2 comments Mel Kiper's 2015 NFL Draft Grades; Everyone Wins This Year!

I stopped doing draft grades last year and started doing non-grades, which basically consisted of which pick I thought was the best for a team and which I thought was the worst pick for a team. It was just my opinion. I grew tired of giving out grades when it takes years to figure out how a team did in the draft. I also included comments from Mel Kiper, since anything he says about the draft is always fun for perusal. Mel always says non-important statements like a guy "could be" a guy for depth on a team's roster soon. He really said last year:

Lavelle Westbrooks is one to watch as more depth at corner. 

One to watch as more depth. So he's one to watch as someone who will make the team? Great. Anyway, this year I'm not going to give my opinion in the form of non-grades either. I don't know enough about all 200+ players to give one, but I am going to mock Mel Kiper's comments and his draft grades. This is not to be confused with five years from now when I again mock Mel's grades and comments once these guys drafted in 2015 have played in the NFL for five years. 

So I had a hard time finding Mel's grades this year. I did get an image of them at this site. So those are his grades and immediately you will notice one particular thing. What is that one thing? Everyone gets a ribbon! Of the 32 teams that drafted, 28 of them did above average or better in the draft. That's great. This is the most successful draft in NFL history!...or Mel Kiper is giving out great grades to every team like he does every single year in an effort to be as right as possible in retrospect. See, it's easier to say, "Man, I totally thought that guy was going to be great in the NFL" in retrospect and be wrong rather than write, "The Bears had a terrible draft..." and start ripping on those players while running the risk of being wrong. When Mel is wrong when going negative, he will hear about. Mel doesn't want to hear about and chooses to minimize the amount of time he is wrong, so he prefers to be wrong while being positive. He's weenie basically. One would think a draft "expert" such as Mel would be fine being seen as wrong, but this isn't correct because Mel thinks almost 90% of the NFL did above average or better. In fact, Mel only gave 8 grades lower than a "B-." Weenie. 

Arizona Cardinals: C+

Mel said the Cardinals need to address the OLB, RB, C, and CB positions. They addressed one of those positions in the third round, but he thinks they did an above average job. Okay, so he likes the picks the Cardinals made?

"...but I didn't like the value too much with either of the top two picks."

So Mel didn't like the players the Cards chose with their top two picks and they didn't draft for three of the four positions of need? Fuck it, they did above average. Makes sense.

Atlanta Falcons: B

So though Beasley is a slight reach on my board -- he can rush the passer but can he provide value elsewhere? -- 

For example, how good at Accounting is Vic Beasley? Can he provide value for the Falcons when it comes tax time? Because, if they are being honest, the Falcons Accounting department sucks and any help Beasley could provide there would really up his value to the organization.

I don't mind the pick there.

Congrats Falcons! Mel Kiper gives you retro-permission to draft Vic Beasley. Also, Justin Hardy is "a solid depth addition" at wide receiver. He plays the position of wide receiver and may not suck.

Baltimore Ravens: A-

"Tray Walker is an interesting, 6-foot-2 CB prospect who could emerge with seasoning."

Wait, he's going to emerge with seasoning? Does this mean at training camp he'll show up with cayenne pepper, perhaps a little table salt or other spices that will really give the food during training camp that much needed flavor? If so, this was a much-needed pick. Training camp food sucks.

Yeah, Mel didn't say too much stupid for the Ravens. He fawned, which wasn't hard to do.

Buffalo Bills: C-

This is the lowest grade that Mel gave out. The worst an NFL team did was draft a little below average. What a draft!

"Watkins is going to be just fine, but Mike Evans and Odell Beckham Jr. could both have been taken without moving up, and that now factors into the grade this year..." 

Wait, what? So the Bills are going to get dinged for last year's draft by Kiper, because he feels the team gave up too much to get Watkins, then dinged again this year because they didn't have a first round pick. Mel is brutal...or as brutal as someone who gives the lowest grade of a "C-" can be. I don't understand why not having a first round pick factors into the grade when the metrics being measured are:

• How much overall talent did a team add, based on board position?

• How effectively did they address key personnel voids?

• How efficient were they in maneuvering on the draft board?

At what point is "Did they make a trade last year and lose picks for this year?" show up as a metric that Mel is measuring?

"The Bills didn't need an amazing draft, thanks to good roster-building outside of QB." 

Well, don't worry Bills fans. Your team didn't even need an amazing draft, so really Mel's lowest grade doesn't even mean anything to him, because the Bills were set anyway.

Carolina Panthers: C

The Panthers passed again on an O-lineman --- and I repeat, they need really need some O-linemen, any O-linemen --- in Round 2...

The Panthers added some useful pieces, but the O-line still looks scary from where I sit---

It's a shame they didn't draft an offensive lineman when Mel thought they should have. BUT the Panthers did draft an offensive lineman and Mel thought it was a good pick.

Daryl Williams is a decent value at No. 102, and he could push for a starting role at one of the tackle spots, though that's wishful thinking in 2015.

Okay, why is that wishful thinking? The Panthers needed offensive linemen, they drafted one in the fourth round and now Mel is all, "Well the tackles in front of him on the roster are too good for Williams to be a starter." One minute the team needs offensive linemen because the O-line is scary, the next minute the ones they have are good enough to beat out a fourth round pick. Make up your mind.

Chicago Bears: B+

If there's a void here, it's a pass-rush addition, but you can't hit every need...

Oh, someone should tell that to the Panthers, who just got bludgeoned by Mel for not filling their need at OT, but then filling it too late.

Pretty good draft overall, 

Actually Mel, a "B+" is a step below an excellent draft. Semantics, I know.

with the big question being whether White can transition quickly,

Rick Telander is going to be very upset when the Kevin White he knows starts to transition. It's going to throw him for a big loop.

Cincinnati Bengals: B+

In fact, if Ogubehi felt like a bit of a reach given his injury situation, Fisher balances it out. 

So it's okay for Mel to believe that a team reaches for a player, but only as long as another player falls to that team in the draft. Got it. So the Bengals could have drafted me in the first round, but if the best pass-rusher in the draft falls to them in the second round then it's fine to have wasted a first round pick on me? It's always fun to read Mel's rules for how he grades the draft. You know, other than the major rule being "Don't give any low grades because that's taking a stance, which you should not do."

They added a trio of tight ends, and you get the impression that'll practically be a highly-competitive camp situation, with the hope that someone breaks through. 

I think I figured out the issue with Mel's grades. He doesn't understand numbers or letters. The Bengals drafted two tight ends, but Mel thinks "a trio" is two tight ends. Also, yes Mel, I'm betting the Bengals are hoping one or more tight ends perform well in training camp. Spoiler alert: Every NFL team wishes for this to happen at every position. 

Cleveland Browns: B

The really curious selection was Cameron Erving at No. 19. Although I agree with some that he's among the best O-lineman in the draft -- and easily the best center -- he might end up at guard right away.

YES, WHY IN THE HELL WOULD THE BROWNS TRY TO DRAFT THE BEST OFFENSIVE LINEMAN IN THE DRAFT? THOSE STUPID FUCKING BROWNS SCREWED UP AGAIN!

The pick did make me think the Browns remember how much the run game fell apart when Alex Mack got hurt last year, and they aren't about to let that happen again. Still, a surprising pick.

So the Browns run game fell apart last year without Alex Mack and this year they drafted Cameron Erving, who may be the best offensive linemen in this draft? So what in the hell is surprising about this pick? Is Mel surprised the Browns made a smart pick? I must know. The pick made sense and Mel thinks it makes sense, yet he's shocked.   

The QB situation is obviously a mystery -- I liked the idea of adding Bryce Petty in Round 3 here -- and based on what I can see, the Browns think the best use of the QBs they have right now is to keep them handing off.

I guess the Browns QB's should keep handing off if they insist on drafting the best center in the draft. Who knows why the Browns do what they do? 

Dallas Cowboys: C+

Randy Gregory is the big story. Gregory is a gifted pass-rusher with top-5 ability, but Dallas is rolling the dice at No. 60 and believing Rod Marinelli can help a kid who has off-field issues that threaten to derail his career.

I think Mel Kiper may be upping the drama factor just a bit here. Gregory has some issues, but let's allow him to get into the NFL before having his NFL career derailed.

As to the big question mark, which was not selecting a running back, my sense is the Cowboys know there are many backs who will run effectively behind their offensive line, and you can add one on the cheap pretty easily. The depth chart there just really isn’t that bad.

So the #2 need for the Cowboys that Mel identified coming into this draft really isn't that big of a need? Why list RB as the #2 need in the draft if the team doesn't actually need to draft a player at that position? 

Denver Broncos: B-

Denver needs to hope at least one of the rookie O-linemen emerges as an answer to help the interior of their offensive line, 

Actually no, I bet the Broncos were hoping the players they drafted would actually make the worse in the long run, as well as bring embarrassment to the franchise. Now that Mel has pointed out they probably want these rookie O-linemen to play well, then the Broncos franchise will decide that this is probably what they need to hope for.

but if Ray pans out, this draft could be pretty good.

So I'm not sure what to be snarky about here. So if Shane Ray plays well then that means the entire draft for the Broncos could be pretty good or should I be snarky about Mel Kiper basing this draft's reputation on whether the first round pick plays well? Isn't that one of the best determinations regarding whether a draft is good or not, how well the first round pick performed?

Detroit Lions: B

"Even if Tomlinson is a bit of a reach, you added one starter and potentially two with the value of a single pick. That's not too bad.

Filling two positions with one pick does seem like something that could be categorized as "not bad." That is true. Very insightful.

Alex Carter gives them some needed depth in the secondary, and the addition of Gabe Wright gives them much-needed depth on the interior of the defensive line. 

So the big takeaway or lesson to be learned from the Lions draft is that depth is always going to be "needed" in some way. Though it seems according to the "Mel Kiper Depth Assessment Guide" that "needed depth" is a less urgent need than "much-needed depth." "Quality depth" on the other hand is a step above "needed depth" and involves filling a less urgent need. Perhaps next year Mel should release his "Depth Assessment Guide" prior to draft time so NFL teams can peruse it.

Green Bay Packers: B

I thought the Packers did a good job because they got players I can see helping them right away, and they really didn’t have major needs to fill. - See more at: http://packersinsider.com/2015/05/mel-kiper-nfl-draft-grades-packers-receive-a/#sthash.bFrK18bW.dpuf

Damarious Randall is just the definition of duct tape in the secondary, 

Duct tape: a wide, sticky, and usually silver tape that is made of cloth and that is used especially to repair things

Yes, Randall is JUST the definition of duct tape.

Quinten Rollins is just total intrigue, 

He's JUST total intrigue. So he's a spy like James Bond, made of cloth that is used to repair things like Damarious Randall or where does he fit on the "Mel Kiper Depth Assessment Guide"? Who knows? In fact, there are rumors Quinten Rollins doesn't even exist, that he's just a whisper heard in the ears of NFL GM's. No one has ever actually seen him. Just total intrigue.

I thought the Packers did a good job because they got players I can see helping them right away, and they really didn’t have major needs to fill. - See more at: http://packersinsider.com/2015/05/mel-kiper-nfl-draft-grades-packers-receive-a/#sthash.bFrK18bW.dpuf

Houston Texans: B

The continuing question around the Texans is whether they'll get enough out of the QB position to help elevate the good roster-building they've done elsewhere, but it's not like there was a starting QB play to be found in this draft for them, and they did a good job of continuing to strengthen the roster beyond that position.

I always enjoy how Mel gives teams a pass in his draft grades for not filling a positional need and other times he knocks a team's grade down for not filling a positional need. Sure, quarterback is the most important position on the field, but the Texans did the best they could without reaching for a quarterback. Other teams, like the Bills built their roster but didn't fill the QB position in this draft and they get knocked down for a trade they made last year. The Panthers didn't sufficiently address the offensive line position (I always find it interesting the "experts" think it's understandable not to reach for a QB, but think teams should just fill another need they have in the draft even if they clearly don't like the options), but have a QB, and they got a lower grade for that. Mel's grades feel scattershot at times.

Kevin Johnson is a bit lean, but everything else is there,

He has two arms, two legs, ten toes, ten fingers and a working brain. He seems like a full human being to Mel.

Indianapolis Colts: B-

The Colts managed to get several of my favorite players in the draft, yet I still think they continue to play with fire by not doing more to build quality depth along the offensive line.

Welp, the Colts have that franchise QB-thingie that all teams want, but they aren't protecting him sufficiently. That knocks them down a grade. Houston doesn't have Andrew Luck, but that's cool because they helped the roster around the QB position. Sure, Indianapolis built the roster around Luck, but that doesn't count because it doesn't count.

(Not that building a good offensive line isn't important, but what do the Colts and Panthers have in common in this draft? Both desperately need offensive line help and both picked towards the latter half of the draft and didn't grab offensive line help...it's almost like they both didn't like the guys available at that point)

Phillip Dorsett is an absolute burner who can actually catch the ball, and if you like T.Y. Hilton, I think you're going to love Dorsett. A great player ... but a big need? That looked to me like a clear case of "best player available" drafting.

(Bengoodfella faints at the idea of a team drafting the best player available)

Why on Earth would a team do this? First, the Browns select the best center in the draft who is also MAYBE the best offensive lineman, and now the Colts have selected the player they think to be the best available at their draft position. When will teams learn to fill needs, not acquire good football players?

If there's a big gripe, it's the Colts seem to consistently take for granted that Andrew Luck won't get hurt despite all the hits.

While I agree the Colts drafting a wide receiver was really weird, reaching for an offensive lineman isn't going to fix this problem of Luck getting hurt despite all the hits. Wishing and hoping an offensive lineman is a first round talent just because you select him there doesn't mean this wish will come true. 

Jacksonville Jaguars: B+

From a phone call that Mel had after the draft:

Kiper said he gave the Jaguars a “B .”

Actually Mel, you gave the Jags a "B+." There is a huge difference apparently or else you wouldn't include the "+" to the grade of "B."

“They helped out their quarterback by getting Yeldon, Rashad Greene, Sterling and Koyack, and they helped their defense stop (Colts quarterback) Andrew Luck by getting Fowler, Sample and then Bennett, who was a steal in the sixth round,” Kiper said. “All the way around, there was some method to what they were doing.”

What? A method to what the Jaguars were doing? The Colts draft the best player available, the Browns choose the best offensive lineman and now the Jaguars have a method to their drafting. What is going on with these AFC teams? 

Kansas City Chiefs: B-

They had Mitch Morse graded well above where I did, but I think he'll compete to start at either guard or center, which adds to his value. 

So Morse is going to compete to start at both positions? He's not going to show up drunk to training camp and just sit on the sidelines and drink water? Here I thought maybe Morse would show up, refuse to play center, and then play PS4 for the rest of training camp.

Steven Nelson adds more depth in the secondary,

I always love it when Mel has nothing to add regarding a player so he just states that player "adds depth." Basically, Mel needs to write another sentence and has no idea what to write, so he writes, "This guys plays football and was drafted. He is a warm body." And also, as the "B-" grade shows, Mel loved this draft as he seems to love every draft by every NFL team. That's why it is so much fun to go back and review his grades a few years later. 

Miami Dolphins: B

Jordan Phillips has first-round physical ability and third-round tape, so landing in Round 2 just about averages things out

The silliness of this sentence makes me laugh. So if a player has first round tape and seventh round physical ability, then drafting him in the fourth round sounds about right? Mel is essentially saying, "I am an expert on the draft and have no idea if Jordan Phillips is going to be any good or not. Fuck if I know, so using a second round pick on him sounds good." He gets paid to do this by the way.

If there's a question, it's the lack of a linebacker earlier on. The Parker pick really elevates this draft for me, and they can hope the coin flip on Phillips' becoming really good works out.

Mel liked every single pick the Dolphins made from Rounds 1-4, but he is worried the Dolphins didn't draft a linebacker. Teams can't fill every need with limited picks. Only in NFL Draft "analysis" can someone like Mel write, "I liked every pick the Dolphins made early in the draft" and then write, "I wish the Dolphins had drafted a linebacker early on." It's like going to a restaurant and ordering food and when the waiter asks how the food was saying it was delicious but you wished that you had ordered something else.

Minnesota Vikings: B

Trae Waynes brings about a lot of debate among my colleagues on the draft. We know he can cover in a straight line, and I love the speed, but the detractors point out Waynes really struggles when wide receivers aren't running in a straight line.

They had one of the best picks in Round 2 when they added a potential immediate starter in Eric Kendricks. This kid can really run sideline to sideline

If the Vikings could get into the lab and create a Trae Waynes/Eric Kendricks hybird (to be called Tric Wayndricks) then that would be the greatest defensive football player in this draft. He could cover in a straight line and run sideline to sideline.

The Vikes hit needs pretty well, and if Waynes cleans up aspects of his game, they might have really helped the defense with him and Kendricks. Good draft, but Waynes still has some "we'll see" aspects.

This is as opposed to the other draft picks which are all guaranteed to be good in the NFL? 

New England Patriots: B-

They did well overall, but I'm not sure why they didn't take at least one wide receiver or cornerback.

My guess would be because they didn't want to.

Jordan Richards is a smart, versatile fit in the secondary, which is exactly the kind of guy they like. I had him going lower, but if you think the guy can help and he's there for a team this good? Take him.

Ohhhhhhhhhhhhh, I get it. It's okay for some teams to reach in the draft, but other teams get knocked down a grade for reaching. I think I'm going to need Mel to release the "Mel Kiper Guide to When It's Okay to Reach for a Player in the Draft" because I'm pretty sure no NFL team is going to draft a guy they don't think can help. Whether the team is traditionally good or not should be irrelevant. If Mel is going to knock a team for reaching, how good the team that does the reaching should be irrelevant.

Again, I wished they would have done more at CB and WR, and that drops them some, but you can't say they didn't get some good players, for a Super Bowl champ, no less.

Mel loves all the players the Patriots took, but wishes they would have taken different players, yet still likes the Patriots draft. This is how draft grades and analysis works for Mel. 

New Orleans Saints: C

Andrus Peat hits a need on the offensive line, but he's probably not ideal as a starter in Week 1 because NFL-level pass-rushers could give him fits.

See Mel, this is the type of thing that happens when a team like the Colts drafts an offensive lineman because it fits a need. You bash the pick for not being an ideal starter in Week 1. I have no idea if Peat will be any good, but this is how teams draft players who don't work out. They fill a need because Mel Kiper says it's a need.

The first-rounder they got back from Seattle turned into Stephone Anthony, and though he hits a need, I had a trio of inside linebackers ahead of him on my board.

And this shows the full subjectivity of draft grades. They often only depend on the person doing the grading and his/her opinion of the players selected versus other players available.

The Saints did some good work addressing defensive needs, but they really could have used another pass-catcher. When you factor the Graham deal as a part of the overall grade, it takes a hit.

So to review, Mel didn't like the Saints two first round picks, their second round pick, one of their third round picks and yet he thinks they did an average job in the draft? Got it. Way to go out on a limb there, Mel. What would it take for Mel to give a "D" to a draft? He hated all of a team's picks? Even then Mel would probably give that team a "C-." 

New York Giants: B-

I expected the Giants to take either Brandon Scherff, if available, or Ereck Flowers with the No. 9 pick, so when Scherff ended up at No. 5, Flowers became the man. He could end up at right tackle, pushing Justin Pugh inside. If Flowers can transition well, the Giants could get better at two positions with one pick, but you just can't make that promise.

I literally have no idea what the point of this sentence was. Flowers may play tackle, which means Pugh would play guard and the Giants could improve both positions but nobody can predict the future so there's no telling if that will happen or not so let's not talk about this anymore.

The addition of another safety in Round 5, Mykkele Thompson, just emphasizes the need at that position and, perhaps, how they plan to use Collins. I just thought it was a reach. I had better options available on my board, but again, it's all about fit and development at this point.

It's about fit and development at every point in the draft, not just the later rounds. Even the #1 pick isn't going to work out if he doesn't go to a team that fits him and works to develop his skill set.

New York Jets: A-

they were then able to move back up later to secure Bryce Petty, who has ability but will need time to develop because there are so many NFL concepts that are foreign to him. Still, good value to get a No. 4 QB down at 103 overall.

I always like it when a draft "expert" gives a team credit for a player falling to them, as if the Jets used mind control to ensure they would be able to get Petty at 103 overall. Sure, it was a smart move to draft Petty, but getting "good value" is as much about luck as it is anything else.

And remember: I factor Brandon Marshall into this draft."

And then Mel will factor Marshall into the draft after that as well. Mel is probably still holding the RG3 trade against both the Rams and the Redskins in his draft grades. 

Oakland Raiders: B

If I'm critiquing, it's probably in Round 2, where I thought Mario Edwards was a bit of a reach as my 61st-ranked player.

Mel, your draft grades are literally nothing but you critiquing a team's draft. So yes, "if you are critiquing" meaning, "if you are doing draft grades again."

Edwards was a need, but this team has plenty of them and I had a couple dozen players rated higher there.

The Raiders get knocked down to a "B" (yes, "down" to a "B") because the team had so many needs and Mel didn't like the player the Raiders took. This obviously means the Raiders didn't do a good job in the draft by not listening to Mel's opinion, which is the only correct opinion.

Jon Feliciano could help at guard, though value there was just OK.

Oh, he could help? Great, that's pretty much the reason the Raiders drafted him. Mel had questions about a few picks, but the questions weren't enough for him to think the Raiders were not one of the majority of teams that did a great job in this draft. I'm guessing if Jon Gruden did draft grades then he would give every team an "A." 

Pittsburgh Steelers: A-

The Steelers had a really good draft.

As did apparently almost 90% of the other NFL teams in Mel's opinion.

You think they wanted to find answers in the secondary? Yep, those guys will be green, but at least the depth chart looks better.

The players may suck, but at least there are functioning humans at these positions in the secondary! In "Mel Kiper's Depth Assessement Guide" this is probably known as a mix between "quality depth" and "green depth," which is totally different from "slightly experienced depth."

Philadelphia Eagles: B+

ILB Jordan Hicks went higher than I expected but I don't mind it because he's a really good player who filled a need.

Sure Mel thinks that Hicks was a reach but the Eagles think he can help, he fills a need, AND the Eagles are a good team so it's fine if they reach for a player. They have permission to do so from Mel. 

San Diego Chargers: B-

I would have really liked to see the Chargers add some fresh legs at either wide receiver or tight end, given some of the age on the roster at those positions, and nose tackle was a need that wasn't addressed.

The Chargers had five picks in the draft after trading up to get Melvin Gordon. They couldn't address every need they have in the draft with those five picks.

They did get some really good players, though.

Again, Mel really enjoyed his meal but wishes he had ordered something else. By the way, the Chargers got some really good players with five picks, but it only amounts to a slightly above average draft. I never understand these grades. 

San Francisco 49ers: C+

This one wasn't bad by any measures,

Just as a reminder, Mel thought none of the NFL teams had a bad draft.

but there's a lot of projection here,

Every draft pick is a projection of some type.

The other thing I wonder about is the lack of a true inside linebacker or cornerback. I'm fascinated to see what this class becomes because it's short on guarantees.

The 49ers did seem to draft more players who are considered "raw," but I would love for Mel to point out which teams in the draft picked a class that is long on guarantees. I bet five years from now those drafts long on guarantees won't seem that way anymore. 

Seattle Seahawks: A-

Mel didn't really write anything stupid about the Seahawks. Sadness accrues. My snark has run out on this one. 

St. Louis (Los Angeles) Rams: C 

This was a fascinating draft class, but one that I thought had several reaches on value

And the Rams are not good enough of a team to have permission from Mel to reach. Sure, maybe they drafted players that they thought could help the team, but permission to reach is denied.

The Rams want to be better running the football, which should help take pressure off a passing game we can't expect to be special, and they seemed to emphasize that goal with every pick.

WHAT? The Rams are another NFL team that had a plan and executed that plan in the draft? Inconceivable. No wonder Mel gave this draft a "C," he hates it when a team has a plan during the draft.

I don't dislike the value as much as I typically would -- I've said 1,000 times I don't think taking RBs in Round 1 is a good strategy -- because the Rams have the roster to start winning now, and because a star QB isn't walking through that door, they had to go with the run game.

So it's okay to draft a running back in the first round if a team is trying to win now, but otherwise if a team isn't trying to win now, then it isn't okay to draft a running back in the first round? By the way, both teams that Mel gave permission to draft a running back in the first round didn't make the playoffs last year. It seems important when discussing how they are teams that are trying to win now. So the biggest error the Rams seem to make was drafting offensive linemen before Mel thought they should, which of course, he would criticize the Rams for not filling a need if they didn't draft these offensive linemen. That's just how Mel works.

Tampa Bay Buccaneers: B-

Winston is not Andrew Luck, a winning lottery ticket handed to a fortunate franchise; he's the definition of a boom-or-bust selection. Again, I don't think they made the wrong decision, given the obvious need; I only think what Winston becomes is an unknown because the real work to help him develop into a true franchise leader is about to begin.

It's annoying when people compare every #1 overall pick to Andrew Luck, as if a quarterback like Luck comes out of the draft more often than once a decade. Pretty much any quarterback drafted in the first round isn't going to be polished and pro-ready like Andrew Luck was when he was drafted. So stop comparing quarterbacks taken #1 overall to Luck, because most quarterbacks picked in the first round are boom-or-bust selections.

After the Winston pick, the Bucs looked to address some clear needs up front. Donovan Smith was a reach on my board -- 

And if the Bucs had selected another player at another position then Mel would have pointed out how the Bucs have a need at offensive line and they didn't fill that need. 

Tennessee Titans: C+ 

After Mariota, I thought Tennessee had some reaches on value on three consecutive picks: Dorial Green-Beckham is a special athlete, but he's incomplete and plays soft, and I thought there were several better options available at No. 40;

Of all the criticisms of Dorial Green-Beckham, that he's incomplete and plays soft aren't two I have heard too much. These types of things will happen when he has limited exposure playing college football due to the real reasons that he was a shaky pick at #40. He's a stud if he stays on the right path though and I can't imagine how Mel thinks there were several better options available at #40. Not shockingly, Mel doesn't list these options. I have a feeling there's a reason he doesn't list these better options because they don't exist.

I had Jeremiah Poutasi as my 12th-ranked guard (he played tackle at Utah), so that's a reach on my board in Round 3; and the Angelo Blackson pick was again a slight reach for me.

And the Titans DO NOT have permission to reach in the draft. They got a guy with first round talent in the second round, so one would think it balances at least one of these picks out according to how Mel's bizarre mind works, but I guess not. 

Washington Redskins: A-

I don't think there was a softer team in the NFL the past season than the Redskins, especially on defense, where they simply didn't tackle.

So Mel loved how the Redskins improved on defense by using four of their ten selections on defensive players and only selecting one defensive player in the first 140 picks. That's how you get an "A-" from Mel, people. If Mel thinks you are a team that is soft on defense, don't draft any defensive players early. Mel loves that.

Matt Jones was a bit rich for me in terms of value, but it's all preference on RB at that point.

Permission to reach a bit is granted, given the Redskins success of late and all.

When I went through tape with Jon Gruden,

A nightmare scenario for anyone who gets stuck in this room with Mel and Jon "I Love Everybody and Here is a Cutesy Nickname for the Road" Gruden.

So there they are, the grades for what seems to be (based on Mel's grades) the best draft in the history of the NFL. Everyone gets a ribbon and no team did terribly. Five years from now, every team will be shown to have had either an average draft, or in the case of four teams, just a slightly below average draft. I bet Mel is happy he didn't write anything that could be used against him in the future. Be positive, you won't get criticized.

8 comments MMQB Review: Peter King Stalks Women on Running Trails Now Edition

Peter talked about Tim Tebow getting signed by the Eagles last week in MMQB, not because he wanted to of course, but because one anonymous coach said Tebow could make the Eagles' roster. So obviously if Tebow is going to be a third-string quarterback then Peter has an obligation to report on Tebow being signed by the Eagles with as much in-depth analysis as he would any other third-string quarterback that was signed by an NFL team. So that's what he did. When any third-string quarterback signs with an NFL team, Peter puts that quarterback's name in the title of MMQB, and discusses the signing. He totally didn't do this just because the words "Tim Tebow" in the title piques interest and increases pageviews/discussion. This week Peter talks about the Philip Rivers to Tennessee trade being dead/alive/who knows really, has (lack of) insight from Mike Mayock, and can't even run without listening to other people's conversations.

Three days before the 2015 draft, one thing is clear: The drama starts with the second pick.

Such dramaaaaaaa! Peter loves himself some drama. Every draft/NFL season/offseason is even more dramatic than the last. 

With Tampa Bay very likely to take quarterback Jameis Winston number one, Tennessee is in command with quarterback Marcus Mariota the likely target if anyone wants to come up.

Lots can happen, including Philip Rivers being in play, and Chip Kelly getting an itchy trigger finger,

An itchy trigger finger? How many people have you killed Chip? You can tell Peter. He wants to know.

the Jets moving up for their quarterback of the long-term,

Put on repeat over the past few years.

Nothing is clear this morning, but this is what I’m hearing, and what I believe three days from round one:

Nothing is clear! No one knows how the NFL Draft will exactly shake out at this point. There's drama everywhere!

I don’t think the Chargers will trade Philip Rivers. Just a gut feeling after lots of time calling around over the weekend. Now, I do think the Titans and Chargers will talk this week, but I don’t see a smart match; moreover, as I’ve written all along, San Diego definitely does not want to trade Rivers, and I believe the Chargers have never been told Rivers won’t sign a contract in San Diego beyond this year—though he does not want to currently.

It's a smart move by the Chargers to not trade Rivers. Knowing Rivers doesn't currently want to sign a contract beyond this year, when would he like to do this? It's unfair to the Chargers, but if Rivers wanted it would be grand if he could give the Chargers a target date for when he may want to sign another contract or he could end up being traded...unless that is Rivers' intention, to get out of San Diego without ever actually demanding a trade.

I believe Tennessee would want more than the 33-year-old quarterback for the second pick in the draft,

(Bengoodfella spits coffee all over his desk) Look, I hate older players as much as the next guy does, probably more. I'm not interested in a hot take, but if the Titans aren't looking to take a quarterback in the draft (and there isn't much else in free agency), want to count on Zach Mettenberger, then they are going to end up with a lot of disappointment this upcoming year regarding the performance of their quarterback. I don't believe Mettenberger is "the guy." So holding out for more than Rivers in exchange for the #2 overall pick doesn't sound smart to them now, until it's Week 5 and the Titans are ending the day with a record of 1-4.

If the Titans like Mariota, then great, they shouldn't be dangling the #2 pick to Chargers for Rivers anyway. Yeah, the Rams got a haul for the #2 pick a few years ago, but NFL teams learned from that and the Redskins weren't getting a proven veteran in return for all of those picks. San Diego feels like they can get more than one draft pick for Rivers, while the Titans want more than one player for the #2 overall pick. I can't imagine a deal goes down.

If the Titans don’t get a good offer, I think they pick Mariota. Tennessee wants an offer; the Titans aren’t married to picking anyone at number two. I do not believe Tennessee has gotten a golden offer yet.

I don't know anything about anything, but if the Titans are going to pick Mariota because they need a quarterback and he seems like as good of an option available without a better trade option in place, then I would probably trade for Rivers (if possible). Taking a quarterback at #2 isn't something an NFL team should just go because they need a quarterback. That team has to like the guy and know how they will build the offense around his strengths. I don't know, maybe the Titans can do this, but they seem to be using Mariota as a backup option at #2 unless they find a better option. There's no harm in getting offers for the pick, but what would it take for the Titans to pass up on what they perceive as an elite player at the most important position on the field? Why would they pass up on a quarterback they like if given a great trade offer? Quarterback is the most valuable position and the bottom drops out of the quarterback market after Mariota and Winston are off the board. All this talk about the Titans wanting to trade is probably a smokescreen that I'm not smart enough to understand.

The Titans were all over Mariota all through the college season, and beyond. One Oregon source told me the Tennessee scouts were the most fervent of all teams during and after the season investigating Mariota. The one thing the Titans feel very good about: Though Mariota has a reputation of being a running quarterback who would have a tough time adjusting to life as an NFL pocket passer, they saw that the majority of his throws this year came from the pocket, without a lot of movement before the throw.

Or maybe the Titans do like Mariota. It's that time of the season where, as Peter would say, NOTHING IS SET!

The idea that some "draft experts" are furthering that Mariota can't pass from the pocket is just ridiculous though. These "experts" seem to have watched Mariota play for one quarter of one game and based their evaluation on that.

My gut feeling three days out? (Dangerous in a year like this, because nothing looks certain but the top pick.) The Titans don’t get that pot of gold for the pick, and they take Mariota.

Or they could trade this pick and get Philip Rivers. I think I know which option I would choose if I wasn't absolutely sold on Mariota. My gut tells me the Titans are absolutely sold on Mariota and are simply feeling the market out.

With Jacksonville picking third, I asked 12 people I talk to fairly often to tell me if they heard anything they trust about the Jaguars at three. Eight answered the question with a name. Amari Cooper, Dante Fowler and Leonard Williams all got mentioned as names they heard reliably.

Well, Bleacher Report is always suggesting in slideshows while grading each team's draft that a team should have filled all of their needs, even though a team doesn't have enough draft picks to do this. If the Jags have cap room, maybe they should draft all three of these players. No one can stop them once they land in London to play all their home games there.

Very little consensus about the order of the top players this year. Have you noticed? It’s been that way consistently since the end of the college season. There’s not an Andrew Luck, or even a Jadeveon Clowney, this year—a player who would be rated the best on the board of most teams or most analysts.

THIS IS THE CRAZIEST NFL DRAFT SINCE AT LEAST LAST YEAR'S NFL DRAFT!

Let's talk what Peter had to say about the 2014 NFL Draft. Let's talk about what Peter King wrote on April 30 of last year when trying to pick the Top 10 picks of the draft. Guess who he doesn't pick, on April 30, as the first pick of the draft? I'll give you a hint, it's not the consensus first guy on every team's board whose last name is "Clowney." Here's Peter's Top 10 from last year:

1. Houston: Blake Bortles, QB, Central Florida.
2. St. Louis: Greg Robinson, T, Auburn.
3. Jacksonville: Jadeveon Clowney, DE, South Carolina.
4. Cleveland: Teddy Bridgewater, QB, Louisville.
5. Oakland: Johnny Manziel, QB, Texas A&M.
6. Atlanta: Jake Matthews, T, Texas A&M.
7. Tampa Bay: Khalil Mack, OLB, Buffalo.
8. Minnesota: Anthony Barr, OLB, UCLA.
9. Buffalo: Sammy Watkins, WR, Clemson.
10. Detroit: Taylor Lewan, T, Michigan.

Not awful, but not quite. It's interesting how Peter remembers Clowney as being the top guy on most teams' board, but on April 30 of last year Peter didn't have Clowney going to the Texans. It's almost like Peter writes, "THERE'S NO CONSENSUS THIS YEAR UNLIKE PREVIOUS YEARS!," nearly every single year prior to the draft. In fact, here is another King nugget from that MMQB:

I think the difference between this year and many recent ones is that we know which players to place at the top of the draft, but we have no idea whom to match where. 

Last year was such a different year too with all the lack of consensus in the Top 10 of the draft. It's almost like this happens every year.

Want more of Peter King misremembering and overstating Clowney as the first pick in last year's draft? Great, here it is. From the May 3 MMQB, which was written three days before the draft:

From the top of the first round to the bottom, here’s what I’m hearing:

No. 1, Houston. The buzz about a trade-down or Khalil Mack to Houston instead of Jadeveon Clowney won’t die.

Peter just wishes there was a consensus top guy on the board like there was last year with Clowney. If only...

There is also a picture of Peter King with Brian Williams in that MMQB. It's notable because Brian Williams is disgraced now for making things up that he experienced as a reporter, while Peter King can't remember what he experienced just last year as a reporter.

The book on this draft, essentially, is that there is no book.

Which happens to occur what seems like every single year prior to the draft.

The big calls from each analyst: 

I'm not going to print all of these because they are all guesses. I pretty much believe nothing that Mike Mayock writes/says/indicates though, so I'm glad he wasn't a part of this sample of "big calls" (again, "big guesses") from these "analysts" (professional guessers).

The moral of the draft this year is that it’s a beauty-in-the-eye-of-the-beholder draft. It should be fun Thursday night, just because most of what happens will have a surprise element to it.

Every single year the moral of the draft is that beauty is in the eye of the beholder and there are always surprises. Nothing has changed. 

Having said that, I’ve heard from several agents that their clients want the draft in New York. It’s perhaps a coincidence that the potential top three picks Thursday night—Jameis Winston, Marcus Mariota and Amari Cooper—all chose to skip the trip to Chicago. Perhaps it’s the start of a trend. Players should be free to make their own decisions about attending or not attending, but it’s been a long time since three of the top picks in the draft skipped it. So that bears watching.

I get it, Peter! The draft is in Chicago, so something "bears" watching. If the draft were in New York, would these three players have "jetted" out of there or made the "giant" decision to attend the draft? What if the draft is in Green Bay? Would so many potential draftees attend that they can't "pack" them all in? Hilarious (not really) and great stuff (not really) that Peter didn't even realize he did.

Thursday’s and Friday’s picks (rounds one through three) will be made inside the Auditorium Theatre. All Saturday picks (rounds four through seven) will be made outside, in Selection Square. Day three picks will have some interesting venues:

The Jaguars, trying to pump up their London partnership, will be making their sixth- and seventh-round selections late Saturday night (England time) from London.

The Jaguars, realizing they are quickly alienating all of their fans in the states, will hope they can trick some unsuspecting foreigners into cheering for them.

Other local markets will have different places where picks will be made as well. The Vikings will announce day three selections from the construction site of their new stadium in Minneapolis … the Falcons from a fan event at the new College Football Hall of Fame in Atlanta … the Cardinals from the Big Red Rib & Music Festival at their stadium, where local flag football players will announce the picks.

The Rams will be making their picks from Los Angeles at the site of their new practice facility that is being built, not because they are moving to Los Angeles, but because...uh...it's more convenient? Jeff Fisher specifically is going to be making the Rams' fourth round pick from the deck of the new house he built in Los Angeles after receiving a contract extension from the team. Then the entire organization will flip off the city of St. Louis and thank them for being so patient by burning a pile of the 2017 season tickets that would have been issued had the team stayed in St. Louis.

How well the league and the fans and the players adapt to the new setting will determine whether the league continues to go on the road—though from what I hear, Chicago would have to be a significant failure for the league to revert reflexively to New York next year. “We love the move so far,” O’Reilly said Friday. “It’s allowed us to re-imagine what the draft can be.”

The NFL just asks that you bear with them on this Chicago draft idea.

Collinsworth, the Emmy-winning NBC color man on “Sunday Night Football,” usually disappears from the football consciousness in the offseason.

I personally ignore him during the regular season as much as possible too, so his disappearance becomes more of a year-round thing for me.

Not this year. Collinsworth in 2014 bought a majority interest in the football analytics website Pro Football Focus, and PFF will have a draft special today, “Pro Football Focus: Grading the 2015 Draft,” at 5:30 p.m. ET on NBC Sports Network.

Last year the site began to do the same work for major-college teams. NBC says PFF analysts graded all plays for each draft-eligible player in the 2014 season and graded the players the way they’d grade NFL players. On this show the PFF analysts will compare the pass-releases of Marcus Mariota and Jameis Winston to established NFL stars like Tom Brady and Aaron Rodgers.

That will be interesting, especially when factoring in who actually catches the pass that is released from the hand of Winston, Mariota, Brady, and Rodgers.

Two interesting Collinsworth observations after some draft study. One: “When I started watching tape on the quarterbacks, I was 100 percent convinced Winston was the better player. As every day goes by, in my mind, Mariota gets a little closer.” 

"A little closer"? So Collinsworth was 100 percent convinced Winston was the better quarterback, but now that Mariota is getting a little closer, Collinsworth is only 95% convinced Winston is the better player? That still seems like he is very convinced, no? So this observation doesn't mean a hell of a lot in the end, because "a little closer" isn't close at all coming from 100 percent certainty.

Two: “The best player in the draft, to me, is Dante Fowler.

Mike Mayock liked Dante Fowler as the best player in the draft too, until he saw Fowler had a bad personal workout and now he's moved Fowler to a late fourth round pick.

The Hardy case certainly is not over, after the Dallas defensive end was suspended last week for the first 10 games of the 2015 season. If the suspension holds, it means Hardy would be sidelined for playing football for 25 games, longer than any other player for an off-field issue ever.

I'm not going to waste my time finding a .gif for this so just pretend I put a .gif up of a person pretending to cry out of mock sympathy. Hardy was sidelined during the 2014 season while not losing a dime he was supposed to be paid for the season. So he got paid to do nothing. I wish I would get suspended like that by my employer.

1. Hardy’s case on appeal will be simple: I shouldn’t be kept from playing football for 25 games for what I did. Hardy’s side will add the 10 games this year to the 15 games last year. The NFL will argue, as league counsel Jeff Pash did with me Friday, that the 15 games was mutually agreed to, in essence, when Hardy agreed to go on paid leave without discipline last year.

And let's be honest. This isn't a 25 game suspension. Hardy got paid for 15 of those games. That's not a punishment, but a chance for him to ply his trade as a rapper and whatever else he did during that time while earning his full contract, and having the time to Retweet idiots who supported him.

But it’ll be interesting to see, assuming he files suit against the NFL for an excessive suspension, if a court views last year’s 15 games as time served.

Hardy will file that suit against the NFL. He's refused to even admit guilt for putting himself in the situation he was in and has been defiant through everything. That's his deal, good for him, but a little self-awareness about putting himself in the situation would be nice. Best of luck, Dallas. You got the best bi-polar defensive end who only wants a new contract in the NFL. Once he gets that contract, we'll see how dominant he continues to be.

“In terms of what’s different about the NFL’s approach and what different about how the NFL’s approaching these kinds of issues, is the fact that we took a case where the prosecutors dismissed the charges, sent the guy home, and we said, ‘We’re not done,’ ” said Pash. “We spent quite a bit of time, at no small expense, to hire investigators to get the facts as best we could.

I see the NFL is wanting a pat on the back for taking domestic violence seriously. I hope the NFL, a billion dollar non-profit organization, didn't have to spend too much money getting the facts as best they could. I wouldn't want them to spend money they can't afford to spend, which is better served going in the pockets of the already-wealthy owners. Great job, NFL! You take domestic violence seriously...now.

Even if Greg Hardy’s suspension gets sharply reduced on appeal, even if the judge throws out the suspension for some technical reason, the facts are clear. It’s clear what happened. It’s clear what he did. It’s clear what he did because we did the kind of thorough, competent, professional investigation that deserved to be done, and that honored the suffering of this woman, and respected the significance of this issue. And that’s what we weren’t doing the right way a year ago.”

Here's a gold star for you, NFL!

The key part of Brody’s ruling, I believe, comes on page 71 of her decision, and it has to do with the fact that players would have to prove that all or a great majority of any head-trauma issues were caused by playing in the NFL. As pro careers on average last less than four years, many NFL players played more tackle football before reaching the NFL than they did in the pros, a fact that Brody addresses midway through her ruling.

Which is a point I have made repeatedly when Gregg Easterbrook has written about concussions. There is a causation issue where it's impossible to tell when a NFL player actually received the concussion(s) that affected him through out his life. 

Not in any way to minimize what happened to players in the NFL, but there is no question in my mind that if the case ever went to trial, the NFL would have taken some of the big-name plaintiffs in the case, found some old video of college collisions, and asked at trial: Which ones of the big hits caused Player X to have significant post-concussion syndrome today? If one single hit didn’t, how much of his condition can be attributed to his six years in the NFL, and how much to the 10 years of tackle football before entering the NFL?

Considering brain trauma can be caused by what may seem like an insignificant hit to the head, it wouldn't be hard to prove there is a causation issue. Maybe the hits to the head built up over time, that's possible I guess, but the NFL will be paying the burden of an NFL player's entire football career in the settlement. So I see the NFL's point and it's a point I would make as well.

“The main one is Randy Gregory. And trust me, I’ve had a bunch of teams in the bottom half of the first round going, ‘Uh-oh, we’ve got to be all over this guy from our owner, because you might have to bring him into this conversation, from our owner down to our coaching staff.’ And what I think it really becomes, it’s an organizational call. You’ve got top-10 talent in Gregory. And if you’re going to pull the string with him at 16 or 32 or 48, I don’t care where, because of the well-known off-the-field issues, you’ve got to get ownership to buy in and you’ve got to have a coaching staff that understands what they’re going to have to do to provide an infrastructure to help this kid succeed.”

You gotta love Mike Mayock quotes about the NFL Draft. Actually, no one has to love them, and if they didn't, maybe he would go away.

—NFL Network’s Mike Mayock on one big hurdle facing Nebraska pass-rusher Randy Gregory, who admitted testing positive for marijuana at the NFL scouting combine—and whose off-field life at Nebraska has been the subject of much investigating by NFL teams in advance of Thursday’s first round.

I'd worry much more about Gregory's size if I were an NFL team, but I guess a positive drug test is a red flag. If he fell to #25, I wouldn't mind at all if the Panthers took him. He's stupid and had/has an issue with smoking pot. It's not like he was kicked off the Huskers team or has a history of violence. Of course I probably would have said the same thing about Charles Rogers in regard to having an issue with smoking pot. And yes, I bash Greg Hardy while wanting a pot smoking pass rusher on my favorite team. It's not the same thing and Gregory actually sounds contrite, which can't be said for Hardy.

“We tried to move up last year with a team, and they wanted my first three grandchildren. I said, ‘No, I’m not going to do that.’ ”

—Denver GM John Elway, on trading up in the draft.

Elway initially threatened to go play baseball if the other teams didn't let him get his way and do the deal which would help the Broncos trade up, but then realized that won't work in this situation.

Factoids of the Week That May Interest Only Me

For the first three months of his NFL career, Todd Gurley will not be able to drink a beer legally. He turns 21 on Aug. 3.

I'm not a fan of drafting running backs in the first round as a general rule, but Gurley is the exception for me. I would take him in the first round if I were a team that needed a running back and Gurley was the best player on the board. I think he's going to be a stud.

“The Greatest Catch Ever,” Spike Lee’s 30-minute documentary on David Tyree’s Velcro-helmet reception in the Super Bowl (and on a few other catches), has this note of interest that I never knew:

Stop it. Why do I feel like this wouldn't be the last note of interest about this documentary?

The ball Plaxico Burress caught for the winning touchdown in Super Bowl XLII is the same ball Tyree caught four plays earlier against his helmet as Rodney Harrison mugged Tyree to the ground.

That is interesting. It's at the point now that I don't have to watch the documentary because Peter has told me all the information in the documentary that would have caused me to watch it on NFL Network while I was bored one night. 

NFL Draft Quiz:

The third quarterback picked in the 1998 NFL Draft (after Peyton Manning and Ryan Leaf) gave the commencement address at his alma mater Sunday. Who was it, and where did he speak?

Answer in Ten Things I Think I Think.

Because giving the answer right now would make too much sense. Plus, Peter has to trick his readers into accidentally moving closer and closer to viewing the Adieu Haiku.

Mr. Starwood Preferred Member Travel Note of the Week

So I ran the 6.2-mile Central Park loop Saturday morning (58:33—hey, anyone ever notice it’s different running on a windy 47-degree morning, with real hills, than it is on a flat treadmill in the basement of a health club?), and for nearly a mile I found myself trailing  a woman having a great time running and chatting away on her cell phone.

Oh no, this woman wasn't following the strict rules that Peter sets out which state how every single person on the planet should behave while in public. The only exception to these rules is Peter King himself, of course. He makes the rules, he doesn't follow them. So this woman is minding her own fucking business and running as Peter trails behind her like a stalker, except Peter isn't stalking her, but only listening to her entire conversation as it occurs. He's not stalker, more eavesdropping for a longer period of time. It's a totally different thing.

We were both running about the same pace, about 9.5-minute miles, up and down the slight grades of the beautiful park, and I was interested in her conversation with—I believe—a girlfriend on the other end of the conversation.

You should have tried to----I believe---mind your own business and fall further behind this lady or pass her on the trail. That's fine, it's a free country. You could have---I believe---just done your best to ignore the conversation and not have memorized the whole thing so you can dictate it in your football column later in the weekend. See, that's creepy when you make a point to listen to a person's entire conversation.

(When I run, I have nothing in my ears. I struggle, and think, and watch the surroundings, and then struggle some more. But I certainly do not converse more than is absolutely necessary. I can’t.)

Eavesdrop. Don't forget you do that too.

Oh, and I would be remiss if I didn't state Peter has nothing between his ears sometimes when he isn't running. 

I did find out, though, that this 30ish woman was going to a baby shower later that afternoon, hadn’t bought a gift yet but was thinking about a gift card from Bloomingdales, wondered how much would be appropriate, settled on $50, then asked if the person on the other end wanted to meet for a margarita beforehand, and then she drifted behind me on a bit of a decline.

See, this could all have been avoided. I run and I pass people talking and doing weird shit I wouldn't imagine doing while exercising (okay, mostly talking). Peter didn't have to keep the same speed as this lady for nearly an entire mile. He caught up to her somehow, didn't he? So why didn't he just pass her on the trail so as to avoid being the creepy guy who is trailing behind some poor lady while she runs? I ask when I know the answer. Peter got stuck behind her and wanted to know what she was talking about so he could tell everyone in MMQB about this crazy lady who is talking on the phone while running. He made a conscious decision to stay behind her, which is creepy.

In general, when not running in a race where there are runners everywhere, it is common courtesy to not just drift behind someone for nearly a mile. You make an effort to let the person in front of you go further ahead or try to pass that person. Why? Because it's really fucking weird to be running and have some dude hanging out behind you for an entire mile. If I were the lady (and I would not have been on my phone, so Peter would have either let me go ahead or passed me due to having no creepy story to tell in MMQB), I would have eventually turned around and asked what his problem was or just accelerated as fast as I could to get away this creepy guy. There are so many issues here, but either this lady was talking really loudly or Peter was really close to her. I say this because Peter had to have been breathing hard to hear the conversation, yet she either talked loudly enough or he was close enough to hear over his own breathing.

There is a distinct possibility this woman was continuing to talk on the phone just in case the weird guy hanging out behind her running attacked her there would be someone who knows and could call the police. If Peter is going to trail behind her, at least don't listen to her conversation. It's weird.

It’s a free country and cool if you can use all this technology wherever, and I know I’m a 57-year-old dinosaur, and I get that just running and thinking and pondering life is probably passé, and I understand no one gets hurt when someone is on the phone while jogging in one of the great parks in the world.

Well, part of the reason the woman stayed on the phone with her girlfriend is that she didn't know no one was going to get hurt while on the phone. There was a guy right behind her for nearly a mile and he seemed very interested in what she was saying. That's creepy.

But I do not want to be on the phone when I am running through Central Park. I’m just not going to understand that.

You don't have to understand it, you just don't need to stay behind the lady so you can hear her conversation purely for the purposes of relating the conversation in your weekly football column. 

Ten Things I Think I Think

1. I think there is a cottage industry out there saying the Bengals are nuts for extending Marvin Lewis and asking what Marvin Lewis has won that would merit him getting a contract extension through 2016. Idiocy, in my opinion.

It's all Andy Dalton's fault anyway. He's the one who got his receivers injured this past year against the Bengals, which prevented the Bengals from beating the Colts.

Does he need to win in the playoffs? Absolutely. Losing in the playoff opener four years in a row isn’t good, nor should it be something anyone with the franchise accepts. If Mike Brown were a Steinbrenner, Lewis would have been gone after last season. But I refuse to blame this all or even mostly on Lewis. The Steelers and Ravens start first-round quarterbacks who have played great in multiple playoff games, and both have won Super Bowls. Andy Dalton hasn’t—yet. I’m not putting the blame for that on Marvin Lewis. Now, I would put the blame on him for so solidly standing behind Dalton, without any consequence for his lousy January play. The Bengals need to draft a challenger to Dalton, not necessarily to hand him the job

I’m not absolving Lewis of blame for never getting past the first playoff game. But I’m putting more of that blame on the quarterback than on the head coach.

Actually Peter, it sounds like you are putting most of the blame on the Bengals GM. Peter states the Bengals need to draft a challenger for Dalton and show him consequences for his lousy play in the playoffs. If he doesn't blame Lewis for the Bengals not drafting a challenger to Dalton, then he certainly can't blame Dalton for refusing to bench himself. Dalton has no way to draft another quarterback to compete with him, so it seems like Peter is actually putting most of the blame on the Bengals GM. So Peter is blaming Mike Brown for Marvin Lewis not having won a playoff game.

3. I think it wouldn’t shock me if the Saints used the Jimmy Graham pick from the Seahawks, the 31st pick of the first round, on Dorial Green-Beckham. But I can’t see him going much earlier than 31. With the great group of wideouts in this draft, what sense would it make to take a great prospect with the most checkered history of any player in this draft in the first round?

Peter King is just absolutely so predictable. Here is something I wrote last week when Peter said that Green-Beckham was one of the great mysteries of the draft:

Just write it Peter. You know you want to. List the same teams you always list that could draft a player like Green-Beckham and surround him with veteran players who will show him the right way. The Patriots, Seahawks, etc.

When it comes to talented but troubled players or players that an NFL team may not know how to utilize effectively, it's always easy to know which teams Peter will suggest will draft these players. Funny, these teams rarely do draft these players. I knew Peter would link Green-Beckham to the Seahawks. It makes sense for their needs, but it's also something lazy that Peter would write...and he did.

4. I think it probably wasn’t the best idea for Greg Hardy, or someone Tweeting for him,

Oh no, it's completely Greg Hardy Tweeting for himself. There's very little doubt about that.

to re-tweet the day of his 10-game suspension this wish from an apparent fan of his: “F— Goddell.” [Sic.] That’s the kind of thing that’ll really help him win a reduction in his suspension.

He doesn't care and he hasn't cared. More power to him. Hardy has consistently Retweeted things such as this over the last few months. It's who he is.

5. I think I was glad to see Mike Mayock admit his mistake before the draft last year in being convinced

that Teddy Bridgewater wasn't the best quarterback in the upcoming 2014 NFL Draft based on one individual workout? That he regrets coming to this conclusion based upon ignoring all the tape Mayock saw which showed him Bridgewater was the best quarterback in the 2014 draft and believing this one workout showed Bridgewater's true abilities?

Johnny Manziel was growing up. I bought it too. And that’s one of the reasons why you should be skeptical of every guy in this draft with some pockmarks in his past, such as Jameis Winston and Marcus Peters and Randy Gregory. 

There has been one incident with Randy Gregory so far. He's the outlier here because there's been ONE incident of him failing a drug test, just like Warren Sapp failed a pre-draft drug test. I think there is a difference in a guy having multiple red flags and what happened with Randy Gregory. I could end up being wrong of course.

When you get a repeated pattern of bad decisions, you might be on your best behavior leading up to the draft—you’ve got all kinds of people around you telling you what to say and how to act—but once you get comfortable, whether it’s one year in, two years in, three years in, once you get comfortable again in the NFL and you get paid, typically that kid goes back to being who he always was.”

Which is what I believe any smart person would have thought about Manziel prior to the draft last year. Money and the chance to be a pro isn't going to make him change his actions, it will only exacerbate his actions.

7. I think, if you want to know the value of Peyton Manning to the league, you should know that the Broncos in 12 of 16 regular-season games this year will either be a prime-time game or a doubleheader game in the late-Sunday-afternoon time slot.

Ratings are what matter.

Matt Ryan’s a pretty good quarterback, right? He and the Falcons have only two prime-time/late-Sunday-doubleheader slots.

I guess Matt Ryan is a pretty good quarterback. His team hasn't exactly been very good lately and that seems to have caused the opinion of Ryan to decline. He just needs more help. How can a guy be expected to play well when he only has two quality wide receivers? Without a Hall of Fame tight end Ryan shouldn't be expected to carry the Falcons team.

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

a. Good for you, Bruce Jenner. Really good for you.

Peter can't wait until you fully transition into becoming a woman so that he can follow you on a running trail for a mile, listen to your conversations and then tell the general public the details of your conversation.

b. Seventh pick in the 2009 NBA Draft: Stephen Curry.

c. Second pick: Hasheem Thabeet. Sixth pick: Jonny Flynn.

I'm not sure anyone but the Grizzlies talked themselves into Hasheem Thabust as a real NBA-quality center. He was a tall guy in college who could block shots and had no offensive game to speak of, plus he was a year older than everyone else in his class. I wonder if Peter watches a lot of basketball? He's never made it entirely clear whether he likes basketball or not.

d. As you all know, I am not basketball guy.

What? No way? I had forgotten Peter wasn't a basketball guy since he had not mentioned something about it in the past week.

But Steph Curry is such a marvelous athlete and competitor and player. I think he’s the most compelling player in sports today.

He's the most compelling player in sports over Peter's lifetime. By his "lifetime" Peter King means, "over the last year."

e. How does a human being make the kind of shot he made getting mugged and falling out of bounds that Curry made against New Orleans Thursday night? In front of Sean Payton, by the way … according to Jeff Duncan of the New Orleans Times-Picayune.

Adding this shot was made in front of Sean Payton probably doesn't add to this story like Peter thinks it does.

g. If it hasn’t happened already, someone with the Kansas City Royals whom Yordano Ventura respects needs to take him out to dinner and bring the conversation around to behavior during competition. And this person needs to say to Ventura: “You’re 23 years old. You won’t make it to 25 as a baseball player if you get in fights every time you pitch. Either someone’s going to maim you, or you’ll continually get thrown out of games.”

While Peter may have a point, I wonder if this same conversation would have been had with Don Drysdale or any other pitcher from Peter's childhood that prided themselves on pitching batters inside?

i. There have been many bad contracts in baseball history, but the Josh Hamilton deal has to be in the top five.

j. This is what Angels owner Arte Moreno will get, in the end, for about $110 million: 240 games, 31 homers, 123 RBI.

It's not great, but I don't know if I would put Hamilton on the list of the top five contracts in baseball history. The money was great, but Hamilton didn't play terribly. There are probably contracts worth less where the player receiving the contract didn't perform to the level where he could come as close to earning that contract as Hamilton came to earning his contract with the Angels.

n. Coffeenerdness: Very glad to have discovered walking through Grand Central Station the other day Joe, a tiny to-go coffee shop with tremendous care taken in making good espresso drinks. The smell in there: heaven.

And what does heaven smell like to Peter? Heaven smells like the sweat hopping off a 30-something old female runner's body, while Peter is stalking this woman around a running trail. 

q. NFL Draft Quiz answer: Charlie Batch, picked in the second round by the Detroit Lions in 1998, gave the graduation speech at Eastern Michigan University in Ypsilanti, Mich., on Sunday.

Here is the answer to the question Peter posed earlier. My life is now more complete knowing this and the wait was absolutely worth it.

The Adieu Haiku

Ted Wells probe of Pats:
Day 94. Please end it.
Publish the report.

I think it is Year 2 of the Adieu Haiku. Please end it as well. 

4 comments In Honor of Thanksgiving, Gregg Easterbrook Invites The Truth Over For a Meal and Later Murders It With His Lies and Deception

Well, it turns out Gregg Easterbrook's Authentic Games Super Bowl selection from the AFC just lost to the Raiders. It's a good thing that Gregg's Authentic Games metric changes every week, because now he has a few more chances to correctly guess the Super Bowl matchup. Actually, no worries, because Gregg's Authentic Games metric doesn't care that the Chiefs just lost to the worst team in the NFL. What a great metric to determine the best teams in NFL! This week Gregg is thankful for exciting games on Thanksgiving, updates his Authentic Games standings, and really I could stop writing now because here's the column. It's TMQ. It sucks and frustrates me. It probably always will. But hey, it's Thanksgiving weekend so I will find one thing in this column that I am thankful for. That is my vow.

Many Thanksgiving Day games have been woofers. Not 2014. This year, Thanksgiving offers playoffs in November.

It's only November and Gregg is talking about the playoffs taking place? Is this 2014 NFL Playoffs Creep? How dare Gregg Easterbrook become a part of the 2014 NFL Playoffs Creep. He should be ashamed of himself.

Philadelphia Eagles at Dallas Cowboys pairs 8-3 teams and will decide first place in the NFC East. Seattle Seahawks at San Francisco 49ers pairs 7-4 teams and, considering this season's wild-card logjam, is close to an elimination contest for both clubs.

Nope, it's "close" to an elimination contest in that it isn't at all an elimination contest because there will still be four games played after this one.

Philadelphia-Dallas should be an entertaining shootout, matching the league's fourth- and sixth-ranked offenses. The winner will hold first place in the division. The loser will be 8-4, 

Watch out! Gregg can count!

A shoddy team from the NFC South will host a postseason contest while several winning NFC teams do not receive a postseason invitation. The Boys-Birds losers get an inside track to a wild card. But the Boys-Birds losers need to go 3-1 down the stretch, since a 10-win season is not likely to cut it in the NFC this season.

The Boys-Birds loser has the inside track to a wild card until they lose their next two games, in which case they won't make the playoffs. My point is this is an important game, but it's not like if the Eagles win then they will have the NFC East or even a wild card spot locked up. The game is important, but there's no "inside track" to a wild card here, because the winner of Seattle-San Francisco will also be 8-4. If the Cardinals win the NFC West and the winner of the Seattle-San Francisco game wins their next game and the Eagles lose their next game (after beating the Cowboys on Thanksgiving), while the Cowboys win their next game, then all three teams will be 9-4 and the "inside track" doesn't exist. My point is there is still 25% of the games to be played after Thanksgiving day.

Tension is higher in the Seattle-Santa Clara contest. These teams met for last season's NFC title, a down-to-the-wire event many considered the real Super Bowl of last season.

Oh really? "Many" considered this game the real Super Bowl and were discounting the 15-3 Denver Broncos led by a Hall of Fame quarterback and the best offense in NFL history? I must have forgotten that "many" were simply discounting the Broncos. I learn so much reading TMQ.

Now both are staring at the taillights of the Arizona Cardinals. The loser of this Bluish Men Group-Squared Sevens game will have five defeats and likely need to win out for a wild-card berth. Athletes boast about winning out, but it's not a good master plan, especially since Seattle and Santa Clara face each other again in two weeks.

Maybe I'm stupid, but did Gregg write that "winning out" meaning, "Winning the rest of the games they play" is NOT a good master plan? I don't think either team is planning on losing Thursday evening just so they have the chance to try and win out the rest of the games. So no, the master plan probably will never be to lose a game and then try to win the rest of the games.

Will the home field equate to Detroit, Dallas and Santa Clara wins?

Yes, they will Gregg. There's no point in even playing the games because the home team is definitely going to win.

Not necessarily. Since the three-game Thanksgiving format was implemented in 2006, turkey-day hosts are 13-11. 

Whaaaaaaaat? Thanks for clearing up the misconception I didn't have about the home field advantage equating to a win for Detroit, Dallas and Santa Clara.

That 54 percent home victor performance on Thanksgiving is below the typical winning share for home teams. For instance, in the 2013 regular season, home teams won 60 percent of the time. And it's well below home-team outcomes for all Thursday games that are not held on Thanksgiving.

Gee, if only there were a way to chalk this up to something. I know! How about pointing out that two of the teams that have played on every Thanksgiving since 2006, Dallas and Detroit, have five winning seasons between them in that time? Maybe the fact two teams that traditionally have played home games on Thanksgiving since 2006 have not been very good during that time? Detroit has only had a winning record once, so it's mostly on them. It would be crazy to chalk up the lower home winning percentage for home teams on Thanksgiving to something as logical as this.

That Detroit always gets a Thanksgiving host date, and the Lions have been awful in many recent seasons, dragging down the turkey-day home team performance statistics. 

See, Gregg DOES come to this conclusion, but only after beating around the fucking bush as much as possible. Rather than just state WHY home teams on Thanksgiving don't have a winning percentage comparable to home teams playing on non-Thanksgiving Thursday, Gregg has to ask the question, beat around the bush about why and then finally get to the right answer. It's like he is killing space, but Gregg wouldn't do that would he? Not when he has all this NFL knowledge just waiting to burst out on to the computer screen.

In other football news, if the playoffs began today, 4-7 Atlanta would host a playoff game while five 7-4 teams -- the Browns, Steelers, 49ers, Lions and Ravens -- would not reach the postseason at all. Why is a seeded playoff format a forbidden thought to the NFL?

Why is Gregg trying to predict which teams will make the playoffs when there are still five games to play? Yet again, Gregg is guilty of 2014 NFL Playoffs Creep. It's only the end of November and Gregg is talking about the playoffs that don't even start until 2015. It's just like showing the Rockettes' Christmas Show in early December or late November. It hasn't happened yet, so don't talk about it or else that's CREEP!

Stats Of The Week No. 5: The AFC North is 28-15-1; the NFC South is 13-30-1

I'm not taking anything away from the AFC North. It is clearly a stronger division this year (and that's important to note. THIS YEAR it is a stronger division. These things are cyclical), but also know that the AFC North is playing the NFC South head-to-head, so these records may be exacerbated by one of the best divisions playing one of the worst divisions during the season. It doesn't matter. The NFC South sucks, but it's important to know that these two divisions are playing each other this year.

Stats of the Week No. 8: Atlanta is 4-0 versus the NFC South, 0-7 versus all other divisions.

See? This puts things in perspective a little bit and helps prove my point. The AFC North is 10-1-1 against the NFC South this year. Obviously those games can't be removed, but when not playing the NFC South the AFC North is 18-14, while the NFC South is 12-20 against other divisions. This is still a terrible number, but puts the AFC North record in a little more perspective.

The Broncos seem to have a playbook just for deuce tries: under Peyton Manning, Denver is 4-of-5 when going for two.

Or the Broncos just have a really good Hall of Fame quarterback who is good at converting two-point conversions.

Touts lauded the return of Josh Gordon, with 120 receiving yards. Two of Brian Hoyer's three interceptions were errant throws targeted to Gordon. in both instances he might have broken up the pass but instead just watched passively as the ball was picked off. When a pass is errant, a wide receiver should turn into a defensive back. Gordon seems to consider this beneath him.

I like how Gregg's takeaway from these two plays is to blame the receiver for not turning into a defensive back and he doesn't blame Brian Hoyer for throwing the fucking errant pass. Maybe Josh Gordon should have played defense better, but Hoyer threw the damn interception. Most of the blame should go to him.

More importantly, Gregg is performing his weekly lying and deceiving tricks. Someone please tell me how the holy hell Josh Gordon was supposed to "turn into a defensive back" and stop this interception from happening. Was he supposed to turn into fucking Superman and fly ahead to push the Falcons player away from the football? It was well overthrown and Gordon couldn't have broken up the pass. As usual, Gregg wants to criticize and hope no one follows up to see if he's misleading his audience or not.

Now it's Detroit leading 3-0 at New England. The Flying Elvii face third-and-goal on the Lions 4. Presnap, Detroit is confused -- linebacker Josh Bynes is gesturing madly to the secondary. Just call time out! Continuing to gesticulate, Bynes turned his back on the opponents. Word to the wise: Do not turn your back on Tom Brady. He immediately signaled for the snap and threw an easy touchdown pass to tight end Tim Wright, the man Bynes should have guarded.

While agreeing with the point Gregg is trying to make, this isn't fucking basketball. There may be no player that Bynes is supposed to "guard." Sometimes defensive players don't have players they "guard" because this isn't basketball and teams run defensive schemes that are zone schemes. But of course, Gregg doesn't know this and just assumes defensive players are always "guarding" a man.

Also, I think Gregg meant to call him "hard-working undrafted free agent" Josh Bynes. I'm sure it's coincidence he didn't mention Bynes' draft position.

One other thing. Gregg doesn't think anyone can look at video to prove he is misleading his readers. Look. Bynes back was not to Tom Brady. He was looking at Brady at the snap. He went right and should have gone left.

The next time New England reached the Lions' 4, Wright split wide. Across from him was safety Glover Quin, who, being a safety, won't get any safety help; at any rate there wasn't any other defensive back on that side of the field who didn't have a man to guard. At the snap, Wright did a quick down-and-out. Quin stood like a piece of topiary, covering no one, as Wright scored again. 

This is a perfect example of Gregg Easterbrook criticizing an NFL team while not recognizing the type of defense that team was running. I know it's shocking to Gregg, but he is wrong sometimes. First off, the ball was on the Lions' 8 yard line not the 4 yard line, so Gregg is factually incorrect as usual. Second, Quin was in zone coverage. He clearly didn't just stand there, he was in his zone with a linebacker in front of him also running zone coverage. Also, there was no "guarding" because it was a zone defense. The defenders were guarding a zone, not a man. And for the third thing that Gregg was wrong about on this play, there WAS another defensive back on that side of the ball who didn't have anyone to cover in his zone. There was no other Patriots player on the screen in the left side of the end zone when Tim Wright caught that pass.

So Gregg has managed to get the yardage, the Lions' coverage, and his description of this play incorrect. Basically, there was nothing about the Patriots' touchdown that he described accurately. I'm sure many of his loyal readers will simply believe Gregg Easterbrook isn't misleading them and go spout off knowledge about how Lions' defenders didn't "guard" their man. Such is life with a trusted writer who misleads and lies to his audience in order to churn out a weekly column.

Last week at Indianapolis, the Patriots huddled up and mostly ran a heavy package of two tight ends and a fullback. That's the film Detroit looked at during the week.

Gregg claims to know the exact film the Lions watched during the week. Knowing the Patriots change offensive tactics on a weekly basis, I find it hard to believe the Lions only watched last week's game tape. But hey, Gregg makes up shit knows more than I do, right?

Sunday, New England used a no-huddle hurry-up with four or five wide. The game was a 1 p.m. start in late November, which means declining winter sun may be in a receiver's eyes. From about Veterans Day on, the coach who leaves nothing to chance sends someone to the field the day before the game to chart the sun, as perceived from the field, as it declines during the hours of the contest. Sunday, in the second quarter, a Detroit receiver was sent deep where, looking back, the sun was blinding: drop. New England passes went to shaded areas of the field.

Gregg wants to know why NFL teams have such a large staff? There's the justification for NFL teams having such a large staff. Somebody has to chart the sun.

"The Hunger Games: Mockingjay -- Part 1" just opened, the most recent in the doomsday genre that has assimilated Hollywood, television and novel writing. The "Hunger Games" books and movies denounce use of violence for mass entertainment. And hey, come be entertained by the glorified violence! 

I haven't read the books, but my understanding is that "The Hunger Games" movie is a work of fiction that isn't intended to portray a life lesson, so who gives a flying shit?

Then there's "Snowpiercer." Marketed as a highbrow, philosophical doomsday film, "Snowpiercer" contains a stark warning to humanity: After the apocalypse, nothing will make sense. Some kind of environmental blunder triggered an instant ice age that killed all but a few thousand people. They endlessly ride around the planet aboard a huge train powered by a perpetual motion engine that requires no fuel. If the world was suddenly covered with ice, why were capital and resources devoted to building a train track rather than, say, protective structures? Future technology can devise a perpetual motion engine, yet everyone has forgotten about power plants that burn coal to generate heat.

It's almost as if this movie is a work of fiction and any attempt at extracting reality from the movie is the fault of the person attempting to extract this reality.

The economics make least sense. The deep philosophical part is that the poor live in the back of the train, the middle class in the middle and the 1 percent in luxury up front. If society collapsed, wouldn't the money held by the rich become worthless?

Yes Gregg, but the power they have is still worth a lot. Power is the real money. Surely Gregg Easterbrook understands this principle. He is well-paid to write TMQ, so people think because he has this power it means he is smarter than the average football fan. See, the power Gregg has by writing TMQ means he is given qualities that he wouldn't otherwise have if TMQ was written by some dude on a blog.

Trailing 17-0 at Philadelphia, Tennessee punted on fourth-and-1 from its 34. Trailing 27-17, the Flaming Thumbtacks took the field goal on fourth-and-goal from the Nesharim 2. Tennessee entered the contest 2-8, yet coach Ken Whisenhunt used hyper-conservative tactics as if holding a late lead in the Super Bowl.

And to be clear, if a team used hyper-conservative tactics holding a late lead in the Super Bowl then Gregg would criticize that team for using hyper-conservative tactics. So Gregg doesn't really even agree with his comparison for how Whisenhunt was coaching.

Trailing 7-3 in the second quarter at New England, Detroit faced fourth-and-goal on the Patriots 2, and took the field goal. New England entered the contest as the league's second highest-scoring team -- touchdowns, not field goals, defeat high-scoring teams.

Pulling within 24-21 with 3:23 remaining versus Green Bay, Minnesota prepared to kick off following roughing the passer on a deuce. That meant the Vikings teed up on the 50-yard line. Onside! Onside! Worst-case for an onside from midfield just isn't that bad.

Two important points I believe Gregg misses:

1. He just stated that touchdowns, not field goals defeat high-scoring teams. Giving the Packers, another high-scoring team, a short field is also not a way to defeat a high-scoring team.

2. An onside kick does seem smart here, unless the Packers were expecting an onside kick, in which case the odds of success decrease. Gregg seems to consistently have difficulty understanding the success of an onside kick often depends on whether it is expected by the opposing team or not. If the Packers expect the onside kick here, the odds of success decrease.

Why Do Corners Look Into The Backfield? TMQ complains about corners looking into the backfield. Prep and college players may do this owing to lack of experience. Why do NFL players do it?

Cornerbacks will sometimes try to read the quarterback's eyes, but I think most of the time Gregg claims a cornerback "looks into the backfield" that the corner is usually not playing man defense and is in zone coverage of some sort. As I showed earlier, Gregg is terrible at figuring what defenses are run in the NFL, so I'm quite certain he's mistaken "looking into the backfield" for being in zone coverage. As always, Gregg's football knowledge is great as long as you don't look into the claims he makes in TMQ.

On T.Y. Hilton's 73-yard touchdown reception that led to his "cradle the baby" celebration, Jacksonville corner Dwayne Gratz was busy looking into the backfield as Hilton blew past. NFL corners know that future bonus offers will be heavily influenced by their interception numbers.

Does Gregg even know what he's talking about? "Future bonus offers will be heavily influenced by their interception numbers." What "bonus offers"? Is he talking about a contract extension? If so, the signing bonus the player receives isn't determined by only interceptions.

Looking into the backfield is a way to generate interceptions -- the corner may be able to read the quarterback's eyes and jump a short out. If looking into the backfield generates an interception, the corner benefits; if it causes a long pass completion, too bad for the team.

Gratz was not looking in the backfield, but was running either short man coverage or zone and expected safety help over the top. Look at the video. At the end of the video, the analyst even says, "Dwayne Gratz, wasn't totally his fault. His safety didn't help him."

It simply annoys me that there are idiots who read TMQ who will go around spouting bullshit about corners "looking into the backfield" because they think Gregg Easterbrook knows what the hell he is talking about, which he clearly doesn't. Gratz expected safety help and it is clear from looking at the coverage the Jaguars were running that he wasn't in man coverage on Hilton. Yet, Gregg keeps spewing nonsense in the place of facts.

Nobody likes to think about this stuff. In the short term these problems can be ignored, and the American political system is good at ignoring problems. But the longer pension reforms are put off, the worse the bailouts will be.

The Netherlands has a secure pension system because each generation is required to pay for itself. In the United States, the retired expect to be subsidized by the young. Millennials, why aren't you rebelling against this?

Because the retired and those going to be retired soon are the people holding the power. There aren't too many Millennials in Congress who can push through pension reform. But great question that ignores one of the most obvious answers. It's kind of hard to make changes when those in power who can make the change are those who also benefit from no change being made.

TMQ Right on a Distressingly Easy Prediction: Last month my Atlantic Monthly article on longevity trends noted that Social Security and Medicare have between $3.2 trillion and $8.3 trillion in unfunded liabilities,

The Dangerous Safety Device: Years ago for the Washington Monthly I did a story about an OSHA mandate that backfired and caused a workplace fatality.

A lot of pimping out of Gregg's other work in this TMQ.

The urban myth of being "thrown clear of the crash" is nonsense: being thrown from a crash makes a person 25 times more likely to die. (Your body is moving 50 miles an hour, passes through a window and then impacts concrete.) "I don't need to buckle up because this is a short trip" is also urban myth. Most traffic fatalities occur within 25 miles of home.

True, but this is probably because most people only drive within 25 miles of their home.

And please don't say "no one can tell me what to do inside my car." That's true if you drive exclusively on private property. State and federal law both are crystal clear that, on public roads, drivers must obey traffic and safety rules.

True, but I believe if I am over the age of 21 then I should be able to decide if I want to wear a safety belt or not. I don't need the government protecting me. But yes, the law says drivers and passengers have to wear a safety belt.

air bags reduce the probability of death by approximately 16 percent in direct-frontal impacts and 9 percent in partial-frontal impacts." Levitt and Price established that seat belts were much more effective than generally assumed, while airbags were overrated.

Why are auto regulators still in love with airbags?

Because even if they are overrated, they can still save lives if the person is wearing a safety belt. So if the regulators will force people to wear seatbelts than they will also think any other option to save lives is worth exploring.

First is that some people refuse to buckle up. Mandating ignition interlocks -- so vehicles won't start until belts are buckled -- is seen as a scandalous idea. Dangerous, expensive airbags are better?

Second is that airbags are seen as a triumph of regulation, and the intellectual left won't give an inch on regulation. Seat belts, and then shoulder harnesses, were the true triumph for regulation -- they've saved large numbers of lives in a cost-effective manner.

Third is that government programs never end. A generation ago there was a huge lobbying fight regarding airbags, resulting in new government programs and a new constituency of bag manufacturers. At this point airbags may have outlived their usefulness, if not actually become a hazard.

Also, now that air bags have been placed in most cars, if manufacturers take them out of the car then there is a perception that the car has just been made less safe. This would obviously affect sales.

Crimson star Andrew Fischer compiled 193 of his team's 404 yards from scrimmage. So maybe, just maybe, the play will be to Fischer. Yale had him single-covered going deep, no safety help. To make matters worse, Bulldogs corner Dale Harris was looking into the backfield trying to guess the play, rather than simply covering his man. 

Since Gregg often lies about whether a corner is looking in the backfield, I'm guessing Dale Harris really wasn't doing this.

TMQ contends that donations to university and college athletic departments should not be tax-deductible, since unlike education, athletics makes no larger contribution to society. No one likes taxes. But when the rich get deductions for donations, average people must be taxed or government debt must rise. Harvard has $36.4 billion endowment, more than double the GDP of Iceland. Why should athletic donations to Harvard, or to any university or college, be supported by average taxpayers?

The tax law which states donations to university and college athletic departments are tax-deductible isn't really in place for Harvard or other schools with huge endowments. It's intended to encourage contributions to smaller or medium sized athletic programs that need and can use the funds. The IRS just can't say, "All contributions to university and college athletic departments are tax-deductible, except for you Harvard. You have too much money already. Any contributions to your athletic department is not tax-deductible."

Last week Kansas City rose to second place, and immediately lost to winless Oakland. But since the Authentic Games Index doesn't recognize the Long Johns, this defeat does not alter the Chiefs' standing.

And yes, Gregg's Authentic Games metric is so useful it doesn't include his AFC Super Bowl participant from last week (and this week) losing to a previously winless team. Why would a loss to the worst team in the NFL hurt the Kansas City Chiefs in the Authentic Games metric? How could losing to the worst team in the NFL have ANYTHING to do with predicting that team's success in the postseason?

Gregg's Super Bowl matchup this week is Arizona versus Denver. Of course, Kansas City has one less loss to authentic teams than the Broncos have, but they lose out because they haven't played as many authentic teams as the Broncos.

My Non-Authentic Games metric has predicted the following Super Bowl matchups so far:

Packers and Broncos
Saints and Dolphins
Packers and Patriots

This week's Non-Authentic Games metric based entirely on which teams in the AFC and NFC won by the largest margin shows the Super Bowl matchup will be the Philadelphia Eagles and Buffalo Bills. So get ready for the matchup in the Super Bowl. Orton versus Sanchez.

Arizona clock management at the end of the first half at Seattle was perplexing. Trailing 9-0, the Cardinals reached third-and-goal on the Seattle 5 with 55 seconds remaining, holding a timeout. Bruce Arians watched as the clock ticked down to 19 seconds, then called the timeout. Huh? That meant Arizona was sure to attempt a pass into the end zone, as it did, incompletion -- the odd use of clock assured the Bluish Men Group they didn't have to defend a rush.

The Cardinals were holding a timeout, so why does this mean a pass attempt was assured? The Cardinals could easily have tried to run the football and then called timeout. Gregg is using hindsight to say that a pass was assured, but the Cardinals easily could have run the football from the five-yard line with one timeout. Sometimes I don't even understand what Gregg is thinking. He tends to just make up a reality to fit the criticism he wants to make.

The Blizzard of 1979 pretty much shut down Chicago for about two weeks and had lingering impacts for a month. Snow removal efforts were terrible despite lavish federal emergency aid; much of the CTA failed; the city's political machine was discredited, opening the door to Byrne. Three monster blizzards have hit Chicago in the postwar period, and all three been poorly handled. Yet Chicago is not widely viewed as a blizzard city.

Then there's Buffalo. The hard-to-believe seven-foot snowfall in parts of the Buffalo area (most totals are much lower, "lake effect" snow can vary significantly over short distances) is perhaps best appreciated in this photo, unless you prefer the drone perspective. Most Buffalo area public schools reopened today, one week after the blizzard. Chicago needed two weeks for basic recovery (schools open, plowing of side streets) from less than two feet of snow, Buffalo recovered faster from more than double the snowfall. Having lived in both Buffalo and Chicago, I can attest that Buffalo handles snow better, and endures less disruption of daily life from snow, than Chicago.

Yet Buffalo is viewed as a blizzard capital while Chicago is viewed as merely windy.

Chicago is viewed as merely windy probably because they don't get as many snowstorms during a given year as Buffalo. So Chicago doesn't handle snow as well because it seems the city infrastructure isn't as well-equipped to handle large amounts of snow as the city infrastructure in Buffalo is equipped to handle large amounts of snow.

If snowstorms ruin your day, you'd be better off in Buffalo than in Chicago -- since in Buffalo, snow rapidly is plowed and shoveled.

Yes, it's better to be in a snowstorm while located in a city that is used to handling snowstorms. Thanks for the information Gregg. I wouldn't have been able to figure this out without your help.

The Football Gods Will Smile Upon Him: On the final first half snap of Cleveland versus Atlanta, the Browns attempted a 60-yard field goal. Devin Hester was back to return a missed long field goal, which happened; got most of the way down the field and had only the holder to beat for a touchdown with time expired; Browns offensive lineman Joel Bitonio, who weighs 305 pounds, hustled like crazy to catch Hester from behind.

I think Gregg means "highly-paid glory boy and second round pick" Joel Bitonio hustled to catch Hester. Because Bitonio was drafted in the second round, Gregg won't be mentioning his draft position because it might ruin the narrative that highly-drafted players don't hustle like undrafted and lowly drafted players do.

Last week, TMQ complained of timid play calling by Buffalo coach Doug Marrone on fourth-and-short. In the second quarter, Bills facing fourth-and-short on the Jersey/B 45, Marrone went for it, and the try failed. The failed fourth-and-short was Buffalo's biggest down of the game! This column contends that sometimes it's better to try and fail -- this communicates to players that their coach is challenging them to win -- than to launch a timid punt. After the failed fourth-and-short, the Bills outscored the Jets 31-0.

It's better to try and fail because this communicates to players that the coach is challenging his team to win...except in situations like last week when Gregg criticized the Saints for not "doing a little dance" to convert the fourth down. It turns out that going for it on fourth-and-short challenges a coach's team to win only in cases where that team ended up winning the game. Funny how that works isn't it?

Manly Man Plays of the Week: Game tied 7-7, Santa Clara, hosting the Potomac Drainage Basin Indigenous Persons, faced fourth-and-2 at midfield with 11 seconds remaining, holding a time out. The "safe" thing to do is to punt. Harbaugh/West  called for a deep pass, complete, Niners field goal on the final snap of the half.

Yeah, but WHO CAUGHT THIS PASS, GREGG? WHO? SAY HIS NAME!

From the ESPN game play-by-play of this game:

(:11) (Shotgun) C.Kaepernick pass deep right to M.Crabtree pushed ob at WAS 23 for 25 yards (B.Breeland). 0-yds YAC

Michael Crabtree, he of the "Crabtree Curse" and a highly-drafted glory boy who only cares about himself, is the guy who caught this pass. Isn't it interesting how Gregg leaves this little tidbit out of his analysis of this play? It's like Gregg has an agenda he pushes in TMQ. This agenda is mainly to make up some shitty theory in order to explain why a team isn't playing well (instead of actual analysis because Gregg isn't capable of doing this) and then cover up how wrong he was when his theory is proven to be incorrect. It's all about Gregg's ego. He CAN NOT be seen as wrong nor can he allow his readers to see through his bullshit.

Colin Kaepernick and Robert Griffin III, both once viewed as unstoppable,

They've never been viewed as unstoppable. Gregg is exaggerating.

Doomsday movies play in suburban shopping malls to amuse soccer moms; 

That's a little sexist I think. Gregg probably thinks these soccer moms catch the doomsday movies in the afternoon so they can be home in time to cook dinner and make more babies.

Doomsday and computer-generated special effects obviously fit together nicely, while dystopias create the sort of simplistic good-versus-evil contrasts beloved by scriptwriters. If a future society is run by cackling villains, that's a lot easier to write than a future run by the conscientious.

Considering these movies and books are written to be entertaining, it's also a lot more entertaining to have an actual antagonist in a story rather than a story about nice people running the future with no conflict and drama.

The Football Gods Chortled: Three days after being on the cover of Sports Illustrated, breakout Patriots star Jonas Gray was benched, active for the Detroit game but never sent in.

Again, Gregg misleads his readers. I believe he means "unwanted and undrafted" Jonas Gray. Also, Gray isn't a star because he played well in one game. Geez. Cut back on the exaggerations.

Raiders Mathematically Alive to Finish 6-10: Kansas City had just defeated the defending champion Seahawks and was looking past the 0-10 Raiders to this Sunday's confrontation with Denver.

Gregg's ability to read minds comes through again.

Miami leading 21-17 at Denver facing third-and-10 at the Broncos 12, Ryan Tannehill dropped to pass.

Well, if Tannehill dropped to pass then he's playing the quarterback position all wrong. It's hard to throw the football from the ground.

Yes, I make grammar mistakes all the time, but is it too much to expect more from a columnist who has an editor and writes for the biggest sports site on the Internet? I don't think so.

He was hit as he threw; the ball bounced off an offensive lineman

Well obviously. He dropped to throw the pass. There's no way he could get the pass over the offensive lineman while on the ground.

Next Week: Tuesday Morning Quarterback gets a chief of staff.

Maybe this chief of staff will convince Gregg to quit misleading his readers by leaving out facts that only serve to protect Gregg's ego and attempt to give Gregg's assertions some authority in the minds of readers through deception. I doubt it. Gregg would probably just hire a chief of staff to gather more information about how unrealistic science-fiction movies and television shows are.

I said I would have to be thankful for something in this column in an attempt to be somewhat positive. Here it is. I'm thankful this column is over...and I'm thankful you guys read the crap I write about the crap Gregg writes.