable player in the NFL. It's impossible. Peter also started what I am assuming will be at least monthly assault on Jadeveon Clowney for underperforming during his rookie season due to injuries, though I don't recall Peter going at Luke Joeckel for playing in only five games in his rookie season with the Jaguars. This week Peter talks about how the type of dramatic, unpredictable football games can only happen in the NFL, talks about the winners and losers from this past week, and haughtily recommends the best wine under $25. It's funny, 97% of the wine purchased is for $10 or less and Peter recommends the best wine under $25, like that's the cheap wine that he wants to recommend to his readers. Ah yes, how the other half lives.

The Season That Went Too Fast
 
A Pro Football Book in Twenty-One Chapters

Chapter Fifteen
 
“Only in AMERICA!” Don King used to bellow, and some story about a long-shot palooka who toiled his way from Loserville to Las Vegas and into a championship fight would spill out of King’s mouth, the drama making it Must-Pay TV. Or so the legendary boxing promoter hoped.

Every single season football writers talk about what a WILD AND CRAZY SEASON THIS HAS BEEN, as if this doesn't happen every season. The NFL is unpredictable and every season is crazy in it's own way. Talking about how this season is an "Only in the NFL!" season is pretty standard. Craziness and unpredictability is the standard. So I do wish sportswriters would stop being surprised when unexpected things happen.

Weren’t we all thinking a few days ago that the road to the Super Bowl in the NFC would lead through Green Bay?

Nope. I had Seattle and Philadelphia as the two best teams in the NFC during the preseason and wasn't moving from that simply because a new and shiny team caught my attention. Life is really very simple when not making knee-jerk reactions.

I asked a friend of mine who gambles a lot: If Seattle and Green Bay met in the playoffs, with neither team changing appreciably between now and then, what would be the difference in the spread if the game were played at CenturyLink Field in Seattle versus Lambeau Field in Green Bay. He thought for a minute, then said: “Packers by five at Lambeau. Seahawks by seven in Seattle.”

I don't gamble, but that spread in Seattle seems high, even knowing the Seahawks beat the Packers handily at home in the first game of the season.

And this is why every chapter in The Season That Went Too Fast has some Grisham in it, 
 
By "some Grisham" Peter means "going to bat for pedophiles who like child porn"?

some element you never, ever expected:

Every NFL season has an element "we" would never expect. Every season.

Buffalo 21, Green Bay 13. Marcus Thigpen and Bacarri Rambo, men no one in Wisconsin had heard of at noon Sunday, playing the big roles in sending the Packers trudging back to the Tundra.

Considering Thigpen went to Indiana University, I think fans in Wisconsin probably have heard of him. But of course, if the great Peter King hasn't heard of these players then obviously no one else has either.

Seattle 17, San Francisco 7. Which figured. So now it could be setting up for the playoff road to go through Seattle.

Predictability would be different.

Only in the NFL!

Let's marvel every NFL season at how unpredictable the NFL season is!

Week 15 winners
 
Detroit. Another day, another dogfight for a confusing offense, another win (Lions 16, Vikes 14). The Lions have been held under 275 yards four times in the past 10 games. But they’ve survived, and they’ll be in the playoffs with two more wins.

I bashed the Lions' hiring of Jim Caldwell and I really don't know if I'm wrong. Next season at this time I think I will know if I'm wrong or not. Two seasons under Caldwell should be a decent way of determining if I was wrong about him. Considering the Lions haven't been an offensive juggernaut this year at times, I feel pretty good about my initial feeling on Caldwell. Of course, he does have meals with his players, so that counts for something.

Dallas. Imagine if the Cowboys lost at Philadelphia.

I can't imagine this. The results are too terrible for the human mind to wrap itself around.

The loser of the NFC East showdown for first place would face a serious chance of not making the playoffs. Jerry Jones hasn’t re-signed coach Jason Garrett yet, and with Indianapolis and Andrew Luck coming to town this week, finishing 10-6 and out of the playoffs would have been a real possibility. (It’s still no lock Dallas will make it, because finishing tied with Philadelphia at 11-5 would give the division to the Eagles on the basis of Philadelphia’s better division record.) It’s highly likely Garrett will continue—Jones loves him and thinks he’s got the perfect temperament to be the long-term coach—but another crushing loss in a division title game for the fourth year in a row would have left ownership grasping for answers. Would Jones have considered a run at a Sean Payton or a John Harbaugh? 

Sean Payton, yes? John Harbaugh? I'm pretty sure the Ravens aren't letting Harbaugh go after the season. Though if Peter has heard there will be shakeups on the Ravens' roster, and much like he thought they wouldn't re-sign Joe Flacco two years ago, this leads him to think the Ravens will get rid of John Harbaugh.

Now Jim Harbaugh? Yes, do it. I want to see Jerry Jones work with Jim Harbaugh. This has to happen.

Doubtful, but the 38-27 win, Garrett’s biggest in his five-year tenure,

Not that Peter is being knee-jerk of course.

The AFC North. “This is the craziest division I have ever seen,” Terrell Suggs said from Baltimore Sunday.

(Bengoodfella dies of hyperbole-related symptoms)

Carolina. Derek Anderson is 2-0 against Tampa Bay this year, and that’s what has Carolina in first place in the NFC South at 5-8-1.

Skinniest kids at fat camp, people! In your face rest of the NFC South!

New Orleans re-takes first in the moribund division with a win at Chicago tonight (hardly the surest thing),

And they did.

Who will quarterback Carolina against Cleveland at home, then in the finale at Atlanta?

I DON'T KNOW! I CAN'T HANDLE THE DRAMA!

There are two options, either Cam Newton or Derek Anderson, but who knows what will happen? The NFL is SO unpredictable. It could be Steve Beuerlein! The point is, Peter doesn't know right now! It's too early to tell.

Marcus Mariota. The Jets won, meaning he doesn’t have to think of going to the vortex of pain and tabloid embarrassment that has eaten alive so many young quarterbacks. And the Bucs lost, meaning Tampa Bay is number one in line for Mariota, the Heisman winner and by far safest quarterback prospect.

Peter King, NFL Draft Scout M.D.

No one is saying it’s a cinch, but Tampa Bay—with two very good receivers, a good young tight end, a smart front office and a stay-the-course coach in Lovie Smith—gives a young quarterback as good a chance as anywhere to be able to reach his potential.

Greg Schiano would have had the Buccaneers in the Super Bowl this season if it weren't for that meddling Josh Freeman who screwed everything up.

Week 15 Losers

Green Bay. One ugly afternoon took the Packers from the two seed in the NFC to six. And it won’t be easy to get back up there. Wins in the next two games would do it, but beating Detroit at home in Week 17 means beating the team that has beaten you by 30 and 12 in your last two meetings. That last game could leave Green Bay battered, without a bye and on the road for the playoffs.

Which is the exact road they used to win the Super Bowl several years ago. Wait, am I not supposed to talk about real life and instead go into a panic about what terrible shape the Packers could be in? Gotcha.

THE PACKERS LOST! HOW WILL THEY EVER RECOVER? WHAT IF THEY HAVE TO GO ON THE ROAD IN THE PLAYOFFS? THEY'LL NEVER WIN A SUPER BOWL THAT WAY! EVERYBODY STAY CALM AND PANIC!

It's like Peter can't remember what happened just a few short years ago. Sure, the Packers want homefield advantage, but it's not like they haven't won a Super Bowl by winning on the road in the playoffs.

In all likelihood, Green Bay making the Super Bowl now depends on winning the last two and then winning at an unfriendly place like Seattle or Arizona for all the NFC marbles.

They have Aaron Rodgers. I'm not worried.

Joe Philbin. His Dolphins collapsed down the stretch last year, scoring seven points total in season-ending losses to the Bills and Jets. This year Miami has lost three of the last four, including Sunday’s no-show 41-13 loss at New England that gave the Patriots the AFC East title, again. Miami’s playoff hopes are on life support at 7-7, a month after being in the hunt at 6-4. Now the drumbeat will grow louder that owner Stephen Ross will go hard

That's disgusting Peter. This is a family column.

after Jim Harbaugh again, and is there any doubt he’d pay the compensation to San Francisco to get Harbaugh?

Oh, nevermind. Much like Peter shouldn't make knee-jerk reactions after one game, I should finish the sentence that Peter has written.

Hey, since the Cowboys may go after John Harbaugh, perhaps the Dolphins should give him a look-see too. Or the Dolphins could just go after the one that got away a few years ago, Jeff Fisher.

Johnny Manziel and hope in Cleveland. All along, Manziel held out the prospect of the big surprise, the quarterback to ride in on the steed to save the franchise. Now everyone in Cleveland is thinking, “We should have listened to Merril Hoge.” 

Manziel may be terrible, but give the guy more than one start to prove it. Geez, what's with the knee-jerk reactions and overreactions in MMQB over this past year? Maybe Peter always wrote like this and I just forgot, but he's got a severe case of overreacting this season. A team has a good/bad game and Peter either puts that team in the Super Bowl or as receiving a Top 10 pick. Give Manziel another few starts and an entire another offseason of work in the Browns' offense.

Pettine was heartbroken, which I am sure mirrored the emotion of his city. It’s another wait-till-next-year situation in Cleveland, and a cautionary tale for Manziel: Get to work. Nothing is going to be handed to you. Become a student of the game. It’s too early to write Manziel off. (Really? One game is too soon?)

Peter, you say one game is too early to write Manziel off, but you also just wrote "Now everyone in Cleveland is thinking, 'We should have listened to Merril Hoge.'" Manziel may be terrible, but one game isn't going to be the determination and saying "hope" in Cleveland is the loser in this situation is beginning to write Manziel off too early.

There will at least be a Manning-Brady XVII.

Oh thank God. I can put off jumping into a volcano for another year because I have something to live for now.

The Seattle Effect. “It’ll be interesting to see how Philadelphia comes out of the Seattle game physically,’’ said one Dallas Cowboy last week, before his team’s trip to Philadelphia for the Sunday night game. This player remembered how physically spent the Cowboys were after playing Settle earlier in the year,

I need an editor here, STAT!

The Eagles are the eighth team in a row to lose the week after playing Seattle; Philadelphia, San Francisco, Arizona, Kansas City, the New York Giants, Oakland, Carolina and St. Louis all lost the week after playing the Seahawks.

Gregg Easterbrook is totally stealing this fact for the next TMQ.

Why players want to play for Bruce Arians. The Arizona coach said this to Ryan Lindley, the backup to the backup, when No. 2 quarterback Drew Stanton went down with a knee injury Thursday night at St. Louis: “I trust you. Don’t be a game manager. Be a game winner.” Lindley didn’t play particularly well—he completed four of 10 passes in the 12-6 Arizona win—but a win’s a win,

Which is what is said when a team wins a game despite having shitty quarterback play. Yes, I'm still hating on the Cardinals' quarterback situation. Sportswriters always have to have a narrative or reason handy for why a team won and when they have no idea (it was the Cardinals' defense) they just chalk it up to nothing. A win is a win and let's give credit for Ryan Lindley for not fucking it up.

With Stanton likely out for this week and two or three more with strained knee ligaments, the Cardinals seem likely to go with Lindley, and maybe with a package of plays for the rookie quarterback who is more mobile, Logan Thomas. “We’ll figure something out,’’ said Arians. “We’ll just keep on swinging, scratching out points.” Worked pretty well so far.

But can the Cardinals win a Super Bowl with Ryan Lindley and Logan Thomas? That's all I want to know. Someone ask Bruce Arians this question.

Not a great week for the top candidates, but I’m not changing much from last week—just subbing Andrew Luck for DeMarco Murray.
 
1. Aaron Rodgers, QB, Green Bay. First mulligan since Week 3 at Detroit. I’m sticking with the best player in football as the most valuable.
 
2. J.J. Watt, DE, Houston. Now with 16.5 sacks, five in the past two weeks. Just unstoppable.

J.J. Watt will never be #1 in Peter's MVP standings. Even after last week when Peter tried to lay out a reason why Watt could win MVP, Peter lacks the intestinal fortitude to actually put Watt as his MVP. It's a bold cowardice. He gives Watt a ribbon by putting him #2, but I'll be shocked, shocked, shocked if Watt ever ends up #1 by the end of the season in Peter's MVP rankings. You know what, the Cardinals will win the Super Bowl with Drew Stanton as their quarterback before Peter King has J.J. Watt as his MVP.

Chris Harris Jr.: The Player You Need to Know This Week

Harris, who quietly has become one of the best cornerbacks in football, signed a five-year, $42.5-million contract with the Broncos late Friday,

Thank God I have been alerted to Chris Harris Jr. this week. I personally don't know any NFL players until Peter acknowledges their existence to me.

Year	LCB	RCB	Slot CB	Safety	Total snaps	Pro Football Focus CB rank
2011	41	14	463	54	572	19
2012	137	149	610	121	1,017	4
2013	252	80	642	112	1,086	10
2014	24	439	309	61	833	1
TOTAL	454	682	2,024	348	3,508	2

What makes the contract, and Harris’ play this season, all the more impressive is that eight months before opening day this fall, he wrecked his knee. In the divisional playoff game against San Diego, Harris tore the ACL in his left knee. Amazingly, 31 weeks after the Feb. 6 surgery, he suited up and played 39 of 76 snaps in the Denver season-opener. By October, he was an every-down player again.

It's amazing how medical advances have helped the human body recover so quickly from ACL tears isn't it? I say this with the slightest bit of sarcasm along with absolute zero knowledge of medicine and whether it is possible for the human body to recover from an injury in 8 months that used to take 12 months to recover from.

Getting a young cover corner for his prime seasons, and having him locked up through 2019 is a smart move by Elway. For Harris, a veteran of one knee surgery already, he gets less than he could have gotten had he ever hit the market in March … but he gets to play without worry of injury the rest of this year, and he gets to stay in Denver, where the defense fits him. 

Coming off an ACL surgery, I would personally have taken the contract. Maybe I'm not bold enough, but after having rehabbed a major knee injury, I think I'd want to get paid now just in case it happens again.

Four points to make in the wake of the new Personal Conduct Policy, the denial of the Adrian Peterson appeal, the future of football in Los Angeles, and the relationship between the players and owners:

The league hopes to hire what it is calling a special counsel for investigations and conduct to lord over the process of this new personal conduct policy. This person, likely a former judge, former prosecutor or former top law-enforcement official, will have a staff to judge early on whether a player should be taken off the field while an investigation is happening. But the process will still be fraught with difficulty. There will be false accusations, stale accusations, accusations not made that should have been made because of threats against spouses or partners. What happens during the season when a potentially serious accusation is made, and the special counsel has to decide if the player should be taken off the field immediately or allowed to play in a game that week?

It's a decent point from Peter. I think this special counsel will just err on the side of caution and remove the player from the field. These are the types of things that happen when over-correction occurs. Goodell wants to prove he cares, so he sets up a labyrinth system of checks to make sure players don't play while being accused of a crime as proof of his caring. All he's doing is taking the burden off him and placing it on someone else. That's my view.

I think Adrian Peterson should have been reinstated. When the arbitrator in the Peterson case, Harold Henderson, issued his ruling upholding Peterson’s ban Friday, a few things were given short shrift. Before this season, the suspension for domestic or family violence was never longer than two games and most often a fine or one game. Peterson is 29 years old. He will miss at least 15 games (with most of them treated as paid leave), and those are games he can never get back. He’s not like a 29-year-old teacher who can miss three months and get right back to teaching.

Yes, poor Adrian Peterson. How's he expected to make enough money to survive if he can't play football? I get that Peterson's penalty is probably too severe, but to compare Peterson to a teacher like he doesn't have enough money earned over his career to retire right now is just typical Peter King-type thinking. Yes, a teacher can get right back to teaching, but Adrian Peterson has to work hard and maybe he'll catch on with an NFL team. If this doesn't happen then he'll just go about his life with enough money to go about his life and not have to worry about working. You know, the exact opposite of what would happen to a 29 year old teacher.

It strikes me as excessive. Now: Peterson didn’t do himself any favors. He should have pled his case in the appeals process if he truly wanted to play this year. I still don’t understand why he didn’t.

Probably the same reason he beat the shit out of his kid with a switch after suffering the death of a child from a beating last season.

Regarding Los Angeles… “There’s a schism about what to do in Los Angeles,’’ said one source with knowledge of L.A. effort. “The big issue is not only whether it should be one or two teams, and where the team or teams will be, but also which franchise should get the first shot? There is sentiment that [Rams owner] Stan Kroenke shouldn’t have the first shot. The Raiders are in horrible shape. The Chargers have a terrible stadium. In St. Louis, the city is trying at least to find a solution.”

I think there should be a television show where these three teams compete to play in Los Angeles. They can each argue about how badly they are being treated by their respective cities and then a winner will be chosen by the viewing public. I like how because the Raiders are in terrible shape, this means they should get one of the first shots at playing in Los Angeles.

THE FINE FIFTEEN

1. New England (11-3). Dominating performance puts them first. Winners of nine of 10, with the narrow loss at Green Bay the only blemish. Sign of a Ridiculously Good Franchise Dept.: The Patriots won their 11th AFC East title in the past 12 seasons on Sunday.

Is the Patriot Way still working? Once the Patriots lose another football game or in the playoffs, I can't wait for this question to get asked once again.

3. Green Bay (10-4). Not to rain on the Super Bowl parade or anything, but that was the first grim performance by Aaron Rodgers in, like, forever.

So, like, that obviously means it's a sign of things to come and not an anomaly, right? Aaron Rodgers had a grim performance so that must mean the rest of his performances will be equally as grim this season. Logically.

At all. Green Bay at Tampa Bay on Sunday. Rodgers has played there twice, in 2008 and 2009. Lost twice. Completed 50 percent of his throws in the two games, with four touchdowns and six picks, and a 54.6 rating at the Pirate Ship.

And I'm sure it's the stadium and not the team that was the issue for Rodgers when he played there five and six seasons ago. Because the Buccaneers current defense directly resembles the defense they had in 2008 and 2009.

7. Detroit (10-4). Another touchdown catch for Golden Tate in the 16-14 win over Minnesota. Tate has been a total surprise. He’s going to end up with 100 receptions. (He has 91 now.) Imagine this: Tate has more catches per game, on average (6.5), than Calvin Johnson (5.6)—and that accounts for Johnson missing three games with injury. Divide Johnson’s 61 catches by 11, and Tate’s 91 catches by 14, and Tate’s been more productive per game.

Thank you for teaching your readers how to do basic division in order to get an average, Peter. God knows most of America would be lost if you weren't here to provide statistics and then explain how you arrived at those statistics. I know I read that Tate had more catches per game than Johnson on average and was all like, "HOW ON EARTH DID THIS NUMBERS WIZARD MAKE THESE MEANINGFUL STATISTICS POPULATE AS IF OUT OF THIN AIR?" Then Peter explained how to divide and it made complete sense to me.

9. Philadelphia (9-5). Bradley Cooper sure looked sad sitting in Jeffrey Lurie’s box, his beloved Philadelphia Silverliningplaybooks down 21-7 to the Cowboys in the second quarter. Cooper was dancing in the second half, but Mark Sanchez just couldn’t make enough plays to win this one.

Am I reading "US Weekly for Teens" now?

"Bradley Cooper was sad because the Eagles were losing. Spies for 'US Weekly for Teens' say that Cooper danced at one point during the game, but Hayden Panettiere's ex-boyfriend just couldn't pull the Eagles through and keep Cooper dancing. Observers said that Cooper looked to be having a good time and took pictures with fans."

10. Cincinnati (9-4-1). No idea how I rate the Bengals two slots higher than Pittsburgh, which beat Cincinnati by 21 in Ohio last week. It’s just about a week-to-week coin flip right now.

Peter King's Fine Fifteen rankings everyone! They mean nothing, but Peter still feels the need to write them every week. This column isn't going to bloat itself you know.

14. Kansas City (8-6). Broke a three-game skid with a rout of the Raiders. One of the strangest stats in recent history—a team can be 8-6 in this era of football with no touchdowns caught by a wideout—has surprisingly not crippled the Chiefs, though Dwayne Bowe’s ho-hum season is a major surprise.

Bowe's ho-hum season is a surprise with a quarterback who can't throw a touchdown to a receiver as the one tossing him the pigskin? Otherwise, is Bowe's season a surprise? He hasn't exceeded 1,000 yards receiving since 2011.

Coaches of the Week

Bruce Arians, head coach, Arizona. Not to make these awards a clean Cardinal sweep, but to have the Arizona Cardinals tied for the best record in the NFL after 15 weeks, with Drew Stanton and Ryan Lindley playing quarterback, and hanging in to beat a St. Louis team that had won the previous two games by shutout … well, you can see why Arians is so revered inside the Cardinals’ building and outside the building by a growing legion of fans.

Coach of the Year should be Arians' for the taking. Of course I have to piss on this win a little bit. The Cardinals only had 274 yards of offense and the Rams didn't exactly light up the scoreboard either. Six of the points the Cardinals scored were the result of a fumble by the Rams and a 36-yard pass interference call that put the Cardinals right in field goal range. I'm not taking anything away from them, but the Cardinals had to settle for field goals all night. I'm very worried about them in the playoffs if they don't score touchdowns.

My point is that the Cardinals are averaging 12.8 points and 289 yards per game (If I were Peter King, I would explain to you how I got an average) in the five games since Carson Palmer went down for the season. The 289 yards per game would put the Cardinals at 31st in the NFL in total offense, just above the Raiders, and 12.8 points per game would put them 32nd in the NFL in scoring per game. That's not going to win a Super Bowl, especially with a banged-up defense. Arians deserves Coach of the Year, but the Cardinals are in deep shit if they can't muster up more offense.

Goat of the Week

Johnny Manziel, quarterback, Cleveland.

I'm not going to defend Manziel's performance, but this seems a little unfair. It was his first start in the NFL and he went against a reasonably good Bengals defense. Calling him a "goat" seems like the type of knee-jerk conclusion that Peter warns his readers against reaching.

First time in memory I had Goat of the Week locked at 2:23 p.m. Eastern Time. 

Remember this is the same guy who wrote it was too early to write Manziel off. It took Peter less than an hour and a half into the Week 15 games to decide who the "Goat of the Week" will be.

This game showed many things, among them that Manziel had better start spending a lot more time studying his craft. The entire game had the feel of fool’s gold, with the Browns, for the moment, feeling fooled by Manziel in his first NFL start. He was 10 of 18 for 80 yards, with no touchdowns and two picks, a 27.3 rating … with just 13 yards rushing on five scrambles. An awful opener for the 22nd pick in the 2014 draft.

Of course if the Browns had won the game then "a win is a win" and Manziel would be praised for doing something right. It doesn't matter really. It was one game and there is a reason the Browns didn't have Manziel start the season at quarterback.

For the Baltimore Ravens to be 9-5 this morning, and for the franchise to be in position to win its third AFC North title in four years, is a pretty amazing thing, considering 17 of the 22 starters from the team that won the Super Bowl 22 months ago are new.

I'm still laughing at the "changes" being alluded to by the Ravens organization after winning the Super Bowl which Peter took to believe the Ravens may not be interested in re-signing Joe Flacco. I think everyone except Peter knew this meant the team would part ways with older players and start over at several positions on the roster. But now, Peter is all like, "LOOK AT HOW THE RAVENS TURNED THEIR ROSTER OVER!" as if this weren't the plan the Ravens had all along. Kudos to the Ravens for making it work so far, but I still chuckle a bit at Peter's misunderstanding of what these changes and difficult decisions really meant.

Super Bowl XLVII Starters		2014 Week 14 Starters
	OFFENSE
Torrey Smith	WR	Torrey Smith
Anquan Boldin	WR	Marlon Brown
Jacoby Jones	WR	Steve Smith
Bryant McKinnie	T	Eugene Monroe
Kelechi Osemele	G	Kelechi Osemele
Matt Birk	C	Jeremy Zuttah
Marshal Yanda	G	Marshal Yanda
Michael Oher	T	Rick Wagner
Joe Flacco	QB	Joe Flacco
Ray Rice	RB	Justin Forsett
Vonta Leach	FB/TE	Owen Daniels
	DEFENSE
Terrell Suggs	Rusher	Terrell Suggs
Haloti Ngata	DL	Elvis Dumervil
Arthur Jones	DL	Chris Canty
Ma’ake Kemoeatu	DL	Brandon Williams
Dannell Ellerbe	LB	C.J. Mosley
Ray Lewis	LB	Daryl Smith
Courtney Upshaw	LB/S	Jeromy Miles
Corey Graham	CB	Asa Jackson
Cary Williams	CB	Lardarius Webb
Ed Reed	FS	Will Hill
Bernard Pollard	SS	Matt Elam

The Ravens saw a chance with the retirement of veterans like Ray Lewis and the pending free agency of Ed Reed to remake the team. They have done a really good job so far. But still, I chuckle at what Peter thought the remaking of the Ravens' roster meant.

Rambo has out-Ramboed Rambo
— Sam Farmer (@LATimesfarmer) December 14, 2014

I don't know why Peter felt this should be considered a "Tweet of the Week." It doesn't make sense, because Rambo is a fictional ex-Vietnam vet who killed people in movies trying to save others, while Bacarri Rambo is a football player. It just doesn't make sense AND seems to lack a little funny.

TEN THINGS I THINK I THINK

1. I think this is what I liked about Week 15:

b. Detroit safety Glover Quin, the Pro Bowl protester, with a vital interception of Teddy Bridgewater.

c. And a beautiful interception by Darius Slay, also off Bridgewater.

Mike Mayock was right! Teddy Bridgewater just absolutely sucks.

f. Eight sacks by the Ravens. Timmy Jernigan, Pernell McPhee … you have officially been introduced to America.

Yep, I knew who they were prior to this introduction when they were attending Mississippi State and Florida State. But now that Peter has mentioned them and helped introduce them to America, I guess they officially now exist.

s. Josh McCown making it a game, late, in Carolina.

I don't understand what this means. Tampa Bay scored 10 points in the first half and 7 in the second half. I guess that Peter likes how Josh McCown ran the final drive of the game for the Buccaneers when Carolina was happy to watch the Buccaneers eat clock up while trying to score. If anything, Peter should like McCown's scrambling ability for the touchdown. Maybe THAT is what Peter is referring to here.

2. I think this is what I didn’t like about Week 15:

a. Johnny Football.

You don't say? Why hasn't Peter mentioned this in MMQB before now?

i. For his talent, Andrew Luck makes some dumb throws.

Skip Bayless wants to know why Peter King is putting Andrew Luck in the Hall of Fame already? Because one time in a bowl game, Brandon Weeden played as well as Andrew Luck did. So there's that and it definitely means something.

Nobody is supposed to talk about Andrew Luck making dumb throws. It's against the rules, plus he has 38 touchdown passes this year, so that sort of overshadows the bad throws.

l. Here’s the deal, Bucs: You put either the entire throwback uniform on, or the modern one. You can’t mix them. Orange socks do not go with a red and white uniform.

Peter King, Fashion Maven M.D.

3. I think I have a difficult question for you in the Bay Area to answer this morning: Which 36^th overall pick in the draft would you rather build your franchise around: Colin Kaepernick (2011) or Derek Carr (2014)? I think there would have been no question about that in August. Slam dunk. But with Kaepernick’s maturation as a player put in serious questions this season, now it’s a contest.

I wonder how Ron Jaworski feels about Colin Kaepernick now? I'm not sure I wouldn't choose Kaepernick to be the quarterback I build the franchise around. I will have to see more about David Carr. That's the fun part about questions like this. They can change from year-to-year...or month-to-month as the case may be with Peter.

4. I think when we hear about knee surgeries, we just assume that players go in and have the surgery done and in seven or eight months they’ll be as good as new...As concerning, or more so, is the microfracture surgery for Houston rookie pass-rusher Jadeveon Clowney. Microfracture is no slam-dunk, especially for a speed rusher.

I'm telling you, Jadeveon Clowney is well on his way to being Josh Freeman'd by Peter King. It's starting already. He's calling Clowney a "speed rusher" and is preparing for him to never be the same again after microfracture surgery.

Indianapolis tackle Gosder Cherilus, who has had the surgery, told the Indianapolis Star of Clowney: “He’s screwed. His game is all about explosion. That’s a problem. I’m out there dancing. I’m an offensive lineman. That’s a different ballgame. He’s screwed. I’m just being honest.” The Texans have to be concerned about whether Clowney can come back to be the same player, regardless what they say publicly.

No Peter, I bet the Texans aren't concerned at all about their top pick needing major knee surgery. They probably are laughing about it right now and making jokes to each other about the situation.

Peter is getting ready for Clowney to be a bust as the #1 overall draft pick. I can feel it in my bones.

9. I think this is why the crown-of-the-helmet-into-Russell Wilson was called Sunday, giving the Seahawks a fresh set of downs at a critical time late in their win over the Niners: Prohibited contact against a defenseless player, which includes a player in the act of passing or just after releasing a pass, came into play on this call. Wilson, in this case, was a defenseless player.

I don't know. The NFL does a lot to protect quarterbacks and I get the point, but sometimes it annoys me. Derek Anderson got a hand to the facemask on Sunday and a penalty was called. He was hit in the face, but it certainly didn't seem like it hurt or put his health in danger. So in the situation Peter is describing, it seemed pretty close to a penalty on the 49ers defender, but it's nearly impossible to tell for sure.

According to strict interpretation of the rules: “Lowering the head and making forcible contact with the top/crown or forehead/”hairline” parts of the helmet against any part of the defenseless player’s body” is illegal. The officials ruled Wilson was struck with the helmet either at the hairline or crown level. It’s close, very close. I watched the replay at least 10 times and it’s hard to tell if the helmet was in the right position or not.

Maybe the NFL should make penalties like this reviewable since it had an impact on the game. Hell, just make everything reviewable.

10. I think these are my non-NFL thoughts of the week:

g. Re the SONY hack: I have changed my email password six times in the last week. And I believe it doesn’t matter.

Wouldn't it be fun to read emails that are leaked from Peter King's inbox? I'm sure there is some haughty and uppity shit that he leaves out of MMQB, but he shared with friends and family. I imagine Peter has some email screeds about people who take too long to order at Starbucks or wonder why everyone slows down to look at Christmas lights. Those leaked emails would be interesting to read. I wonder how many he gets from Brett Favre in a given month?

h. Really bright to skip your team’s fan festival, Bryce Harper, because of a contract dispute. That scores lots of points with fans.

Welp, he got a two year contract extension and they love him again.

i. The Sports Illustrated Sportsman of the Year event last Tuesday was memorable.

Naming Madison Bumgarner "Sports Illustrated Sportsman of the Year" is a very "Sports Illustrated" thing for them to do.

k. Coffeenerdness: Here’s what I don’t get when I bring my reusable grande cup into Starbucks and ask for a triple grande macchiato:

Seriously, imagine the shit that Peter King writes which he doesn't share with the general public. It probably makes inconsequential bitching like what you are about to read look like a major conflict that must immediately be resolved.

Most baristas take a small cup, brew the three shots of espresso, pour them on top of the foamed milk, then throw the little cup away. Not using the normal espresso shot glasses sort of defeats the purpose of using the same grande cup over and over, right?

Yes, it might defeat the purpose. Wouldn't the barista have to constantly wash the espresso shot glasses over and over after using them though? Wouldn't this require wasting water to do AND it could also cause there to be a backup during peak times because Starbucks doesn't have a hundred espresso shot glasses they can use for this purpose?

I think Peter should take this issue up with Starbucks. I'm sure they will put it at the top of their priority list.

l. Beernerdness: Don’t have a new beer for you this week, but I will throw in my vote for the best $25-or-under Cabernet Sauvignon out there: Simi Alexander Valley Cab.

The best $25-or-under Cabernet Sauvignon, huh? It's for those middle class people who read Peter's column that may not want to spend more than $25 on a bottle of wine. After all, Peter hears that some people in the United States have a budget they stick to, so they have to go for the cheaper wines, like something under $25.

I simply love that Peter recommends a wine under $25. I can't figure out if he thinks that this is a "budget" wine or what. Seriously, 97% of the wine sold is under $10 and Peter is giving tips for $25-and-under wines. I'm not sure when the last time he lived in the real world was.

o. Perfect metaphor for the New York Mets: While much of the rest of baseball made mega moves at the winter meetings last week, the Mets signed a platoon outfielder (maybe) who batted .212 for Toronto and Philadelphia last year, John Mayberry.

Remember the big moves the Royals and Giants made last year prior to and during the winter meetings? Oh, you don't? It's probably because this isn't the best way to determine which team will have success during the upcoming season.

p. Re the Red Sox: I have tremendous respect for Jon Lester, and gratitude for what he has done for the franchise. But I’m very much on board with not paying a pitcher who will be 31 in January $26 million a year for six years … I do not support paying Cole Hamels $22 million a year for the next five years plus the surrender of two prime prospects … I’d wait for a Johnny Cueto type in free agency next year, when the pitching crop will be richer, or at the trading deadline this year

How much money does Peter think Johnny Cueto is going to try and get in free agency? He'll be 29 years old when he signs his next contract and he's made 30+ career starts in five of his seven seasons, plus statistically he's only improving. How much money does Peter think Cueto is going to fetch if he has another season like his 2014 season? I'm guessing he's going to try and get somewhere around $22 million per year.

Who I Like Tonight

Chicago 24, New Orleans 20. Though I have no idea why.

Thanks for contributing.

The Adieu Haiku
Aaron Kromer blabs. Cutler forgives. So he says.
Forget? No way, Jay.

Why should Cutler forget? Sure, the Bears may regret that contract extension, but to have his offensive coordinator be the source for this report? That's bullshit and something close to career suicide. Fortunately for Kromer, it happened to Jay Cutler so the media isn't going to go to bat for him. If this happens to a more well-liked quarterback you can bet it would be more than a footnote in Peter's Adieu Haiku. Peter would go all-in on Kromer if he was the source bashing a quarterback that Peter and the media really likes.