6 comments MMQB Review: Other Than All of His Success, Peter Wonders What He's Missing That's So Great About Dave Dombrowski Edition

Peter King mentioned how "lithe" and "penetrating" Caraun Reid looked this year in last week's MMQB. Peter also talked about how Blake Bortles threw a really good pass and this means something, just like Sam Bradford hasn't blown his ACL out in the past week, so that means something too. What does it mean? Probably nothing because Peter says that preseason games don't mean much, but certainly enough for Peter to begin writing about how Bradford and Bortles look good. So what Peter wrote may or may not mean much. Good to know. This week Peter talks about Cris Carter's "fall guy" comment, gives us six things to know about Peyton Manning (wait, there are six things we don't already know about him?), and apparently Peter's sources are lying to him again. I get part of reporting is having sources who you need to rely on in order to write a story, but I've always felt that many of Peter's sources play him for a fool and use him to get misinformation out there to benefit themselves. The whole Ray Rice debacle sort of confirmed it for me, but I routinely can't shake the feeling Peter is used as a conduit for misinformation or is a naive person who disseminates information the sources wants out there. Of course, as we have learned from "SI's" own media guy lack of comments on mistakes made by "SI" employees, as long as Peter apologizes for his mistakes in meek fashion then there is nothing to see here. Now if someone from ESPN used two sources that gave him bad information, this "SI" media guy would crush this ESPN reporter. It's how it goes.

I’d planned to lead this column with Sunday night’s compelling return to the field of San Francisco all-pro linebacker NaVorro Bowman after 19 months away, and to so much else from the final week of my training camp tour—including how Peyton Manning has no feeling in the fingertips of his throwing hand to this day, after his 2011 surgeries. (Which stunned me.)

So many inappropriate sexual jokes I could include here as to why Peter would be shocked that Peyton didn't have feeling in the fingertips of his throwing hand. I will refrain. 

But Sunday was one of those hurricane-of-news days you don’t get very often in the preseason, so let me get to all things Jordy and Maurkice and Cris Carter and, well, here goes … 

THIS WAS THE CRAZIEST PRESEASON DAY SINCE AT LEAST ONE PRESEASON DAY LAST YEAR!

NFL Network's Ian Rapoport reported the initial diagnosis for wideout Jordy Nelson was a torn ACL, after the wideout landed awkwardly Sunday. Nelson last year set a Packer record with 1,519 receiving yards and is Aaron Rodgers’ favorite target, and his loss would make the Packers significantly less multiple in the deep-receiving game.

Oh no, I guess Aaron Rodgers will have to rely on the 3-4 other high draft picks the Packers have used on offense in order to score points. However will he manage to do it?

• There has to be a common-sense approach to the preseason. It’s easy to say, “Just napalm the damn thing.” After days like Sunday—the two-injury debacle in Pittsburgh, the Cowboys worried about playing on a field with a terrible reputation in Santa Clara, the Giants reeling over losing six of the nine safeties on the roster in the first two preseason weeks—it makes sense to ask this question: When is the NFL going to come to its senses and reduce the preseason from four to two games?

Yes, will this happen? What could stop the NFL from caring about the risk of injury to their players and cause the league to reduce the number of preseason games? Roger Goodell certainly can't think of a single reason. 

The exhibition games are fan-cheaters; charging full price for the games is robbery, which is the most no-duh statement in the NFL today.

Yes, if it was the mid-90's then this would be a "no-duh" statement for sure.

They should now follow by cutting out two more chances of injury. Do the math: If Jordy Nelson suits up 17 or 18 times instead of 19 or 20, it follows that he’d have less exposure to the kind of injury that can kill a team’s season in a totally meaningless exercise. 

Usually, Peter's math can be a little shaky, but he is in fact correct about his math this time. Though, Kelvin Benjamin just tore his ACL while practicing, so there is only so much the NFL and their teams can do to reduce the chance of injury. Cutting the number of preseason games will certainly help of course. Players still get injured in practices though.

• You are kidding me, Cris Carter—and you are kidding me, NFL. My first reaction to the story of Carter telling NFL rookies at the 2014 Rookie Symposium that they have to find a “fall guy” in a player’s “crew” who will take the blame when the player commits a crime: My jaw dropped.

Yes, how dare Cris Carter encourage that NFL players do something that has thus far remained unspoken. Everyone was shocked when Mike Scott of the Hawks admitted some drugs were his, because that's not how it's done. But it's better to pretend this shit doesn't go on rather than the NFL just admit it, right? I love how Robert Klemko was present for this comment, yet refrained from commenting on it. I see he's learned from Peter King that it's best to withhold information in order to gain or keep access. Be a reporter when it doesn't risk your access.

Precisely. Carter apologized, and though the NFL tried to distance itself from Carter’s idiotic remarks, how could the league have placed the offending video of his talk on NFL.com until yanking it Sunday? This is so offensive it boggles the mind that some person with the NFL would say, Let’s show the world this great advice about obstructing justice from a Hall of Fame hero to impressionable rookies.

I don't think Carter should have said this, but NFL players find a "fall guy" all the time when they get in trouble. It's not advice Carter should be giving obviously, but why would Peter's jaw hit the floor? He doesn't think this type of stuff goes on?

Carter, by the way, was in his yellow Pro Football Hall of Fame blazer. In all ways, this is the biggest example of inmates running the NFL asylum that I’ve seen in years. 

It's terrible advice, but again, it happens. The only shocking thing is that Carter said aloud what actually happens in secret. I think it's more funny than shocking.

• The fallout over Terrell Suggs’ hit on Sam Bradford continued. I side with Suggs, who dove at Bradford because he wasn’t sure if Bradford was going to hand off or keep a read-option-appearing play in Saturday night’s Ravens-Eagles game. Suggs said if you’re going to call such a play for a quarterback with ACL reconstructions the past two seasons, you do it at your own peril.

This is very true, but I think it's also important to note that the defender shouldn't be simply going for only the QB's legs when trying to make a tackle. I don't believe Suggs did only go for Bradford's legs, but it would be nice if the defender hit the QB and didn't try to only take his legs out in another situations.

Chip Kelly shouldn’t be putting Bradford in such a position to be hit violently anyway—and certainly not in a dumb preseason game. 

For a smart guy, leaving Bradford out there to run a read-option play wasn't the smartest move that Kelly could have called. I get that they want to practice these read-option plays, but in a preseason game that is simply setting your QB up for an injury in a pointless preseason game. What kind of dumbassery is that to call this read-option play?

SANTA CLARA, Calif. — Lots of reasons to say ‘Wow’ about NaVorro Bowman this morning.

Question to Bowman on Friday: “How long does it take you to get ready to practice or play right now?”

Bowman: “About two hours. The massaging and the bending, the flexing of the knee. Once I do that I have a five-minute period where it just needs to relax and then I’m ready to go.”

Peter knows how Bowman feels because he used to roll out of bed and then go to a team's training camp with his notebook, but now he has to roll out of bed, take a shower and then go to a team's training camp with his notebook. It's just so hot out these days that Peter must prepare more to stand out in the heat than he used to. So Peter completely empathizes with Bowman.

Question: “Before the injury, how long would it take you to be ready?”

Bowman: “Nothing. No time.”

So Bowman didn't stretch all before practice in order to be prepared to practice? He threw an uniform on and just started to play football with zero stretching or bending of his body?

Look what happened to San Francisco’s D this offseason. No Justin Smith; retired. No Patrick Willis; retired. No Aldon Smith; cut. No Chris Borland to train as the next great inside ‘backer; retired, shockingly.

Peter's jaw hit the floor when he heard that Borland retired. It made him lose all feeling in his heart.

Bowman sure knows how to make an entrance. Until Sunday night against Dallas, Bowman hadn’t played in a game since shredding multiple left knee ligaments on the ugly goal-line play in the NFC Championship Game in Seattle in January 2014. He played three plays against the Cowboys. From his spot in the nerve center of the Niner defense, Bowman stoned Darren McFadden up the middle for a one-yard gain on first down. He stoned McFadden over right tackle on second down; loss of one. He stopped running back Lance Dunbar on a dumpoff pass from Tony Romo on third down; loss of one. Three plays, three tackles, two of them for losses. That was an impressive three minutes of football right there.

Or really shitty blocking from the Cowboys offensive line that probably wasn't trying too hard for fear the horrendous turf on the 49ers field would swallow up their legs and tear ligaments doctors didn't know existed in the human body.

“I thought I ended my career,” Bowman said Friday afternoon in the bowels of Levi’s Stadium.

Given the condition of the field, "the bowels of Levi's Stadium" could very well pertain to a few locations in the stadium or on the field.

Two hours of prep work, daily. Just to be able to practice. Seventeen months of arduous, painful work to try to be NaVorro Bowman, all-pro linebacker, again … while so much of the team is crashing and burning around him.

Has it been worth it?

Peter King asks the tough questions which he knows will result in an obvious answer. Like, what does Peter think Bowman will say? "No, it's hasn't been worth it. I retire, effective immediately."

“I don’t play this game for money,” he said. “I play it for respect and ultimately to make it to the Hall of Fame. That’s what drives me. In order to be the best, this work comes with it, and I’m willing to fight through it.”

This is the answer I would expect to hear from Bowman. It's remarkably easy to say you don't play football for the money when you are sitting on a contract worth almost $26 million guaranteed. At that point, saying you play the game for respect sounds more noble than it probably is. I'd like to hear Bowman say he doesn't play football for money and then back it up by taking less money and gain the respect of his teammates by allowing them to get paid. It's always about the money. Always, even when he claims it's not about it right now for Bowman, the game of football was about the money before he got paid.

He said he doesn’t think he’ll feel that way all season, and he’s not sure exactly how to describe the difference in the knee; he just knows it’s not the same as it was two summers ago.

Well, that doesn't sound positive at all.

I find one thing about the Niner dynamic fascinating right now. Bowman and Borland, health permitting, were set to be the next great combo platter of inside linebacker for the next three or four years. Bowman’s injury was one of the factors that made Borland play so much last year—and, it turns out, he played very well.

Ah yes, Peter is lightly treading down the "NaVorro Bowman is playing despite fighting back from a very traumatic knee injury, while Chris Borland is being a pussy and retiring before he gets hurt" road right now. Again, Peter is lightly treading down this road, but I know he wants to hammer this point home a harder than ends up hammering the point home.

So here’s Bowman, who stones people, playing. And Borland isn’t. Bowman, a Harry Carson block-of-granite type, and Willis keyed a defense that went 14 straight games in 2011 without allowing a rushing touchdown. Three times he was first-team all-pro, the classic kind of run-stuffer who also had the ability to turn and run with tight ends. Bowman's fought through it all, and Borland chose another path.

"Chose another path." Come on Peter, you know you want to go there, just like you wanted to go there last week and complain about the "Black Lives Matter" protesters blocking the street. Go full heel on us. Bowman has chosen to stick around and play through injuries, while Borland is retiring before he can get injured. You know you want to write this point of view. Just do it.

Concerned about the impact of football on his long-term health—a rising tide among current players—Borland walked away from the game after one starry season.

Peter describes the guy who fought back from injury as "a Harry Carson block-of-granite type" and states the other guy "chose another path." It's like saying, "My oldest son is running his own company and is successful, but my youngest son chose a different path and hasn't found his calling yet." It's on the edge of judging, but trying to do so in a polite way. 

That’s one of the things that makes this comeback compelling. There’s nothing dramatic about the way Bowman says this. It’s simply his ethos. He’s a man making a choice, the way Borland made his. And the 49ers, in this seismic season, need Bowman desperately, and he knows it.

Bowman has an ethos. Chris Borland has no ethos. One chose a compelling comeback and the other tapped-out through "walking away." Regardless of what Peter says, the wording he uses says what he really thinks. At least I think I think I know what Peter thinks.

ENGLEWOOD, Colo. — ​Six things you need to know about Peyton Manning, at 39.

Again, at this point there is very little I don't know about Peyton Manning, but I'm sure learning six more things won't hurt.
 
1. He still doesn’t have feeling in the fingertips on his right hand.

Peter is still stunned upon hearing this. 

“I can’t feel anything in my fingertips,” Manning said Thursday. “It’s crazy. I’ve talked to a doctor recently who said, Don’t count on the feeling coming back. It was hard for me for about two years, because one doctor told me I could wake up any morning and it might come back. So you wake up every day thinking, Today’s the day! Then it’s not.” I find his production all the more impressive since four neck procedures caused him to miss the 2011 season, and caused him to lose—maybe forever—the comfortable grip on the football.

I don't know how it usually works with a quarterback, but I would think it would be a much bigger deal for a wide receiver to not be able to feel the ball with his fingertips than it would be for a quarterback. Maybe not, but this still sounds like a semi-serious medical issue. A medical issue that Peter King thinks NaVorro Bowman would fight back from, but Chris Borland would choose his own path and walk away if faced with this fingertip condition. 

2. He traces the physically crummy end to last season not to age but to a vomitous December night in San Diego.

Now I'm the one whose jaw is on the floor. You mean Peyton Manning isn't attributing his poor ending to the season to getting older? He isn't saying, "Oh sure, I'm really old and can't play an entire season at a high level anymore"? What an unexpected thing for Peyton to attribute his crummy ending last season to, as opposed to acknowledging he's getting older.

Before the Broncos’ 14th game, in San Diego, Manning says a bug he caught from his sick daughter made him violently ill. “I threw up all night,” he said. “Then, in the game, I moved to the right on a simple scramble and my quad cramped on me. It lingered. I couldn’t shake it the rest of the year. I really studied it hard this offseason, whether it could linger into this year or whether it was isolated. I just think I got dehydrated, and that caused it. I don’t think you can blame it on my age. It was just an isolated thing.

Manning was just dehydrated for an entire month. It's not that he is older or anything. It's just one of those things that happened as a result of being dehydrated for a few weeks. No big deal, let's all move on and just accept this reason.

4. Manning got advice from Derek Jeter on the contract thing. His wife Ashley weighed in too, importantly. “I talked about it with Ashley, about what I wanted to do, and I wanted to be here,” he said. And Jeter told him: “Do what you want—not what they want.”

Ah, the Jeter always has such great advice. "Use your leverage as an icon to engage in a battle over your contract, fully knowing you have the media on your side and it's going to be hard for you to look like the bad guy." I mean, it's true though, so I'm not sure I can mock it.

6. The Broncos will likely do the Romo thing this year, and give Manning every Wednesday off. Just for insurance—and so the Broncos can see a little more of Brock Osweiler getting quality time with the first unit. “I think that’s the plan right now,” Elway said. “I think he’d feel better right now if he takes Wednesday off. His health is not a concern. His freshness is a concern.”

Absolutely. The Broncos know Manning can play a full season with no problem, even though he can't feel his fingertips and his arm strength seems to have slowed as the season progresses. So no worries from them here. They just don't want Manning to get dehydrated for an entire month again.

And yes, the whole "The Broncos are resting Manning just for insurance and not because they are concerned about his health/arm strength" is one of those things I think NFL teams and other sources tell Peter that he buys hook, line and sinker because he likes Manning and wants to believe it.

OXNARD, Calif. — You think this team doesn’t have one foot out the door to L.A.?

What a scene here Monday and Tuesday, when the Rams, after a Friday night preseason game in Oakland, scheduled a couple of days of work against the Cowboys at their training complex here. It was enough to see the fans, who outnumbered the Dallas fans by 2-to-1 (my estimate) Tuesday, be nuts for the Rams; one even had a huge flat-head cutout of owner Stan Kroenke in the crowd. Imagine fans cheering for Stan Kroenke. Amazing. He’s not exactly a fan favorite in St. Louis.

Well, if California wasn't trying to lure the Rams to their state through flattery than I imagine there would be zero fat-head (not flat-head) cutouts of Stan Kroenke. I mean, of course St. Louis isn't going to love Kroenke. He's trying to take the NFL team away from the city. What the fuck does Peter expect?

On Monday and Tuesday, the Rams did a morning walk-through practice near their hotel between Los Angeles and Oxnard. In one of those sessions, coach Jeff Fisher stuck his head into the offensive huddle and said, “Guys, I’m putting Eric Dickerson in the backfield, and you’re going to block power for Eric Dickerson.” Hall of Fame running back Eric Dickerson, he meant. And Dickerson took a handoff in this walkthrough practice, ran through a hole, and folks cheered.

Jeff "8-8" Fisher sure knows how to pump the team up. But hey, if I were an NFL head coach who so far had gotten paid over a million dollar for every victory then I'd be in a good mood too. I don't know what Peter expects though. Everything will be all sunshines and rainbows for the Rams in California. They want the Rams to move from St. Louis to their state.

RENTON, Wash. — Nothing changes for Russell Wilson.

Not really, but I guess it's more fun to go with this story than to check whether it's realistic or not. He just got a huge new contract and is dating a famous pop star. Things have changed, regardless of whether he wants to acknowledge it or not. 

Ten minutes before the official start of Seahawks practice, on a pristine field a short spiral east of Lake Washington, Russell Wilson is throwing to the tight ends. Fast. Snap, set up, throw, over and over. I’m guessing before practice even started he’s thrown 30 or 40 passes in anger. I’ve seen this movie before: last year, and the year before. Super Bowl win, Super Bowl loss.

Wait, so Russell Wilson hasn't stopped practicing entirely now that he has a new contract? I completely expected him to stop practicing now that he's really wealthy and focus on baseball. Perhaps God spoke to Wilson as he signed his new contract and decided that Wilson should focus on football-only, thereby closing the door on a possible baseball career.

The quarterback who threw the interception heard ’round the world in the Super Bowl last February and made Malcolm Butler a household name doesn’t seem much worse for wear.

He's dating a singer and he got a huge new contract. He's been to two straight Super Bowls. I'm trying to figure out why Peter would think Wilson would be down in the dumps and worse for wear.

The interception might be in a place deep inside him, burrowing a hole he’ll always feel. But if it is, Wilson’s doing a good job hiding it. Or pretending it’s not there.

That's sort of what he has to do in order to move on isn't it? Being able to forget about a bad play that cost his team the game is how he can avoid allowing one play to ruin the next football season.

Wilson said it took about a week before he got over it. Since then, his off-season has been pretty much the same as his others work-wise—just a bit more spotlighted because he’s dating a celebrity.

It's also a bit more spotlighted because Wilson and his agent took his fight for a new contract to any media outlet who was willing to listen to them, while pretending that Wilson totally had complete interest in playing baseball again so that was a fallback option if the Seahawks don't give Wilson exactly what he wants. Of course, Peter won't question Wilson's insistence the spotlight is on him more because of his dating Ciara. Peter isn't here to question. He is here to get quotes and write them down word-for-word as they were told to him, which is why he can be used by some members of the NFL and NFL organizations to disseminate the information they want disseminated. Breathlessly writing down quotes is how Peter gets his sources and how his sources use him from time-to-time.

No matter what the circumstances are, can you stay laser focused on the idea of what can you do for the next moment? That’s the trick. If you ask any great players—and I’ve had the fortune to be around a lot of great players—Derek Jeter to Michael Jordan to other quarterbacks who have played the game—

(Bengoodfella makes wanking motion with his hand)

My mental coach, Trevor Moawad, has this idea: conscious competence. 

Not to be confused with conscious uncoupling of course. Speaking of conscious uncoupling, how smart was Russell to divorce his wife before he got paid? He knows what he's doing, even if he tries to act like he doesn't.

Seattle's quarterback coach, Carl Smith, and offensive coordinator Darrell Bevell both said Wilson’s the exact same guy this summer, post-contract and post-calamitous interception.

Wilson got the new contract like a month ago. It's not like an athlete gets paid and then always immediately starts to turn evil and lazy, refusing to show up for practice and hanging out with Justin Bieber. Sometimes it takes a year or so for a player to change after he has gotten paid, once he has faced tough situations and realizes he is rich so the motivation to dig himself out isn't as great. I'm not saying this is the case for Wilson, and I don't believe it would be, but it's been a month since he signed a new contract. It's a bit early for the whole "HE'S THE SAME GUY!" talk.

When you go on the road to training camps, there are some days you know fun things might happen.

Tickle contest between Peter and Klemko every night before bed!

Last Tuesday, I walked into Cowboys PR VP Rich Dalrymple’s office at camp—a converted Marriott Residence Inn room, right by the practice fields—and who was sitting there chewing the fat with Dalrymple? Tommy Lasorda.

"Chewing the fat" and then Peter mentions Tommy Lasorda. I see what you did there Peter.  
 
The conversation was so good I thought the best way to relay it was to give you a seat in one of the chairs in the room, across from Dalrymple’s desk, and let you just listen to Lasorda, 87, tell his tales.

I won't cover this much except to show you the contributions (or lack thereof) Peter made to the conversation.

Garrett: “Did you come to the playoff game against Detroit?”

Lasorda: “I was there! And we should have won. What about that catch?”

King: “The Dez Bryant catch that wasn’t a catch?”

Lasorda: “That was the greatest catch I ever saw in my life, and they took it away from them. Otherwise they’d have been playing Seattle.”

King: “For the NFC Championship Game.”

No Peter, the Cowboys would have been playing in Seattle against the Sounders, because the winner of the Dallas-Green Bay game got to play a soccer match against the Sounders for the right to play in the NBA Finals against the Cleveland Cavaliers.

Yes, for the NFC Championship Game. That's what Lasorda meant. No need to interject.

Lasorda: “That’s right, yeah. 

Tommy Lasorda is like, "Aren't you supposed to be the one who covers the NFL?"

King: “Seems like the rivalry is missing from baseball now. Football too. Guys are pretty friendly.”

Dalrymple: “Our guys pray with the other team on the field after the game.”
 
Lasorda: “If I saw my players ever talking to the other players, I would chew their ass out.

Brilliant observation from Peter. Of course, Peter is the same guy who loves to relay stories on how Peyton Manning and Tom Brady run into each other at exclusive restaurants and golf clubs and then marvel at how these two players are such good friends and run in the same circles. I guess it's okay for Manning and Brady to be friends and still have a rivalry, but Peter thinks guys are pretty friendly in sports and it takes away from the rivalry. That is unless Peter thinks it's cool two superstars get along well.

“It’s intoxicating. It’s a drug, a drug that gives you the most incredible feeling there is. Outside of sexual intercourse, there's probably nothing like it. But fun is the wrong word for it. I don't consider football fun. It's not like a water park, or a baseball game.”

—Former 49ers linebacker Chris Borland, on football, in a terrific longform story on ESPN.com by Mark Fainaru-Wada and Steve Fainaru about the post-football life of Borland

Hey, he made his choice according to his ethos.

“When you run the read option, you have to know the rules. If you want to run the read option with a starting quarterback that’s had two knee surgeries, that’s on you. It’s not my responsibility to update you on the rule. I could have hit him harder on that. I didn’t.”
 
—Ravens pass rusher Terrell Suggs, after hitting quarterback Sam Bradford in the left knee in Saturday night’s preseason game against the Eagles.

It seems Suggs sort of went at Bradford's knee, though it's hard to tell. He may not have and I can't figure it out. Either way, I don't know why the hell the Eagles would run the read-option with Sam Bradford in a preseason game. Many teams who actually have quarterbacks who run the read-option aren't running it in preseason, mostly because it's preseason and it's stupid to expose a quarterback to an injury risk. 

Whether Suggs had malice on the play, I don’t know. I don’t know why he would. But I don’t know how Suggs said he could have hit him harder. He lunged quite hard into Bradford’s knee.

I think overall it is a cheap play to dive into a player's knee. I don't know if Suggs meant to or not, but it's never cool to dive into a player's knee, no matter if he's the quarterback, kicker, punter or a wide receiver.

“L-A-RAMS! L-A-RAMS! L-A-RAMS!”

—Thousands of fans chanting at a practice between the St. Louis Rams and Dallas Cowboys on Tuesday at the Cowboys’ training camp field in Oxnard, Calif.

What made the display interesting was that at least two-thirds of the fans on hand that day identified as Ram fans. You don't often see a road team in a practice or game setting dominate the local crowd, but that’s what the Rams fans did in Oxnard.

Yet again, these are fans of football who want an NFL team in California. Of course they are going to put on a good show in order to convince the Rams to come out there. It's not really remarkable if you know these fans want a chance to prove they can support the Rams once they move to California.

MLB Payrolls We Have Loved Dept.:

Los Angeles Dodgers (14 games over .500) payroll: $298.5 million.

Combined payroll of Pittsburgh, Houston, Kansas City (61 over .500): $300.6 million.

This statistic just makes me roll my eyes. It's interesting I guess, but the Astros have a low payroll because they essentially disintegrated their entire team a few years ago to rebuild the organization from top to bottom. They have players working under cheap contracts who are producing at a high level.

Mr. Starwood Preferred Member Travel Notes of the Week

On the later flight, a Japanese boy, about 5 or 6, sat in the middle seat of our row, with me on the aisle. He was exceedingly polite. He had to get up twice to use the restroom, and each time he said he was sorry. While seated, he devoured a large picture book about dinosaurs, and pulled out a folder of dinosaur drawings that I am assuming he made.

Peter is like, "Of course it makes sense this little boy likes dinosaurs. All Japanese people love Godzilla and he is pretty much a dinosaur, so the fact this child devoured a book on dinosaurs did not stun me or make my jaw drop to the floor."

"I feel like the Altuve here," Astros shortstop Carlos Correa at #Texans practice.

— Tania Ganguli (@taniaganguli) August 18, 2015

We get it. Pretty good jo---

The Astros shortstop was commenting how small he felt (a la 5-7 shortstop Jose Altuve) while visiting the city’s NFL team.

And of course Peter has to explain the joke to his readers, because he believes his MMQB readers to be too stupid to figure out the joke for themselves. Not everyone can be as smart about baseball as Peter King, but give him credit for trying. One day, maybe one day, he can educate his readers to where they are close to his level.

Ten Things I Think I Think

1. I think if you wanted to tell me that San Diego pass-rusher Melvin Ingram will lead the NFL in sacks this year, I would not argue with you.

Oh, thank God. I was very worried Peter would argue with me if I said Melvin Ingram would lead the NFL in sacks this year. That's a load off my mind knowing I have Peter's approval should I hold this opinion.

2. I think it feels very much like you can see the end for Robert Griffin III in Washington. It started last year, with the blunt criticism of Griffin from his head coach, and it continues with subpar play this summer, and another mini-controversy last week, when he said he thought he was the best quarterback in the NFL. Which would be hilarious if it wasn’t so ridiculous.

I just can't believe a professional athlete had an unrealistic perspective of his true athletic ability. This never happens.

3. I think you’re owed an explanation from me, in the wake of Ben Volin of the Boston Globe writing Sunday that it wasn’t just Chris Mortensen who got a bum steer from someone in the NFL about the deflated footballs in the AFC title game. Volin said it was me, too. I reported after Mortensen’s story that 11 of the 12 footballs were at least two pounds per square inch under the minimum limit of 12.5 psi when tested by the league at halftime. I reported that I’d heard “reliably” that the story of the footballs being at least two psi under the minimum limit was correct.

Being not an employee of ESPN, I won't copy work that others have done. Here is how I feel about this apology from Peter. I agree with what is written there and I think it undermines the credibility of THE MMQB that Robert Klemko also held back the comments Cris Carter made at the rookie symposium about finding a "fall guy." But hey, he learned from Peter King. Hold back information when you are asked. It's how you best gather sources who eventually mislead you. Peter criticized Chris Mortensen a few weeks ago for not taking back his report, yet I forgot that Peter didn't take his report back either. Peter seems to have forgotten as well. No one cares. The "SI" media guy who eviscerated Cris Carter for his comments had very little to say except "You judge yourself" when confronted with the idea Klemko covered up the "fall guy" comment and Peter flip-flopped. Why? I'm guessing because he can't go as hard against "SI" employees as he can employees of other organizations. So, Peter is excused from receiving the type of criticism others would get in this situation. What a world.

As I said on Twitter on Sunday, I believe the person who told me this believed the story was accurate when, obviously, it clearly was not. So, were we used by someone to get a storyline out in public? Maybe … 

No, pretty clearly "yes."

but the reason I’m skeptical about this is because with the knowledge that there would be a full investigation and clearly the air pressure in the footballs would be publicized at some point, the league would look stupid for putting out false information that would eventually come back to embarrass it.

Great take, Peter. Because the NFL is always so worried about it's image and looking like they are giving out false information that they may eventually have to take back. We all know the NFL is deeply worried about being seen as hypocritical and willing to mislead. The NFL knows that fans will still watch, while the reporters who reported this false information would look stupid.

Clearly, this story, along with the Ray Rice story from last fall, has made me question sources and sourcing in general, and in a story as inflammatory as this one, you can’t just take the story of a person whose word you trust as gospel. It’s my error.

Again. You said this same thing last year. The two biggest NFL scandals of the last two years and Peter fumbled the ball on reporting both of them. It's almost like it's a trend. But hey, "SI's" media guy is cool with an apology, so I should be too.

I need to be better than that. Readers, and the Patriots, deserve better than that.

Which is also something Peter said last year. He said he needed to be better. Then when the next big scandal pops up, Peter gets his sourcing and reports wrong again. Readers do deserve better. Can Peter do better?

6. I think this is bad news for the future of Chris Cooley in Washington: New tight end Derek Carrier, acquired in trade with San Francisco on Friday, will be wearing number 47. For all either outside the Beltway or just casual fans of tight-end numbers in recent NFL seasons, that was Cooley’s number. He wants to play again, badly, and his old team sent him a message with that news Saturday.

This is an update for those worried about retired tight ends like Cooley and his ability to make it back into the NFL. So, this is an update for like five people.

7. I think this was a first: I interviewed Tony Romo the other night at Cowboys camp, and he brought his own soundtrack: a boom box with Bruce Springsteen playing at a moderate volume. During our chat, he interrupted his football chatter when “Wrecking Ball” came on.

I don't want to spoil the ending, but Romo and Peter bonded over how great Bruce Springsteen is live. Which is something we already know. I do like how both Peter and Romo pretend like seeing Springsteen live is some secret they both share, instead of something that probably millions of people have in common with them.

9. I think the Cowboys deserve credit for recruiting La’el Collins hard and signing him as a rookie free-agent after the draft … but 31 other teams deserve blame for not using a sixth- or seventh-round pick to take him on draft day. Pro Football Focus named him the top-rated rookie of the first full weekend of the preseason, and people in camp told me last week he’s been terrific in all phases with the second unit. I don’t expect him to stay second-team for the season.

Hey revisionist history, this is Peter King on the line wanting to speak with you. If Peter recalls correctly, and maybe he needs one of his sources to confirm this, Collins was a part of a murder investigation prior to the draft. If it turns out Collins had a part in this murder then I imagine Peter would be writing, "I can't believe Team X spent a draft pick on a player they knew had no chance of playing this season or even in the NFL at any point."

Peter seems to not be able to recall his own words. I'll help him. Here is what he said about Collins prior to the draft:

1. I think La’el Collins, the LSU tackle projected to be a first-round draft choice, has a problem. A pregnant woman Collins apparently knew was murdered last week in Louisiana, and police want to speak with Collins. Police say he is not a suspect. But one team I talked to that is interested in drafting a tackle in the first round is now re-thinking whether Collins will even be on its board on Thursday night. This team’s thinking goes: How can you draft a guy who’s being sought in connection with the death of a woman, even if police are saying now he isn’t a suspect? He needs to be exonerated by Thursday. Fair or unfair, Collins needs to address this today, and with finality.

But now that Peter has revisionist history on his side he thinks some NFL team should have drafted Collins because he's so talented. Peter does an excellent job of forgetting that Collins' status was very much up in the air when the draft occurred. What a farce for Peter to act like 31 teams (and the Cowboys, they didn't draft Collins either, dumbass) dropped the ball in not spending a pick on Collins.

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

b. I think having a The MMQB-style site for covering the 2016 election would be an awful lot of fun right now. I think I’d have Klemko writing a daily Trump story, and Vrentas doing a what’s-wrong-with-Hillary’s-campaign takeout right about now.

Peter always has the pulse on what his readers want. He thinks his readers want MORE coverage of Donald Trump, as if the wall-to-wall coverage he gets every evening on FOX and CNN isn't enough. It's like when Peter writes about Tim Tebow, because that's what his readers want to read about. Peter knows us better than we do it seems. 

e. In the midst of this bizarro-world bad Red Sox season, I note that, in the span of eight-and-a-third innings last week, Boston got 25 hits and 18 runs off King Felix and Johnny Cueto.

f. You just can’t predict baseball, Suzyn. You really can’t.

It's not like the Red Sox have a team full of shitty hitters or anything. They are 3rd in the majors in runs scored, 4th in OBP, and 3rd in the majors in hits. Scoring runs isn't their issue. So you can't predict baseball, but you can know the strengths of your own favorite team.

g. Not saying Dave Dombrowski wasn’t a good hire by the Red Sox.

And we all know that Peter will basically now say Dave Dombrowski wasn't a good hire by the Red Sox. Peter does this all the time. "I don't want to do this..." and then Peter proceeds to do that thing.

But just for the record: Boston made a change because the current franchise architect spent huge money on players (Sandoval, Porcello, Hanley) who are not huge-money players. And the franchise now has hired an architect who spent huge money on players (other than Miguel Cabrera and maybe Victor Martinez) who didn’t produce enough to win big.

Yes, other than the players who Dombrowski spent big money on that have so far worked out well, he's really signed some huge busts. Just ignore all the good signings he made and his record looks pretty bleak. 

What am I missing? 

You mean other than the two World Series champions Dombrowski built in Florida, the fact he took a Tigers team that was the worst in the majors and built them into a team that made two World Series, and drafted guys like Rick Porcello, who he then traded so the Red Sox could give him a huge contract? Other than all the success Dombrowski has had? Other than that, you are missing nothing.

I see the division titles, and it’s important to get in the derby every year, so maybe I’m being too hard on Dombrowski. But the Tigers are 12 over .500 since opening day 2014 (including the playoff three-game sweep last year by the Orioles). Going forward, I’d like Boston to be more of a farm-system team and less of a free-agent team. Too many Crawford/Hanley mistakes in big-money land.

You mean draft good players like Curtis Granderson, Justin Verlander, Andrew Miller, Rick Porcello, Alex Avila, and Drew Smyly? Or do you mean the part where he used prospects he drafted to land guys like Miguel Cabrera, Austin Jackson, Max Scherzer, Anibal Sanchez, and David Price?

The funny part is Peter is bemoaning the Red Sox re-signing Rick Porcello, yet he can't seem to make the connection that Dombrowski is the guy who traded Porcello to the Red Sox before he wanted a big contract the Red Sox eventually gave him.

j. Coffeenerdness: This was a first, driving from the airport in Denver to the Broncos’ practice facility last Thursday: a standalone drive-through Starbucks. No store. Just a skinny little drive-through, on the southeast side of town. No idea such a place existed. Some of their stores could take a lesson from said drive-through: From time of order (three drinks) to pickup of drinks: less than 90 seconds.

One minute Peter wants to have a discussion with the barista and talk about how kind everyone is when having conversation, the next minute he wants everyone at Starbucks to shut the fuck up and just hand him his coffee. I guess it just depends on Peter's mood whether he wants conversation and kindness or a quick drink without any talk.

l. Took Greg Bishop of SI to Coors Field for his first trip there on a lovely night for baseball (Nats/Scherzer-Rockies) Thursday. Good to be joined by one of America’s bright young sportswriting lights, Tim Rohan of the New York Times. Coors has one of the best concession stands in all of sports: a salad bar on the lower concourse between first base and right field. Romaine, cucumber, cherry tomatoes, red onion, with balsamic vinaigrette, topped with chicken, for about $8.

Yeah, Max Scherzer. Which MLB GM traded for him before he flourished again? I can't remember. 

m. Uh, no line in the sixth inning Thursday night. There should have been.

Because I know when I go to a baseball game I'm thinking, "I'm hungry as hell, where is the nearest salad bar at? All I can think about is devouring a delicious house salad with my beer while watching some baseball."

The Adieu Haiku

So L.A. beckons.
My best guess: Rams in ’16,
Chargers close behind.

I only include the Adieu Haiku now because I want everyone who reads this blog to suffer through the inanity of it along with me. 

1 comments Chris Chase Says Russell Wilson Isn't Worth His New Contract Simply Because He Isn't

I think Russell Wilson probably got more money than his overall talent level should suggest, even compared to what other NFL quarterbacks have received lately. Still, I see why the Seahawks paid Wilson like they did and I can't say I wouldn't have done the same thing they did. I can't really find evidence that Wilson is overrated or doesn't deserve the money, so I have a hard time bashing him and criticizing his contract until he shows that he's simply not a franchise or above-average quarterback. Chris Chase of "For the Win" doesn't have this problem. In a column that I am guessing he had pre-written in some form (just a guess, I have no proof) he states that Russell Wilson is now vastly overpaid. Great, I can understand this line of thinking. Unfortunately, Chris Chase doesn't explain why he believes Wilson is overpaid other than, "We all know he's not that good," which doesn't really grade out as a persuasive argument for why Wilson is overpaid. An opinion isn't proof. If it were, then Skip Bayless and Stephen A. Smith would be the two smartest men in sports.

In one fell swoop, Russell Wilson went from the most underpaid quarterback in the NFL to its most overpaid.

BAM! You got scalded by this hot take. Russell Wilson is the most overpaid quarterback in the NFL only seconds after being the most underpaid. Life's a bitch, especially when you are now wealthy beyond all imagination. 

The Seattle Seahawks quarterback beat a Friday deadline to extend his contract, signing for a whopping $61 million guaranteed, with a reported $31 million signing bonus for an annual salary of about $21.9 million that’s just under that of Aaron Rodgers. The total amount of the four-year deal is worth a preposterous $87.6 million which doesn’t appear to contain much of the funny money that usually inflates the contracts of NFL players.

This is the going rate for a franchise quarterback. Is Wilson a franchise quarterback? I don't believe he is on-par with Rodgers, Brees, Brady, Luck, but Wilson has given no evidence my belief is anything but fiction so far. He's been impressive when he needs to be in important games. It's hard to put a value on that. 

This was a deal that both sides needed.

Seattle locked up their starter before this season started, avoiding the headaches and questions that would have come along with Wilson’s unsigned contract for next year. It also locks up a fine quarterback for the foreseeable future.

It's a mutually beneficial contract where Wilson gets paid a ton of money and the Seahawks don't have to search for a replacement for Wilson. While Chris Chase thinks the Seahawks overpaid for Russell Wilson, it's more expensive to let Wilson go in free agency and try to find his replacement. Wilson probably is making more money than he rationally should, as are many other quarterbacks in the NFL, but until a team doesn't have a quarterback it's forgotten how much it sucks to not have one. It's hard to put a price on trying to find a quarterback when an NFL team doesn't have one.

But to do that, the ‘Hawks had to overpay a very good QB who, 

To call Wilson a "very good QB" is to also understand $20+ million per year is the going rate for a very good quarterback.

thanks to a phenomenal defense, great offensive line and powerful rushing attack, has convinced the league he’s one of its best.

Chris Chase will provide no data or any other information that supports his contention the great offensive line, powerful rushing attack and great defense are what makes Russell Wilson the quarterback he is. I'm sorry, I expect more than just the same old talking points about why Wilson is overrated.

He’s the clear winner in the deal.

You don't say? The guy who just got guaranteed $61 million is the clear winner in this deal. You sure about that? 

Wilson, who paid his dues playing his third year with the contract of an NFL pauper, will be in the final year of the deal when he’s 30, when he’ll still be in his prime (and the salary cap should be considerably higher). But Seattle wins too.

They win because they keep the quarterback who, overrated or not overrated, has taken them to two straight Super Bowls. Wilson isn't Trent Dilfer or Brad Johnson, but this also doesn't mean he is Aaron Rodgers. He's been a pretty good quarterback so far and he got paid like a pretty good quarterback. 

So if both sides win, how can Russell Wilson be overpaid? Because, come on: Russell Wilson isn’t worth Aaron Rodgers money. He’s not worth Drew Brees money. Heck, he really has no place near Philip Rivers’ tax bracket.

But, why? Do better than stating, "He's just not as good as these guys." Brees, Rivers and Rodgers all signed their current contracts before the quarterback market had been reset (thanks Joe Flacco!). So it's possible Wilson isn't overpaid, quarterbacks like Rodgers, Brees and Rivers could be underpaid. Maybe not, but at least give statistical and logical reasons other than "He just is" for why Wilson is overpaid. 

Now he’s the second-highest paid quarterback in the league? It’s nonsense.

If there were a schoolyard pick of quarterbacks in the NFL, Wilson should go about 13th, right around Eli Manning and Cam Newton.

Cam Newton just signed a contract very similar, though one year longer, than that which Wilson just signed, while Manning has a cap hit of $19.75 million this year. Just a tip, but if you are going to compare Wilson to two other quarterbacks in an effort to show he is overpaid, try not to compare him to two quarterbacks who have salaries in a similar financial bracket as he has. If Wilson is 13th around Manning and Newton, then Wilson seems to be properly compensated, no?

I mean, if he’s worth $21.9 million per year, what should Andrew Luck get? $30 million? $35 million? $50 million?

Andrew Luck will get a ton of money. He'll get more than Wilson, despite not having had Wilson's success in terms of Super Bowl appearances. See how it works? Then if you compare Luck's salary to that of Rodgers, Brady, and others it will look like Luck is overpaid because he doesn't nearly have the amount of rings and MVP's those guys have.

Yet Wilson deserves every penny of the deal 

(Bengoodfella throws hands up in the air) If he deserves the money then how can he be overpaid? Being overpaid means an athlete (or person) is compensated more money than he deserves for his performance. If Wilson deserves the contract, he probably isn't overpaid.

and the Seahawks had no choice but to pay it, even if it hamstrings them from making deals with other players over the next three years.

Yes, but quarterback is the most important position on an NFL team. History shows that if a team doesn't have a good quarterback then they aren't winning a Super Bowl and don't have a great chance of making the playoffs. 

If Joe Flacco and Andy Dalton are getting nine-figure deals, then the market is set for a winner like Wilson to thrive, even if quarterback wins are the most overrated stat in the game. (When Dalton’s wins are cited, people say they don’t matter. When Wilson’s are, they are.) 

The very obvious difference in comparing Dalton to Wilson is that Dalton is 0-4 in his playoff career while Russell Wilson is 6-2 with two Super Bowl appearances. Wins are an overrated stat, there's no doubt, but a comparison of Dalton to Wilson is laughable when the big difference in the two quarterbacks using the win statistic is ignored. If Chris Chase claims the only difference in Wilson and Dalton is wins then I'd like to mention that Russell Wilson doesn't have A.J. Green either and Dalton doesn't have the wins that a quarterback is graded on. Dalton's wins are dismissed because he falls on his face in the playoffs. Chris Chase knows this, yet he acts like this isn't relevant.

Other QBs set the market and Wilson was able to parlay that into a bigger deal because the other 21 guys he plays with are better than the 21 players on other teams.

Again, this is an opinion which has no factual backing. Wilson is overpaid, overrated and he only got a deal because his team is better than other NFL teams. Fine, without some factual backing it's just an opinion. Do better. 

Despite that one ring and the second ring that was lost with one of the most untimely and awful passes in NFL history, Wilson is an above-average quarterback on a team that allows such a signal caller to thrive.

Yes, despite those two Super Bowl appearances in three years, Wilson is an above-average quarterback on a very good team. He'd be 13th in QB rankings, right between two other quarterbacks who are making around $20 million per year as well. Tom Brady is a missed field goal and an untimely pass away from being 2-4 in the Super Bowl. He's two really good passes by the Giants away from being 6-0 in the Super Bowl. Super Bowl wins (right or wrong) is how a quarterback can be graded.

And I'm not a big defender of Russell Wilson, but he's been better than above-average when the Seahawks have needed him to be. Maybe he isn't Aaron Rodgers, but he fits what the Seahawks are doing, and that in itself could be worth the money he's getting in his new contract. I keep waiting for Wilson to fall flat on his face too, but it hasn't happened.

Guys like Andrew Luck or Aaron Rodgers are quarterbacks who lead, Russell Wilson is a quarterback who sustains.

I don't even know what this means. I feel like Russell Wilson is a pretty good leader, even if he doesn't have an outstanding set of skills on paper that Rodgers and Luck have. 

That’s apparently good for $20 million plus in the modern-day NFL.

An above-average quarterback who wins games is worth $20+ million in the modern-day NFL. I don't know if Chris Chase's beef is with the increasing cost of the quarterback position or with Russell Wilson, but when stating Wilson is overpaid then it's better to come with some proof or statistics. An opinion is great, but it seems like Wilson is right where he was expected to be in terms of compensation in a new contract. Until further notice or further proof, I can't call him overpaid yet. I don't particularly like how he lobbied and acted on his way to getting his new contract, I found him to be slightly disingenuous with some of his negotiating tactics, but he got paid and that's all that matters. Let's wait for him to fall on his face, or for any proof the past three years have been not representative of his skill set, before announcing Wilson is overpaid. Trust me, I keep trying to come up with reasons too and I just can't.

1 comments Luther Campbell Thinks David West Is a Crazy Person Who Needs a Psychologist Because He Wants to Win an NBA Title

Luther Campbell, yes THAT Luther Campbell, for some reason gets the opportunity to write for the "Miami New Times." I've never heard of this paper, and I have covered Luther here a couple of times before, but he seems like he covers a mix of sports and social issues in his writing. One sports issue that Luther felt like tackling was that of David West opting-out of his contract with the Pacers in order to take a lot less money and join the Spurs. West wants to win an NBA title. That's fairly clear. West isn't the first athlete to take less money to chase a championship, but Luther thinks he needs a psychologist for making this decision. Nevermind a few Heat players took less money than they could make on the free agent market to join the LeBron/Bosh/Wade chase for titles (including some of those three players taking small pay cuts to team up). That doesn't really seem to faze Luther Campbell because these players didn't pass up as much money as David West did. Somehow, Campbell also blames Gregg Popovich for West choosing the Spurs and seems to think Popovich should have acted in West's best interests and refused to sign West. It's all confusing. I think maybe Luther Campbell needs the psychologist.

Veteran NBA forward David West has lost his mind.

And it's Luther Campbell's job to help West get his mind back.

The 34-year-old former All-Star just pulled off the craziest free agent move in sports history by taking a gargantuan pay cut to  play for the San Antonio Spurs. 

David West has earned $87 million in his career so far. I know everything is about money, but it's not entirely crazy for West to take a pay cut in order to try and win a championship. Plus, there are worse things than being coached by Gregg Popovich. It would have been crazy if West were still in the prime of his career and decided to take a huge pay cut while signing a long-term contract in order to win a title. West is 34 years old and wants to win a title. He's earned $87 million in his career. Crazy, this is not. Yearning to win a title after he has made his millions? Yes.

West opted out of the last year of his contract with the Indiana Pacers, leaving $12.2 million on the table. Believing the Spurs give him the best chance to win the NBA title that has eluded him for 12 years, West signed with San Antonio for the veteran’s minimum of $1.5 million.  

West is only making $1.5 million this year. That's it! How will he afford to feed his family on that type of money, assuming he has blown every other dime he has made in his NBA career of course? I don't know David West's finances, but I'm assuming a guy who chooses to forgo more money to win a title is probably pretty good with managing his money as well and isn't poor. 

“At this point in my career, I just want to win,” West told Indianapolis TV station WTHR.

Absolutely insane. 

Most of the reaction from the sports media has been positive, praising West for putting competition above compensation. 

This praise comes from the fact that West has earned his money already. He wants a ring. I don't know if I would take less money to win a title, but I also haven't come as close as West has to making the NBA Finals without actually making it. 

He’s really being a fool.

If only West was a grown-ass man who was capable of making his own decisions and didn't need ex-rappers to question his sanity. 

This is not the same as Ray Allen, LeBron James, Dwyane Wade taking pay cuts to win a title together. Sure, they took reductions, but nothing out of this world like West. 

West took a $12 million pay cut according to Luther Campbell. It doesn't appear Campbell is too good with the math. The Pacers were offering $12 million and West took $1.4-1.5 million to play for the Spurs. He took a $10.5 million pay cut to play for the Spurs. Ray Allen took a $7 million pay cut to play for the Heat. Not that I expect Luther to spend his precious time doing research, but Ray Allen took a large pay cut to play for the Heat, so what West did was very close to being the same as what Allen did. I know Luther Campbell would prefer not to deal with reality, but what West did is like what Allen did.

The NBA Player’s Association needs to step in and investigate how the Spurs pulled off the steal of the free-agency period. 

Actually, I think I could do some investigation into this topic to see what malfeasance has been going on. (Bengoodfella takes five seconds to copy and paste a comment from David West)

Oh, now I see how the Spurs pulled this off. Here is the evidence on how the Spurs did this. I warn you, it is salacious. Here we go...

“At this point in my career, I just want to win,” West told Indianapolis TV station WTHR.

OH MY GOD, SAY IT'S NOT TRUE! The Spurs pulled this off by convincing David West he wanted to win an NBA title. I'm sure Adam Silver wouldn't have the balls to investigate the Spurs for this, but he should. Silver will just protect the favored members of the NBA fraternity like Gregg Popovich and Tim Duncan, but the Spurs should be punished harshly for using mind control to convince West he wants to win an NBA title.

San Antonio’s head coach Gregg Popovich, a former player who knows how grueling an NBA season can be, should be ashamed of himself for allowing West to make such a ridiculous decision.

How dare Popovich allow a grown man who is also a millionaire make a decision for himself! It's intriguing to me how Luther Campbell has somehow managed to turn a decision made by an NBA player into the coach of an NBA team manipulating that player. West states why he took less money, yet that's not good enough for Campbell. Why would Popovich be ashamed of himself for putting together the best team he is able to? He's supposed to apologize for being a great head coach and the result being that veteran players want to play for him? 

He took advantage of West’s emotions.

Yes, Popovich took advantage of West's emotions by convincing him that he wanted to win an NBA title and accept less money to do so. It sounds like Popovich and the Spurs didn't have to do much except make the contract offer. The idea the Spurs took advantage of West is just hilarious to me. NBA players are capable of making their own decisions about where they want to play the sport of basketball and it's not like West will play for free. He's still getting paid for his services.

After taxes, West will probably clear around $600,000. And he still has to pay for the cost of living in two places.

Well, I don't believe there are any state taxes in Texas, so that helps.

It’s not like he’s just going to sell his house in Indiana in one day.

Luther Campbell is simply concerned about the real estate market in Indiana. How can West get the money he put into the home back? David West needs a psychologist because he expects to sell his house in this Indiana real estate market!

Also, as I detailed earlier, David West has made $87 million in his career. Who the hell says he is moving away from Indiana? Why would he have to move to play in San Antonio? Couldn't he just rent an apartment during the season? Somehow Campbell's argument for West being crazy is starting to lean more towards Campbell being the one who needs a psychologist. Why does it matter if West can sell his house? 

Has anyone ever seen an NFL, NBA, or MLB owner cut into their profits to give breaks to poor people who can’t afford to attend games? No.

Yes, but David West could not have joined the Spurs if he had not taken a pay cut. This wasn't a move driven by the Spurs ownership wanting David West at whatever cost, but a move driven by David West to take a pay cut. The Spurs don't really get a break by having David West take the veteran minimum because they weren't going to be able to spend the $12 million it would take to sign West at market value. So this isn't like owners cutting into profits to give a break to poor people who can't attend games, because the Spurs weren't spending money on West if he didn't sign for close the veteran minimum.

West needs a psychological evaluation. When an athlete kisses $11 million good-bye without thinking about his future is a prime example of why he will end up broke.

Man, that's a bit harsh. So Luther Campbell is arguing (relatively incoherently by the way) that David West, who has earned $87 million in his career, is going to go broke because he's "only" playing for $1.5 million this season. Other than evidence he needs a psychological evaluation, couldn't this be proof that West has thought about his future and has saved up enough money to where he CAN go play for the Spurs for $1.5 million? Maybe this isn't a sign he will go broke, but a sign he isn't going to go broke. 

When West retires, he is not going to find another job that pays hims more than ten million dollars a year. 

Unlike all of those other athletes who retire and immediately find jobs that pay them as much as they earned during their playing career? What planet does Luther Campbell live on? What, Bimbo Coles retires and then finds a job that pays him $2.2 million per year? This is something Campbell really thinks happens?

I don't know how Campbell has earned the opportunity to write anything down in a newspaper and be taken seriously, but "Player takes pay cut to win a title" isn't even close to being correlated to "Player goes broke because he spends too much money."

That’s when he will regret it.

Maybe he can pawn his championship ring for cash at that point. 

4 comments Jason Reid Examines the Cruelty of the Salary Cap in Sports

Welcome to the blog, Jason Reid! Reid used to write for "The Washington Post," but seems to have taken a job with ESPN.com. Good for him. It's nice to move up (it's considered "up" so I'll just say it's "up" because the pay is most likely increased) in the world. Jason Reid is one of the brave souls who is willing to speak about the cruelty of the salary cap in sports and how it causes professional athletes to be grossly underpaid for the services they provide. There are also professional athletes who are grossly overpaid for the services they provide, but those aren't as much fun to talk about. Let's conveniently ignore those athletes. Instead, Reid focuses on how the salary is cruel to superstars like Russell Wilson and LeBron James. Yes, he uses the word "cruel" in this context. As if limiting LeBron James to earnings of $22 million in a year instead of his real free market value with no salary cap is on par with other cruel acts that take place in the world. I think Jason Reid needs some perspective and he also needs to stop using some slightly fuzzy math.

Let's talk about the myth that superstar athletes in the NFL and NBA are compensated fairly.

Let's talk about your definition of "fairly." Is it "fairly" compared to the rest of the free world and the average compensation of a worker? Or is it "fairly" compared to their skill set and how easy it is to find a similar skill set among other citizens of the free world? In and of themselves, professional athletes have a difficult skill set to replicate simply by existing as professional athletes. Because Russell Wilson plays in the NFL, this means he has a skill set that most other people do not. So what is "fair" should be relative to other NFL players. If anything, the rookie salary cap, not the NFL's overall salary cap for each team, is what has caused Russell Wilson to not be compensated fairly during his career.

The first issue with this column is that the salary cap is not cruel. It's a matter of fact. Just as state employees have a cap on how much they are able to earn in their respective field, for example a great teaching administrator can only earn so much in that position, the NFL and NBA have a cap on how much players can earn. Is it cruel that I earn more than someone who works as an administrative assistant to a City Manager, even though he/she has the exact same skill set in their field as I have in mine? No, it's a matter of fact for the field that we are both in. So for Russell Wilson and LeBron James it's not "unfair," it's a matter of fact in that player's chosen sport.

The second issue is nobody wants to hear about how NFL and NBA players are not compensated fairly. If there were no salary cap in these two sports then these players could earn more money. Using words like "fairly" and "cruel" overshadows and diminishes the point Jason Reid wants to prove by making it seem like he's trying to evoke sympathy for these players. He's not doing a very good job of proving his point.

The truth is, the best players in those leagues are grossly underpaid because of the salary cap. For Seattle Seahawks quarterback Russell Wilson, that's a bad system.

Relative to football players, the rookie salary cap is why Russell Wilson is underpaid. Once Wilson gets a chance to hit free agency or accepts a contract offer from the Seahawks, he will no longer be underpaid. This comparison across different leagues isn't a very good comparison because each professional sport has it's own salary structure and revenue-sharing which can determine the salary cap and money available to pay these athletes. It's like saying I am underpaid in my profession compared to an investment banker. Sure, I am underpaid compared to an investment banker, but I'm not an investment banker. If I were an investment banker and earned what I earn now, there is a chance I would be underpaid compared to what others in my field earn. Similarly, stating because I'm an investment banker who earns $100,000 a year, then claiming I'm underpaid because a financial planner earns $250,000, wouldn't be a correct way to frame the argument in my opinion. To say, "Oh, well, if there was a different salary structure in place that had no salary cap then Russell Wilson would earn more money" may be a good point. To say he is underpaid compared to other athletic professions because this separate salary structure with no salary cap does not exist in the NFL is not a good point. Wilson should be compared to other NFL players to determine if he is underpaid. 

Seattle knows what it has: Wilson is a keeper. But at what salary? Like all teams, the Seahawks must balance their desire to reward Wilson with the need to maintain cap flexibility. Obviously, those issues are at odds.

Even if there were no salary cap, the Seahawks would have to balance their desire to reward Wilson with the amount of money the organization can afford to spend on Wilson. There is a reason even MLB teams, who play in a sport with no salary cap, can't go out and spend $100 million on a free agent. So even when there isn't a salary cap, there is still the profitability issue and spending ability related to this profitability issue that exists which prevents a team from rewarding their own players at maximum market value. Assuming every NFL team's spending ability is equal and endless is a faulty assumption. So there will always be some sort of budget professional franchises have where the player's reward must be balanced with payroll flexibility. It's shocking to Jason Reid that a salary cap designed to level the playing field does in fact level the playing field.

Although Wilson is a face-of-the-franchise performer, the former third-round draft pick won't be paid what he deserves for his role in the NFL's ongoing economic boom. 

He will be paid what he is worth compared to other NFL players.

Players who produce at a high level while leading their teams to championships provide the foundation of a league that reportedly generated about $10 billion in revenue last season.

Yes, the NFL earned that amount of money. Each individual team didn't earn $10 billion last season.

In contrast, this season's salary cap is set at $143.28 million per team. That's a small slice of a very big pie.

So Jason Reid's point is that the NFL makes a lot of money and each individual employee of the NFL or employee of an NFL team doesn't see a big slice of this very big pie? Much like how my company earns a lot of money and I only get a small slice of a very big pie? So the NFL players are being treated like 99.5% of American employees are treated to where they only earn a small subset of what the company earns as a whole. Excuse me if I can't quite muster up some more sympathy for Russell Wilson when he wants $25 million per year and is only being offered $18 million per year. I'm guessing Jason Reid earns a very small slice of what ESPN makes every single year. Does that mean he is underpaid? Does that mean Skip Bayless is underpaid because he only earns a few million of what ESPN earns every year? Of course not.

Even if Wilson receives a record package -- with an average salary of $22 million, Green Bay Packers quarterback Aaron Rodgers is the NFL's highest-paid player -- he'll still be a bargain based on the league's immense profitability.

This is a remarkably stupid comment. People can get their panties in a wad over CEO compensation, but compared to how much Bank of America makes annually in revenue, that would mean Kenneth Lewis was actually underpaid when he made $24.8 million while being bailed out by the federal government. As long as you use the logic that Jason Reid uses then the idea Lewis was underpaid may make sense. Who knew Lewis was so underpaid at the time?

The buzz is that the Seahawks, despite Wilson's impressive accomplishments for a quarterback at the outset of his career, would rather not break new salary ground because they don't have to (Wilson is under the team's control for at least three more seasons). 

And, of course, if it wasn't such a cruel fact of life that there is a salary cap in the NFL then Russell Wilson would be able to earn untold millions on the free market over the next three seasons, right? Wait, that's not right at all. Even if there was no salary cap and 15 NFL teams were looking to pay Russell Wilson $500 million to be their quarterback, Wilson can't even hit free agency for another three years. Not to mention, during two of those years Wilson would be one of the highest-paid players at his position. So again, Jason Reid is trying so hard to make it seem like if it weren't for the salary cap then Russell Wilson would be rolling in dough right now. That's not entirely true. Though, he could be rolling in dough compared to other athletes at his position if he were franchised for two straight seasons.

However, the argument that Wilson is nothing more than a game manager is ridiculous. That became clear after Wilson rallied the Seahawks to victory over the Packers in last season's NFC Championship Game.

Whether Russell Wilson is a game manager or not is irrelevant. Argue the point, don't try to create a whole new discussion because the topic for this column is inherently weak.

And ask yourself this about Wilson: How much could he command in free agency if there were no salary cap?

Ask yourself this about this question: Do you know the answer to the question or are you just speculating in order to prove your point? Ask yourself this as well: If the NFL had no salary cap would it improve the game?

With elite signal-callers in high demand, the list of bidders, undoubtedly, would be long for a charismatic winner who won't turn 27 until November. There's no way of determining how much Wilson would receive in such a scenario. 

I would disagree that the list of bidders would be long. Just like the list of serious bidders for an MLB free agent isn't long, there would be an even smaller list of NFL teams who would pursue Russell Wilson if he were a free agent in an NFL without a salary cap. The teams that would seriously pursue Wilson would be teams that don't currently have a starting quarterback under contract and would be willing to pay the amount of money Wilson would want.

In fact, I think I could make an argument that the list of bidders for Wilson would be higher with the salary cap and non-guaranteed salary structure the NFL has. If the 49ers want to pursue Russell Wilson then it's a lot easier to do that knowing that they don't have to pay Colin Kaepernick his full contract AND Kaepernick would have (under Reid's theory) gotten an even bigger, guaranteed contract if the NFL was a free market when the 49ers re-signed him. This means the 49ers would have a more difficult time of moving Kaepernick in a trade or would have to eat a lot of the contract if it were 100% guaranteed. This would obviously affect their ability to sign Russell Wilson. Under the non-guaranteed salary structure, the 49ers could cut ties with Kaepernick and sign Wilson, fully knowing they aren't on the hook for Kaepernick's entire salary.

I'm getting off-point. My point is the list of suitors for Russell Wilson wouldn't be as long as Jason Reid thinks because NFL teams who have a quarterback and don't want to pay for Wilson's contract demand won't be in the running for his services.

Wilson's situation is a glaring example of why the cap doesn't work for superstars, sports attorney David Cornwell says.

"Why should a Super Bowl-winning, and two-time Super Bowl-appearing, quarterback be fighting for money?" Cornwell, who represents 2015 No. 1 pick Jameis Winston, said in a phone interview the other day.

So a sports attorney who represents NFL players think that these NFL players should get paid more, meaning the attorney representing that NFL player would get paid more? No way! So David Cornwell holds this opinion based on his own selfish need to make as much money as possible and this affects whether his opinion truly has merit or not? You don't say. Who would have thought that money and having a stake in how money is distributed could affect a person's opinion on a topic? Certainly not me. 

"If [teams] can cut players when they don't perform to their contracts, why can't we have a system where players are guaranteed to benefit [as much as they should] when they perform?"

Because the NFL union didn't negotiate guaranteed contracts into the latest collective bargaining agreement. Had they chosen to do so, then perhaps the players would be guaranteed to benefit when they perform. Also, guaranteed contracts are an entirely different issue from the cruelty of the salary cap. Jason Reid's shaky writing skills are combining these two issues, but they are two separate issues. The NBA does have fully guaranteed contracts and they still have a salary cap. So it's not the NFL owner's fault the players don't have fully guaranteed contracts, because the players chose not to negotiate this into the latest CBA. I understand the point, but I get a little tired of the players and ancillary figures to the players bitching about non-guaranteed contracts. They could have negotiated this into the latest CBA and chose not to. David Cornwell nor Jason Reid should talk about the unfairness of non-guaranteed contracts when it was the NFL players who chose not to pursue this. 

NFL players are compensated spectacularly (the league's starting salary is $435,000). Anyone who suggests otherwise should be ridiculed.

(points at Jason Reid and then begins ridiculing him)

But relative to the revenue they generate, superstars have been exploited historically.

Relative to the revenue they generate nearly every employee is exploited historically. There's no point in running a business if the employees eat up all the profits with their compensation. It sort of defeats the purpose of the business if all revenues go to the employees doesn't it? Relative to the revenue the NFL generates, even Roger Goodell is exploited using Jason Reid's logic. 

And the salary cap, designed to foster competitive balance among teams, has improved the owners' bottom lines much more than it has benefited their most important employees.

And of course because there is no salary cap in baseball, the owners are poor and can't make any money of their teams. Right? Speaking of bottom lines, even if there was no salary cap, NBA and NFL teams still have bottom lines that they must meet in order to make money. This is yet another point that Jason Reid is missing, that professional sports organizations still have budgets and a set amount that they will spend on their most important employees.

 "As a general proposition, there's a strong argument that can be made that, when properly applied, a salary cap can be good for the overall good of the game," said Cornwell, who worked for the NFL early in his career.

"But there are so many moving parts to determine if it's properly applied. And, there's no question about it: The current salary-cap structure is especially harmful to the best players."

And notice how David Cornwell doesn't make mention of when the salary cap is good for the overall good of the game. He says, "Sure, a salary cap can be great, but this one is super-bad," without mentioning when a salary cap could be "properly applied." If there is any salary cap, then there is a good chance the best employees won't be receiving their top market value, but this also doesn't mean these employees are underpaid. 

One issue that David Cornwell doesn't address is how the salary cap treats the 95% of the NBA players who aren't superstars. There are far more NBA players who aren't superstars than there are players who are superstars. Wouldn't the true test of a salary-cap structure be how players in that sport are compensated over all skills levels, not based simply on how much money superstars can earn?

Cleveland Cavaliers forward LeBron James has dominated the NBA over the past seven seasons, winning four league MVP awards and twice being selected the NBA Finals MVP. Yet, James, who this week became an unrestricted free agent for the third time, has never had the NBA's highest salary.

Who did have the highest salary during this time? Other superstars who are exploited by the salary cap in the NBA. I like how Jason Reid is all, "Superstars should be compensated like they are superstars. See, LeBron hasn't ever been the highest paid player in the NBA," then ignores who was the highest paid player in the NBA over this time. I'm guessing it's probably another superstar who is supposedly held down by the salary cap. Whoops.

By signing contracts that have included escape clauses, James has maximized his earning potential, re-entering free agency and receiving new deals as the cap has increased. Unfortunately for James, cap rules limit how much he can earn based on many factors. There's no telling what teams would offer James if the salary cap were not a factor.

There is no telling. What I believe I can tell is that whatever team offered James this contract also has a budget they can spend on other players which will be greatly affected by how much James earns.

NBA revenue is about $5 billion.

NBA revenue is $5 billion, but every NBA team doesn't have revenue of $5 billion. I feel like Jason Reid is seeing this $5 billion figure and saying, "Hey, LeBron James only earns $20+ million of this! Look at his value to the league!" This isn't the best way to argue LeBron James is underpaid. If James earned $100 million this season on the NBA's $5 billion in revenue then he's still only earning 2% of the overall revenues of the NBA. Is LeBron James more important to the NBA than that? I'm sure Jason Reid would argue he is. 

When one the greatest players in NBA history fails to get close to fair contract value because of the salary cap, major change is needed.

Jason Reid is all over the place. One minute he's talking about the NFL's salary cap, then he's talking about the NFL's non-guaranteed salary structure and now he's back using his fuzzy math discussing how the overall revenues of the NBA are $5 billion and he thinks LeBron James should get a larger piece of this. All while not realizing each NBA team (and there are 30 of them) doesn't earn $5 billion each year. 

"It's indefensible that LeBron James exposes himself to the risk of injury by opting out and taking one-, two-year deals to get higher salary-cap numbers," Cornwell said. "And it's not just an issue for the Cleveland Cavaliers.

David Cornwell seems to really struggle with personal responsibility and how these NFL and NBA players are partly responsible for their situation. LeBron James doesn't have to sign a one or two year contract. I bet the Cavs would love it if he signed a longer deal, but LeBron chooses to sign these contracts to max out his earnings. So I don't know if it's "indefensible" that LeBron has to opt-out and take these shorter contracts, but it's something he has chosen to do in order to capture a few extra million dollars that he doesn't need to live his life. It's really hard for me to feel bad for LeBron James because he opts out of a contract in order to earn a few extra million dollars. That's not something I can relate to. LeBron chooses to opt out to capture as much money as possible. That's his choice.

"All of the other owners shouldn't want him to do it ... because a rising tide lifts all ships. That's what the superstar players provide. Why would anyone want to risk [losing] those players because of the salary cap?"

I don't understand. Where would these players go to earn more money playing basketball? Is Cornwell saying that LeBron would leave the Cavs because he keeps opting out of his deal? Because I'm pretty sure the other NBA owners would like that very much, because it means they have a shot at signing LeBron James. Also, if I'm not wrong, James can get the most money by re-signing with the Cavs. So I'm not entirely sure where the risk of losing these players may exist.

That's a good question.

Is it a good question? Where would a superstar player go instead of playing in the NBA with a salary cap?

But with revenues ballooning for owners in the NFL and NBA under the salary cap system, it's a risk they're apparently willing to take.

Yes, revenues are ballooning from television deals and the like, which is why the salary cap keeps rising in both sports. A salary cap prevents star players from earning their maximum potential on the free market, but it's not a "cruel" system, these players aren't really underpaid, and the fact the NBA have revenues of $5 billion doesn't mean that each of the 30 teams has unlimited money they are able to spend on their employees. Sure, the NBA teams make money even if they claim they don't, but even MLB teams (and they have no salary cap) have a budget they must meet. Revenues are ballooning, which is why the salary cap is rising, but I don't feel bad for LeBron James or Russell Wilson because they have a limit on how much they can earn. A salary cap structure isn't an ideal system to maximize a player's earnings, but it's not a cruel system either. Get some perspective.

9 comments MMQB Review: Peter King Inexplicably Does a Power Ranking of NFL Teams in June

Peter King took off last week from writing MMQB and allowed Greg Bedard to fill the factoid vacancy in my soul. Peter's daughter got married and he took a week off to celebrate that life event. Pretty soon Peter will be a grandfather and holy shit I don't want to think about this right now because MMQB will be full of factoids about babies and I'm not going to bring this up ever again. The last we heard from Peter he was battling how his GPS confuses him with the dialect that it uses and was happy with how La'el Collins' agent told the truth after lying. Apparently lying and then eventually telling the truth impresses Peter. This week Peter does the most pointless of all pointless things and makes offseason power rankings (these are the epitome of crowning paper champions before anyone has knowledge enough to crown a paper champion, since training camp hasn't even started yet), talks about his daughter's wedding (I won't talk about it much, but there's a twist!), and Peter is terrified with poor panhandlers try to take his riches. Isn't there something could do with poor people and the homeless? Put them somewhere so that they can't bother others? These jealous ass bitches coming for Peter's riches. Find somewhere to put them or arrest these people who just roam the streets because they have nowhere else to go.

I’ll also have thoughts on the Adrian Peterson contract set-to with Minnesota (surprisingly, I have a little empathy for Peterson),

It's not surprising. He's probably given you a few good quotes as the years have gone by. Peter, you play favorites, so who you do or don't criticize doesn't surprise me at all. If Kim Jong Un gave Peter a few good quotes and was a white quarterback, then Peter would probably have some empathy for him as well.

the colossal loss of Ryan Clady for Denver in the Peyton Manning-protection business,

It's a tough injury, no doubt. There is a reason Peyton Manning doesn't get sacked a lot and it's also because he's very good at avoiding sacks. I have complete faith Manning will be all right. The only colossal loss for Denver in the Manning-protection business would be if Manning lost the ability to feel the pass rush. 

Thanks, first, to Greg Bedard for filling in last week with a memorable column. You got a future in this ridiculously long Monday column, kid.

Meaning, THE MMQB isn't going to let a site staple like MMQB go away once Peter King is done writing it. Meaning, Greg Bedard is (right now) an obvious choice to replace Peter when he retires. That's what I take from this.

Now for a rite of spring. It’s June. (How’d that happen? Where’d the time go?) Time for The MMQB’s 2015 offseason power rankings. The offseason hay is in the barn.

Pointless. It's so pointless, other than to trigger discussion on Twitter and get Peter's opinion out there, to have power rankings in the beginning of June before training camp starts.

Free agency is over, except for the 15-cents-on-the-dollar free agency—which, by the way, is not meaningless;

You are the asshole making 2015 offseason power rankings, not your readers. If anyone doesn't know that cheap free agents signed after June 1 are valuable, it's probably the idiot trying to decide which NFL teams are the strongest on June 1. I'm glad Peter is reminding his readers of a philosophy that he preaches, but of course, doesn't follow himself.

The draft is one month in the rear-view mirror. Though the first practices of training camp are 55 days away, nothing of great substance usually happens between now and the start of official summer practices.

Except for those 15-cents-on-the-dollar free agent signings that Peter claims are not meaningless. Other than those transactions that aren't meaningless, which Peter King forgot about in the span of one sentence, nothing of great substance will happen over the next two months in the NFL.

So let the silly season begin...Let’s see how wrong I can be so long before the NFL’s 96th season. (2014 record in parentheses.)

This is the silly season that Peter King will bitch about and then contribute to by power ranking all of the NFL teams when he admits the rankings will be wrong. 

1. Baltimore (10-6). Why? I trust John Harbaugh to find answers in a league devoid of a truly great team.

But don't worry, Peter has a better reason than THAT. After some rambling, this is how Peter sums it up.

I just think the Ravens will find a way.

And this is why it's pointless to do power rankings in June. The Ravens "will find a way." That's what will happen. Somehow.

2. Seattle (12-4). The addition of Jimmy Graham means so much. He could mean a third straight Super Bowl trip.

Peter King when putting the Ravens at #1: "There is no dominant NFL team."

Peter King when putting the Seahawks at #2: "The NFC team that has been in two straight Super Bowls only got stronger."

Okay, then.

3. Green Bay (12-4). The secondary worries me, as does the pass rush. The Pack’s a trendy pick to get to the Super Bowl, and it wouldn’t surprise me, but a lot will have to go right on defense for that to happen.

Peter King has almost no trust in the Packers defense, yet he believes they are the second-best team in the NFC. You can't make this shit up. Well, Peter does make this shit up, but you hopefully know what I mean.

8. Pittsburgh (11-5). Like Antonio Brown a lot. Like Ben Roethlisberger a lot. But this faith is subject heavily to the ascension of Keith Butler to defensive coordinator after 16 seasons as a defensive assistant below the coordinator level. Mike Tomlin is putting tremendous faith in Butler, who replaces Hall of Famer Dick LeBeau, to be a breath of fresh and productive air. Risky move, and early returns are good. But early returns come in shorts and T-shirts on the South Side of Pittsburgh, not on a cruel Thursday night in Foxboro.

So basically, Peter is knocking the Steelers for Keith Butler not having proven yet that he can replace Dick LeBeau. So this means Peter's biggest issue with the Steelers is that Peter King is doing power rankings in June before any games are played. Again, Peter's problem with Pittsburgh is that they haven't proven the defense can play well under Butler, mostly because they haven't had a chance yet due to how early Peter is doing these power rankings.

10. Arizona (11-5). Maybe the most intriguing team in football.

Yes, maybe. Or maybe not. Only time will tell which NFL team wins the title as "most intriguing team in football," which is obviously factually-based and not simply an opinion one or more people may hold.

11. Indianapolis (11-5). Best team in the AFC South, which isn’t saying much. Still have no clue how the Colts will stop the best offenses in football. I bet Chuck Pagano doesn’t know either.

Well, fortunately for the Colts they don't play the best offenses in football on a weekly basis and are in a division with Blake Bortles/Brian Hoyer/Ryan Mallett/Marcus Mariota/Zach Mettenberger as the quarterbacks leading the opposing offense. So saying, "How are the Colts going to stop the best offenses in football?" is a question any team that has to play these offenses will ask themselves, but the Colts have six games against just bad or so-so offenses. That's nice. How will any team, not just the Colts, stop the best offenses in the NFL?

12. Cincinnati (10-5-1). The running game, and the offensive line, should be enough to make up for Andy Dalton if he struggles. But I don’t think a team can be great unless its quarterback is close to great.

Peter hates Andy Dalton. Since he has the Eagles at #7 does this mean Peter thinks Sam Bradford can be great? No offense, but based on what? Also, the Chiefs are at #4 in Peter's rankings. The idea Alex Smith can be close to great makes me laugh.

14. New Orleans (7-9). Josh Hill, it’s time for your closeup. Drew Brees needs a power tight end with red-zone chops, and you’re it. Or you’d better be.

Best team in the NFC South, huh?

19. St. Louis (6-10). If Nick Foles is really good, the Rams will win 11. If he’s average, they’ll win eight. You see which way I’m leaning.

Marvin Demoff is going to be pissed about this. Though, what can Jeff Fisher do if his quarterback isn't good enough to help him make the playoffs? Nothing to be done about it and this certainly wouldn't be Fisher's fault. On to Los Angeles then...

20. Carolina (7-8-1). Giant question marks at both tackle spots and an offense that can’t afford to lose its quarterback.

There were giant question marks at the tackle spots last year too. And almost no NFL offense can afford to lose its quarterback, so that really means nothing. If losing Newton is a knock against Carolina, then how will the Colts fare without Luck? Can the Colts afford to lose Luck? Can the Dolphins afford to lose Ryan Tannehill? It's funny Peter says the Panthers offense can't afford to lose Newton, since the Panthers were 2-0 without him last year. Both games were against the Buccaneers, but still.

21. Atlanta (6-10). What does new coach Dan Quinn have in store on defense? The pass rush is a question mark coming into the season. And new offensive coordinator Kyle Shanahan needs to find a starting running back and new No. 3 receiver.

This is another reason it is stupid to rank these teams on June 1. Peter says the Falcons need to find a starting running back and No. 3 receiver. Gee, maybe training camp could help this out and it's not a real problem, but there simply hasn't been a chance for Devonta Freeman or Tevin Coleman to show one of them can be that starting running back? I wonder if the search for a new No. 3 receiver will come to a conclusion when Justin Hardy steps on the field in training camp? These power rankings are fun, I get that, but the issues Peter has with these teams can be answered if he would just wait to do a power ranking until later in the summer. Many of these problems aren't problems, but instead are issues whose solution hasn't had a chance to present itself yet.

30. Jacksonville (3-13). This ranking comes from not trusting Blake Bortles—yet—and not trusting a pass rush dealt a horrible blow with the Dante Fowler injury an hour into his NFL career.

Oh my God. Dante Fowler was a rookie who may or may not have been good during his rookie season. It's a bad injury for the Jaguars defense, but stop acting like they lost a proven veteran for the season. Fowler could be Von Miller or he could be Dion Jordan. If Fowler were healthy, how far would Peter have realistically moved them up in the rankings? I'm betting not very far.

32. Tennessee (2-14). I love the Marcus Mariota pick. I don’t love the supporting cast, and he’s not a guy who’s going to be great day one. Or day 24.

How about day 29?

Peter then spends a page discussing his daughter's wedding. I'm going to skip nearly all of this because it's hard to be snarky about a person's wedding without being an asshole. In fact, it's probably hard because it's an asshole thing to do to be snarky about a person's wedding. Here's the twist that isn't really a twist because it's 2015...

For many of you who didn’t like me crossing the line of family life and wanted me to stick with football only, Laura and Mary Beth dropping from sight was just fine. I would urge those to skip to Page 3 of the column right now, because I’m going to spend this page talking about a great event in our lives: the wedding nine days ago of Laura to her girlfriend, Kim Zylker, in California.

Peter King's daughter is not straight. She had, as he termed it on Twitter, "a gay wedding." There's the twist. And we move on...

“Hopefully he can taste some of that meat this year.”

—Philadelphia running back DeMarco Murray, the defending rushing champion, upon hearing that his backup in Dallas last year, Joseph Randle, said Murray didn’t get everything he could have gotten out of his opportunities as a ball-carrier in 2014. Randle’s exact words: “I felt like there was a lot of meat left on the bone.”

Why someone would say that about a rushing champion who carried a team’s running game all season is absolutely bizarre. Or a case of ridiculous envy.

Or the source of this criticism could be considered as coming from someone who shoplifted men's underwear and cologne from a department store and the criticism will be judged accordingly. 

Factoid of the Week That May Interest Only Me

No one in America noticed it, I’m sure. But Aaron Rodgers’ brother Jordan, who had a good chance to win the British Columbia quarterback job in the CFL this season, abruptly quit football last week to pursue a career in television. I don’t blame him, but it was a surprise, especially considering he’s not going to enter TV at a high level.

I'm not entirely sure this is a "fact" more than it is Peter King relaying a story. It's definitely not a "factoid" because factoids are not baby facts, but are trivial bits of information whose accuracy could be questioned.

Mr. Starwood Preferred Member Travel Note of the Week

I don’t mean to be a baby in this space, which I’ve been before.

By "before" Peter clearly means to type "on a near weekly basis."

Nor do I mean to be an alarmist.

But Peter wants us to know that there are poor people out there who need money. Don't be alarmed by this, because generally they don't mean harm. 

But my wife and I spent a couple of post-wedding days in one of our favorite cities, Seattle, last week, and went to see the Mariners on Thursday night. After the game, we walked 1.1 miles from Safeco Field to our hotel in the city. Man, that was one scary walk. To say aggressive panhandling in that city is rampant is an understatement—I guess particularly after night baseball games, when there are folks walking back to their hotels in a good area of the city.

Peter is just trying to walk back to his hotel, which he specifically chose to be in the good part of the city where he wouldn't have to feel uncomfortable, and these people are trying to get money from him. Remember all the times Peter has written "Only in New York" about events that he seems to believe only takes place in New York? Well, I guess there are events and things that happen outside of New York (I know, it's unbelievable) which are not specific only to that city. Peter should have tried walking in downtown Atlanta about a decade ago. Best of luck walking a block without being accosted for money.

We gave three times,

How naive is Peter? Welp, there is his problem. The second he gave money to one panhandler then he's a mark and the others know that Peter has money to give and has given it before. If you give once to a panhandler then expect to be hit up to give up some money again. I even had a panhandler get mad at me one time because I gave his buddy money but not him. You give once, be prepared to give twice. Give twice, be prepared to give thrice.

and after that, we just put our heads down and got back to the hotel.

Which is what you should have done if you had no plans to give money in the first place. I find it very, very difficult to believe that Peter has never experienced aggressive panhandling before. Has he been blessed to only live in areas of Boston and New York where there isn't aggressive panhandling or do those cities just have panhandling under control? I find it hard to believe that Peter has lived in so many big cities and never run into something like this before.

Craziest thing to me: On a brisk 15- to 18-minute walk from a huge sports facility in a major American city to a hotel in a lovely downtown area, we saw zero police officers.

Okay, two things:

1. You said you had your head down for part of the trip, so perhaps there were police officers but you just didn't see them?

2. What would police officers have to do with aggressive panhandling? These panhandlers aren't committing a crime, so what would a police officer do in this situation? These people obviously weren't committing a crime, so does Peter expect a police escort back to his hotel or something? Fine, there should have been police officers around and they weren't around, yet I can't figure out what they would have done in this situation. Advise the panhandlers to leave everyone alone or they will be arrested?

This is not against the Vikings. I am just frustrated that our union did not get guaranteed contracts for its players.

— Adrian Peterson (@AdrianPeterson) May 28, 2015

The Minnesota running back stayed away from voluntary offseason workouts for several reasons—one being the fact that he apparently wants more guaranteed money in the three years left on his Vikings deal. 

It's Peterson's right to hold out if he feels he wants more money. I can't imagine a scenario where the Vikings would actually have given him more money, especially since Peterson sat out all last year, running backs are being devalued by some teams, he's already expensive enough and he wanted a trade just a few short weeks ago. I wonder if Peterson would have been willing to miss some games (and therefore paychecks) to hold out for more guaranteed money during the last negotiating round between the union and the NFL? I'm betting not.

Ten Things I Think I Think

1. I think, regarding Adam Schefter’s news break that Tom Brady’s appeal of his four-game suspension will be heard June 23: Why oh why oh why continue to drag this out?

Because Roger Goodell is a demon sent from Hell to annoy NFL fans.

Let’s assume the league announces its decision in July, which is certainly not a lock but likely. That means one of the ugliest stories of the Goodell Era would have been on everyone’s cranium for much of six months. Maybe the league washed its hands of the Wells report and the inordinately long time that took. (I still think 3.5 months for that investigation is too long. Way too long.) But if the league allows final adjudication of the case to drag on two months after the Wells report is issued, that’s on the league. I am all in favor of due process. But the league allowed this story to dominate the offseason, and could have done something about it, and didn’t.

I do wish this story had been resolved more quickly, but I just don't pay attention to it unless I'm covering a column that specifically mentions the Patriots deflating footballs. So the NFL is really only hurting itself by allowing the story to drag out over multiple months. At this point, I don't expect the NFL to have made a decision on Brady's appeal until after he has retired.

2. I think I understand Minnesota coach Mike Zimmer saying about Adrian Peterson: “He can either play for us or he cannot play. He’s not going to play for anyone else.”

Yes, it does seem to be a pretty straightforward statement that is very difficult to not understand.

But there are a couple of obvious things here. One, Peterson really doesn’t want to play for Minnesota. He certainly now has come to the realization that he probably will have to. No team wants to give up a high draft choice for a 30-year-old running back with $44.25 million left on his contract over the next three years—a contract, by the way, that he’s unhappy with.

Yes, but this is not the Vikings problem. What's funny is that Peterson wants MORE guaranteed money when part of the reason he can't be traded is because he makes too much money. He's all, "Oh, you can't trade me because I make too much money? Well, pay me more money then."

Two, Peterson wants more guaranteed money in the back end of the contract. So if you’re the Wilfs, why not end this rancor now and get Peterson back in the good graces of the Vikings (at least by appearances) by guaranteeing a vast portion or all of his 2016 salary?

Because Adrian Peterson might actually accept this and then the Vikings are stuck guaranteeing most of or all of his 2016 salary when they don't want him around either. The Vikings have most of the leverage here. They are already stuck with Adrian Peterson, so why would they have paid him more money just to be stuck with him? This idea doesn't make sense to me.

Then, if Peterson declines to take it, you know you’ve done a more than fair thing to meet Peterson halfway, and it’s on him.

But Peter, the Vikings didn't have to be fair to Peterson. Why in the hell would they be fair to Peterson more than they are already being fair to him? There is no need for the Vikings to potentially take a hit by guaranteeing more money to a player they probably want to get rid of when that player doesn't want to be there either.

5. I think, if I were a guessing man—which I am in this case—I’d guess Dallas defensive end Greg Hardy gets either two or four games reduced from his 10-game domestic-violence suspension.

Though if Peter weren't guessing and he actually had inside information, then this wouldn't be the first time he withheld information he knew until after the fact when he could mention he had heard Hardy's suspension would be reduced by either two or four games. That's one of those things that always amazes me. Something newsworthy happens and NFL sportswriters on Twitter write things like, "That's what I heard too" or "It seemed inevitable" as if they had information they decided not to share until after the fact.

Of course, the question of WHY Hardy's appeal would be reduced doesn't seem to merit a discussion right now. That is information, not just Peter's opinion, that I would find to be interesting.

8. I think the Bears did the right thing, obviously, in letting go Ray McDonald. And the other 31 teams in the league will do the right thing, obviously, in not signing him.

Yes, that seems inevitable at this point. The question when talking about "the right thing" is why didn't teams do "the right thing" prior to the last incident with McDonald? He was involved, but not charged, in an incident in August 2014 and involved with another sexual assault investigation. Just because those two charges didn't stick, it didn't violate this fictional "the right thing" principle for the Bears to sign him?

9. I think when I saw the Patriots and Saints will conduct join practices at the New Orleans camp in mid-August, the first thought that came to my mind was: This is going to be tremendous for Jimmy Garoppolo. Joint practices, particularly with an aggressive defensive coordinator like Rob Ryan on the other side of the line, are good for quarterbacks trying to get a feel for what they’ll see when the real games start.

I'll never understand the respect that Rob Ryan receives from sportswriters. If his name were "Rob Brown" then I can't imagine he would even have a job as a defensive coordinator at this point. He's been a defensive coordinator in the NFL since 2004 and only twice has his defense ranked in the Top 10 of the NFL in yards allowed. His defense has only been in the Top 10 of points allowed once. Ryan should get a job working for Jeff Fisher. Maybe after they both retire they can share their secret for longevity without providing results with the rest of the NFL coaching fraternity.

Yes, Rob Ryan is aggressive, but his defenses have consistently ranked in the lower half of the league during his career. In fact, his defense has only been ranked in the upper half of the NFL in yards allowed three times since 2004.

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

e. I’ll take Golden State in the NBA Finals, in six.

BUT PETER, HOW MANY NBA GAMES HAVE YOU WATCHED THIS YEAR? YOU HAVEN'T MADE IT CLEAR YET, BUT ARE YOU A BIG FAN OF THE NBA?

h. Coffeenerdness: Give me Peet’s any day over Starbucks. I don’t dislike Starbucks. I just love Peet’s. I don’t think I’ve ever had a bad espresso shot at Peet’s.

Plus, there are no panhandlers at Peet's who will disrupt Peter's white, upper-class existence. There are always some shady looking Jamaicans hanging outside Starbucks in New York "drinking" coffee, but Peter knows they just want to rob him. Where are the police when you need them? Certainly not prepared to arrest anyone at Starbucks for acting suspiciously, that's where.

j. There are many interesting places to run in San Francisco.

But unfortunately, there aren't quite as many women to stalk while running in San Francisco. There are plenty of women, but they all slow down or speed up as Peter tries to hear their phone conversations.

One I got introduced to while there in the past two weeks: The Presidio, with its challenging hills and arduous hills and did I mention ridiculous hills? Running down into the lovely and picturesque park one morning, I thought it wasn’t so bad. But then, on the 1.2 miles back up toward the neighborhood where I was staying, I’d never been challenged so much in my meager running life. Finishing a 3.9-mile slog was its own reward.

A bigger reward? Peter ran into a pregnant woman talking on her cell phone while walking. Ah yes, fresh prey he could keep up with. Jumping from bush to bush behind her in an attempt to hide so he could listen in to her conversation about the baby shower her friends were throwing for her was it's own reward.  

The Adieu Haiku

Make peace, Zygi Wilf.
Yo Adrian, make peace too.  
This can’t end ugly.

I'm stupid. I don't get why Wilf would have needed to make peace by guaranteeing more money to Peterson. Greg Bedard didn't do a haiku last week. I miss Greg Bedard already.