8 comments Idiocy: A Bleacher Report Specialty

There is some good stuff on Bleacher Report, blah, blah, blah. I always disclaim that. There's also shit on the site. Today's article is an example of the shit that can be found on Bleacher Report. I'm not perfect when it comes to discussing sports, but there are several types of comments that baseball and football fans can make which irritates the shit out of me. These comments usually assume that sports are like video games or come from sports fans who just come off as annoyingly simplistic. Three of these comments are:

1. "Let's draft Quarterback X in the fifth round and develop him to where he can be the starter in a few years."

On it's face, this doesn't seem like an annoying comment at all. It is the assumptions behind this comment that annoys me. It's the speaker's assumption a team can draft a player and then start "developing him" to be the starter in a few years. It's as if a lack of talent or the mental makeup to play the quarterback position can be overcome with some TLC and teaching. It just doesn't work that way all the time. It's not simple to take a fifth round pick, teach him to be a quarterback and then spit out a starting quarterback in a few years. Yes, it can happen, but this statement and the assumption of some magical "developmental technique" that can take a 5th round pick and turn him into a starter in a matter of three years annoys me.

2. "With all these linebackers we have, what about running the 3-4 defense?"

Oh sure, let's just fucking turn the entire defensive system around today. That doesn't sound like it would be difficult or take any sort of preparation or change in personnel to do. I read this comment all the time and it never fails to annoy me. There is more required to run a 3-4 defense than to have four good linebackers. This type of comment always seems to assume a team would need no other position adjustment to run a 3-4 defense than having four good linebackers on the roster. A team needs 3-4 linebackers who can rush the passer, a nose guard who can hold down the middle and keep the offensive linemen off the linebackers, and 3-4 defensive ends who can rush the passer but also hold the end. It's a different set of skills required for defensive players and the fact a team has four quality linebackers doesn't make the move easy. Throw in the defensive coordinator for a team may not have experience running a 3-4 defense and the comment becomes more annoying. More NFL teams are running hybrid defenses, but to blindly suggest a team just magically switch to a 3-4 defense in training camp as the magical key that turns the team around is stupidity.

3. "Let's send Player X down to the minor leagues and teach him to play a different position."

Baseball isn't a video game. You can't just send a player down to the minor leagues and teach him to play a new position and then call him up a year later to see him playing extremely well at that position. It's rare for a player who has played his entire career at catcher can just become a second baseman in a year's time. Well, that is unless you write for Bleacher Report, in which case teaching a 6'4" 230 pound catcher to play second base is just a piece of cake. 

Dan Uggla's struggles are no secret for Atlanta Braves fans.

Uggla has been bad over his two years with the Braves, but he improved last year in terms of getting on-base and led the National League in walks. He's been bad in Spring Training again, but he has always struck out a lot and not hit for great average. It's not like he would improve as he got older. I'm still fine with him at second base and have faith he can at least continue to get on-base at the .348 clip with more power than he showed last year. I think Braves fans just tend to get in a panic sometimes.

Hitting .227 with 55 home runs and 160 RBI in his two years with the Braves, Uggla hasn't exactly lived up to his five-year, $62-million contract.

So the solution is to bench him or trade him? What could the Braves gain from having a non-contact hitter who is a poor defender on the bench? What could they possibly get through trade that would relieve them of Uggla's salary and make the team better? Those are my three questions that have no satisfactory answers.

With power throughout the Braves' order, fans aren't going to be patient if Uggla continues to struggle. And, let's face it, can you blame them?

Since Uggla is relied on for power, wouldn't it make more sense for Braves fans to be more patient since one of the biggest things Uggla provides (power) isn't in short supply on the Braves roster? They may not rely on him to hit home runs, so they can afford to be more patient with him.

Before you think this is an article intended to bash Uggla, here are some of the good things he's done for the Braves.

It's not an article to bash Uggla, but an article to bench Uggla and replace him with a catcher. That's so different from bashing him.

In 2012, Uggla batted .262 with runners in scoring position and .308 with runners in scoring position and two outs. So he can hit in the clutch.

Clutchiness is Uggla's thing. Who needs this in the everyday batting order? The Braves don't, that's for sure.

He brings power to the second base position, which is not seen much in MLB. Robinson Cano, Aaron Hill and Rickie Weeks come to mind.

Uggla had 19 home runs last year. That's good and one of the good reasons (his shockingly improved defense last year is another) to keep him in the lineup.

He also started and ended 2012 well, batting .271 in April and .280 in September.

Uggla has it in him to do well, but he seems unable to get things right in his head during the middle parts of the season.

Not entirely true. Uggla hit .293/.369/.586 during July 2011 and .340/.405/.670 during August 2011. For his career he has struggled the most in June, but he doesn't seem to consistently struggle during the middle of the baseball season over his career. He did struggle mightily in 2012, but I don't know if his middle season struggles are a trend or not.

Then there's the strikeouts.

He ranked fourth in the National League with 168 strikeouts, striking out 96 times with the bases empty.

Is it better to strikeout with the bases empty or better to strikeout with runners on-base? Uggla struck out a lot, but he also got on-base at a .348 clip and led the National League in walks.

Simply put, Uggla either just can't get the job done anymore or his brain is getting in the way of him hitting.

I'm glad we discussed this. Now what's the solution to this problem? Players making $39 million over the next three seasons generally just don't go away and it is hard for other teams to want to take on that salary for a declining player through trade.

Including this year, Uggla still has three years and $39 million left on his contract. But can the Braves afford another three years of Uggla's subpar performances?

These are the deep questions only the writers of Bleacher Report are willing to discuss. Can the Braves afford to pay a player $13 million when he doesn't play well? Can ANY MLB team afford to pay a player $13 million for a subpar performance? Probably not.

While there is nobody in the farm system that is ready to take over at second should Uggla continue to struggle, there are other possibilities.

Because any time an expensive player isn't performing up to snuff, it makes more sense to bench that player and then spend money and prospects to go find another player who can play that position.

Should the opportunity present itself before the trade deadline,

"Before the trade deadline," meaning before July 31st? If the Braves are going to replace Dan Uggla why would they potentially wait until July 31st to do so? This makes not of sense.

guys like Ben Zobrist and Omar Infante could be had for the right price.

So the idea is to replace .220/.348/.384 with 19 home runs, 78 RBI's, 94 walks, and 168 strikeouts with Omar Infante who hit .274/.300/.419 with 12 home runs, 53 RBI's, 21 walks and 65 strikeouts last year? How would this improve the team exactly? Presumably the Braves can't trade Uggla, or they would have to eat a lot of his contract, but they are free to take on $4 million more for Infante who at best is only a moderate upgrade and a free agent after the season? So how is the team improved for 2014 with Uggla one year older and still on the roster next year? So Uggla gets benched and then the Braves have the same issue next year. I don't think Infante is a solution.

Ben Zobrist would be an upgrade, but he also costs $5.5 million in 2013, $7 million in 2014, and $7.5 million in 2015. It's not very likely Zobrist could be had for cheap either. Assuming the Braves could trade Uggla, they would still have to eat at the very, very least half of his contract (which I doubt they could even get a team to cover that much). That means they would be investing $39.5 million in their second base position over the next three years at the absolute least, while giving up prospects for Zobrist. Interestingly, that's how much they currently have invested in Dan Uggla except they don't have to trade any prospects to get him.

So Zobrist would be an upgrade (which I would admit) at the cost of prospects and money during a three year span when the Braves will need to try to re-sign, sign, or pay through arbitration Brian McCann, Kris Medlen, Jason Heyward, Craig Kimbrel, Freddie Freeman, Andrelton Simmons. See the issue there? Uggla stinks, but the Braves can't afford to spend more money on the second base position over the next three years and expect to keep what they consider the core of their team.

With both slated to be free agents after this year, the Braves could put a decent package together to get one of the two during the stretch run.

Again, Zobrist isn't a free agent next year. There is a team option for 2014 and 2015. To trade prospects for Zobrist and not exercise these options would be stupid in my opinion. Meanwhile Omar Infante at this point doesn't seem like an upgrade. Plus, after the Braves have benched Dan Uggla should they just turn to him to be the starter in 2014? If you bench Uggla and replace him with Omar Infante then Uggla has to be traded, right? Who plays second base in 2014 for the Braves? Don't worry, the author has a really, really stupid suggestion for 2014.

Or the Braves could send Evan Gattis down to the minors to learn how to play second base.

Worst idea ever. Non-Braves fans have no idea who Evan Gattis is. That's fine. He has an interesting back story that is irrelevant for what I am going to write here. More importantly, he is a 26 year old catcher/outfielder who stands 6'4" and weighs 230 pounds. He crushes the baseball and the Braves are desperately trying to find a way for him to make the active roster, hence the move from catcher to left field. He is not quite the defensive catcher an MLB team would look for and he probably isn't the best full-time left fielder a team would look for either. But he mashes the baseball. A move to second base over the next year is not a good idea for Evan Gattis to make. Simply put, second base is not the place for a 6'4" 230 pound ex-catcher.

While there would be a major adjustment period for Gattis,

This adjustment period potentially being "his entire Major League career." When Dan Uggla is brought in as a defensive replacement, that's never good news. The funny part is the author wants to trade for Infante or Zobrist (he never tells us what will be done with Uggla, so I assume he will very covertly be murdered in order to be removed from the Braves payroll) and then put an ex-catcher at second base. Baseball is a video game apparently.

it could be beneficial for the Braves because he's hitting .438 with two home runs and 10 RBI during spring training.

So sending a player who is hitting the cover off of the ball down to AAA to learn a new position he has never played before would be beneficial to the Braves this year? How can that be beneficial to the Braves when Gattis wouldn't even be on the active roster? I have so many questions and no answers that can satisfy my curiosity as to where this bad idea came from.

If Gattis could learn how to play second base, that would solve two problems: 

If Jason Heyward could be cloned it would solve many problems as well. If Dan Uggla could find the fountain of youth that would solve a few issues. If we could teach birds to carry the heavy weight of a human being and train them to fly to a specific destination then we could rid ourselves of air travel costs. If dogs could speak then we wouldn't have to wonder why they are randomly barking at a wall. There are so many "ifs" and so few answers.

It would provide him with the opportunity to be in the lineup

So would carrying him on the roster as a backup left fielder/catcher/pinch hitter this year. Sending Gattis down to the minors to learn a new position, how exactly does this provide Gattis a chance to be in the lineup? If Uggla is struggling this year then shouldn't the idea to be to replace Uggla this year, not a year from now? There are much easier ways to get a player's bat in the lineup than send him down to the minors for a year to learn a new position. In fact, sending Gattis down to the minors is a specific effort to take his bat out of the lineup for this year when he is tearing the cover off the ball.

and it would solve the Uggla problem all in one.

No, it wouldn't solve the Uggla problem because Uggla would still be on the roster and still cost $13 million per year. Now if you have an idea on how to trade Uggla, get value for him in a trade, get most of his contract off the books and also find a quality second basemen, then that's a great suggestion. Suggesting the Braves move a 230 pound catcher to second base is not a real suggestion and this is just embarrassing for you to even suggest. 

11 comments Bill Simmons Has Some Fat Rhymes to Spit at You

Bill Simmons wants to fire and re-elect sports commissioners in every sport. Needless to say, even though I will say it, I am sure Bill probably believes he is qualified to be the commissioner of the NBA. Few people could run an NBA organization or the entire NBA with the effectiveness that Bill Simmons could run an NBA organization or the entire NBA. Today, Bill tells us that commissioners are hypocrites (Bengoodfella puts look of shock on his face) and out of touch (what? really?) with fans. Besides being the very first person to notice this, Bill also reveals that commissioners only care about making money (I know, I was surprised to hear this too). Unlike other businesses such as Grantland's parent company, ESPN, which only cares about producing the most interesting of sports content...as long as this content makes them money and the content involves Tim Tebow and/or a forced debate about Tim Tebow or LeBron James, the NBA/NFL/NHL/MLB are only money-driven enterprises. Sports should be pure and not driven by business interests. It's so hypocritical for the NFL to pretend to care about the sport and really only care about marketing and business interests. Anyway, let's get to Bill's Friday NFL picks column, powered by Subway.

(Bill's Friday NFL picks columns no longer feature a "Miller Lite Great Call of the Week." What a shame.)

This wasn't the best morning for Roger Goodell. Hours after former Viking Jimmy Kennedy practically ran out of ways to call the NFL's commissioner a "liar," Goodell announced that he would be recusing himself from hearing the Saints' latest bounty appeal. Taking over? Wait a second … good God, that's Paul Tagliabue's music!

This whole faux-wrestling introduction joke got old probably three years ago. Just keep beating the joke into the ground though.

Can you remember another commissioner having his objectivity questioned so vociferously that he had to enlist his former boss to clean up his mess? Me neither.

Can you remember a commissioner dealing with a bounty scandal, and as a result having suspended players and coaches for a full season based on this scandal? Me neither.

And you wonder why Goodell might be wearing the "Most Dangerously Incompetent Commissioner in Sports" championship belt for the foreseeable future, even as his rival commissioners keep halfheartedly trying to steal it.

The only person who could effectively run the NBA/NHL/NFL/MLB? You guessed, the VP of Common Sense, Bill Simmons.

I know Bill doesn't come out and say he thinks he could run these professional leagues but you and I both know he thinks he could be the commissioner of the NBA at the very least. This is the same man who has absolutely no background working in the NBA and thinks he could be a General Manager of an NBA team. Because all General Managers do is sit in their office and think of trade ideas, right?

So for Goodell to stand out so blatantly, that means things had to escalate quickly, and maybe even that Brick killed a guy.

Quick, shoehorn a pop culture joke into the column. Bill even had to make a statement like "that means things had to escalate quickly," in order to slip his "Anchorman" joke into the column. "Things escalating quickly" doesn't even really make sense in this context.

In this case, "Brick" was Browns linebacker Scott Fujita,

So Scott Fujita killed someone? I can see why he is on the commissioner's radar then.

who didn't kill Goodell with a trident but definitely ethered him.

In the context of this joke and in the movie "Anchorman" Brick really did kill someone. So if Fujita is "Brick" in this situation, then in the context of the joke he really did something wrong, and it isn't wrong for the commissioner to try and punish him. I realize I am over-explaining a joke. If Fujita metaphorically "killed" Goodell (which is what Bill is referring to), it is still a forced joke.

Bill is a 43 year old man. I like how he uses the word "ethered" in this sentence as a way of telling "the kids" he is still hip and knows how to sling the street slang around in normal everyday convo. You may think Bill doesn't have street cred, but you would be wrong. Bill's got the street cred because he is going to do an NBA pregame show this year with Jalen Rose and waves everyday to the black guy who lives next to Michael Rapaport in Bill's neighborhood.

Seriously, he just used the word "ethered." I know Bill claims even as a child he always wanted to be a black man, but it could be time to realize he has more in common with Mitt Romney than Nas.

Fujita didn't pour his feelings into a hostile dis song,

"a hostile dis song." That doesn't sound white at all when said out-loud. Don't worry, Bill doesn't start rapping at any point in this column.

Tired of being dragged through the mud of New Orleans's bounty scandal, Fujita crafted 100 carefully chosen words to say everything about Goodell that needed to be said.

Translation: This dude is a H-Y-P-O-C-R-I-T-E.

Translation: E-T-H-E-R-E-D.

If you noticed, Goodell never responded — not even after Fujita called him "condescending" and "extremely desperate," then complained about Goodell's "absolute abuse of the power that's been afforded to the Commissioner." By continuing to trade shots with Fujita, Goodell would have inadvertently broken the golden rule of hip-hop:

So it is understandable that Goodell never traded shots with Fujita. So why criticize him for not responding?

Thou shalt never beef down.

Not only does Bill write the words "Thou shalt never beef down," most likely with "Stillmatic" playing in the background, but he puts it in italics. I'm not even criticizing Bill's writing right now because this is too comical. Bill is teaching us the golden rule of hip-hop. I feel learned right now and not at all like laughing.

Even Stern during his swaggerlicious apex wouldn't have feuded with a badly injured player.

Is Jamie Kennedy ghost-writing this column as his character from "Malibu's Most Wanted?"

Then again, can you really fight back after you've just been checkmated? Everything Scott Fujita said was true.

Ethered. 

He could have hammered Goodell for increasing the number of Thursday-night games to 13, then spinning it by saying this now allowed every team a chance to play in prime time. Has there ever been a lamer excuse for a shameless money grab? When your franchise sucks, there's nothing worse than playing in prime time. In the days of B.B.B. (Before Belichick and Brady), I came to dread every Patriots night game — it was like shining a giant spotlight on a chin full of pimples.

Yes, life has been tough in these pre-B.B.B. years of Patriots primetime appearances for Bill. That time period between the Patriots making the Super Bowl in 1996 and their appearance in 2001 was a tough time for Bill as a Patriots fan. That one losing season they had in this time period, 2000, was nearly impossible to forget, but Bill is trying.

Then Bill brings up the idea NFL teams are more prone to being injured when playing Thursday night games, if not actually injured in the games, but injured later in the season from the lack of rest between games. He also criticizes the Thursday night games as a pathetic money grab, which we all know they are, so this isn't really news to anyone paying attention.

They were running on fumes. News flash: That's how players get hurt. If you're pretending to care about player safety, and that it's not just a pathetic attempt to cover your asses for the wave of looming concussion lawsuits, then wouldn't it make sense to carve out more recovery time for players?

It would also make sense to not advocate an 18 game season, but as the point has been made over the past few years, Goodell cares about player safety only in certain situations.

Here's the real reason for those 13 Thursday-night games every year, in case you were wondering …

Whoops, sorry. Here's the right link.

Bill is absolutely right about this. I'm just confused as to what misconception or misunderstanding he is clearing up. Maybe he doesn't even think he is clearing up a misunderstanding or misconception, in which case he is treading familiar ground. Money controls everything.

And actually, the price will climb higher than that because the NBC Sports Network needs those Thursday-night games more than the Walking Dead guys need clean shirts.

Then he includes a footnote:

I know that was awkward, but I couldn't figure out another way to work that into today's column. How much zombie blood and guts can be splattered onto one guy's unshowered shirt before it joins forces with the guy's overpowering BO and just evolves into its own zombie?

No, that wasn't any more awkward than the Brick reference earlier or one of many pop culture references that get thrown into Bill's column. In fact, this pop culture reference made sense in the context of the sentence. I feel like we need a "Pop Culture Reference Guide" for Bill. He seems lost at times.

Here's the point: You don't have a reason to watch NBCSN right now unless you love the NHL (R.I.P.), CFL, college football, college basketball, old Olympics games and events, hunting, darts, the Dew Network or something called Elk Fever (which actually ran in prime time on Tuesday night). They need to make a splash. Like, soon.

NBC Sports Network is fairly new. Clearly Bill doesn't remember ESPN's early days of fishing shows, exercise shows, lumberjack and poker competitions (I realize they still show poker). Seriously, I know they are a competitor of ESPN so Bill has to put them down to make Bristol happy, but give them a few years to "make a splash." ESPN didn't become the annoying behemoth it is now overnight.

You know those two guys in your fantasy auction who didn't realize all the elite running backs were gone until just DeMarco Murray was left, and suddenly they're locked in a holy war for him and ready to pay 40 bucks? That's how the Thursday-night auction will play out.

You know that guy who uses an extended analogy to say something rather than just coming out and saying it?

Of course, if Goodell genuinely cared about the welfare of his players (he doesn't) AND wanted to make money (he does), then he'd push for an 18-week schedule that included the following four wrinkles:

1. Fourteen Thursday-night games total (including Thanksgiving). When you include the two Thanksgiving day games as well, that means every team would play once on Thursday and that's it.

Nevermind, Bill just said the Thursday night games were only there for money purposes and he criticized how every team gets to play on Thursday once, his new idea is to not only keep doing this, but he wants to increase the amount of Thursday night games from 13 to 14. So Bill criticizes Goodell for not caring about player safety, then says if Goodell really cared about player safety he would do exactly what he is doing now, except he would add one more Thursday night game. My mind is blown.

2. Nobody would be allowed to play a Thursday game within 10 days of another game either way.

I'm not sure how this idea works out logistically, so while this seems like a good idea, it may not be possible logistically. If that game counts as both team's bye weeks then I don't know how a team would play in a Thursday night game the second or third week of the season. Would teams who have played one or two games really want a bye?

4. You might remember that 10 months ago one of my mailbag readers was pushing for an 18-week season in which every team was off for both bye weeks, calling it "Save the Marriage Weekends." I thought that was too radical but suggested the following compromise: Maybe they create two Über-Bye Weeks each season, with which something like 12 teams have byes and no game starting until 4 p.m. ET.

So assuming there is no Thursday night game or Monday night game (though I am guessing both NFL Network and ESPN would want one), this means three games would be played at 4pm and there would be a Sunday Night game on NBC. Why not just give teams the entire bye week off at that point? If NFL Network and ESPN still want their games, NBC will want their game, and there is one game being played at 4pm on Sunday. Even if there are only Sunday games, that is only four games. At that point it almost makes sense just to give every team the week off for simplicity sake.

I wouldn't necessarily classify these as bad ideas, but the logistics how of this could work out may not make sense and the owners would have to convince the NFLPA it was a good idea as well. Roger Goodell can't unilaterally make a decision like this without buy-in from the NFLPA. Sometimes I think Bill believes because Person A thinks an idea is a good one, this means automatic buy-in from Person B, when this isn't necessarily true. Bill has this misconception about NBA trades most frequently. Bill thinks if he himself believes a trade makes sense then the GM of an NBA team should obviously agree the trade makes sense.

Recently, Selig insisted that he'd retire when his contract ends in 2014, a bitter disappointment to everyone who wanted to follow a professional sports league run by someone IN HIS EIGHTIES. Are you kidding me???

Kenesaw Mountain Landis was MLB commissioner at 78 years old and died in office. He could have been 80 and served as MLB commissioner. Only his death prevented this from happening.

And look, I know the concept of electing sports commissioners is fundamentally impossible. It's a pipe dream through and through. But if Roger Goodell's job were threatened by an election, maybe he'd start thinking about semi-radical ideas like "an 18-week season with two byes."

I care not for this idea. I like a 17 week season with one bye. Maybe I am the only one who doesn't like this idea. To elect the commissioner seems silly though. Who would do the voting and could people vote more than one time? Not to mention, the NFL commissioner serves at the pleasure of and for the NFL owners. Why should anyone but the NFL owners get to decide or provide input on who serves for them in this capacity? This would be like the general public electing the CEO of a corporation. That's essentially what the NHL/NBA/MLB/NFL are, corporations.

To paraphrase an American hero named Scott Fujita, we're disappointed in you, Roger. You're a hypocrite. And there's just no way around it.

Yeah, Roger Goodell...you suck. Consider yourself ethered by Bill and he ain't beefing down.

Here's the kind of fantasy season I'm having with my crummy West Coast team: 

Here's the kind of thing I don't care to read about: Anything more than a cursory discussion of your fantasy team when I am not in the same fantasy league as you.

In other news: Cousin Sal and I actually had a brief "Should we bet the Browns at 50-to-1 to win the AFC North" conversation this week...Could the Browns go 7-3 the rest of the way with an easy schedule? See, you're screaming, "NO!!!!!!!!!! THERE'S NO WAY!!!!!!" But even us having that 90-second conversation about it had to be the Browns' biggest win in five years, right?

Absolutely. Because Bill Simmons is the ultimate decider on whether a team is a good team or not, and he will signify this by talking about the team, it is always an incredible honor for the great Bill Simmons to acknowledge your team may be competitive.

Robert Griffin III (-3.5) over Andrew Luck

Isn't it funny how this line has swung five times already?

It is funny how this fictional line has swung five times already. This is almost can be explained by the fact Bill creates this line every week in his NFL picks column and has full control of the line.

"Isn't it funny how my opinion changes from week-to-week? It's almost like I have no control over my own opinion."

Dolphins' Bye Week (-4) over Eagles' Bye Week

Put it this way: Miami didn't have to throw anyone off the stench of its season by firing a defensive coordinator who never should have been hired in the first place.

Does Miami's season really have a stench? I have been sort of impressed with the Dolphins for being 3-3 with a rookie quarterback. I guess the Dolphins 3-3 season isn't impressive to Bill.

And as Mike Lombardi pointed out on my podcast this week, Andy Reid won't do the right thing by promoting Nick Foles and looking toward the future, because that future probably doesn't include Andy, so he's going with the guy who can help him win right now. It's always fun when a coach or GM's short-term interests go directly against the long-term interests of the franchise, right?

This isn't exclusive to Andy Reid. I didn't hear the podcast, but I hope Mike Lombardi and Bill acknowledged nearly every coach who is coaching for his job will many times have his own short-term interests go against the long-term interests of the franchise.

Broncos' Bye Week (+4.5) over Falcons' Bye Week

Nooooooooooooooodle!

Calling Peyton Manning "noodle" still isn't funny.

Is anyone else rooting for Bowe to snap on his QBs like Camila did on Big Easy on The Challenge this week? Wait, you didn't get that joke? Why aren't you reading Jacoby's reality-TV column every Friday?

Because it isn't interesting at all.

Ravens (+6.5) over TEXANS

Are we sure the Texans are good? Sure seemed like Rodgers, Peyton Manning, and even Mark Sanchez could throw pretty easily on them...Oh, and the Ravens are 6-0 lifetime against the Texans. And everyone is counting them out and leaving them for dead since those season-ending injuries for Lardarius Webb and Ray Lewis. Here's your "NOBODY BELIEVES IN US!" pick for Week 7: Baltimore 34, Houston 24.

Juuuuuuuuust a big outside. Bill almost got the total amount of points scored in this game correct, but he missed badly on the score.

Meanwhile, in last week's column, a reader wondered what this year's "Suck for Luck" quest should be called, offering us "Torpedo for Geno" (for Geno Smith, the likely no. 1 pick)...The three best ideas in reverse order …

1. "Geno-Schneid"
 
The most common suggestion was actually "Geno-Cide," which we're avoiding for obvious reasons because it crosses every line and about 10 other lines beyond all the other lines.

But "Geno-Schneid" (first suggested by Haverhill reader Ernie Bassi) — now that's comedy! And it actually works!

Other than the fact it still sort of sounds like you are saying, "genocide," this still works I guess. Let's immediately not adopt this phrase.

Then Bill whines about his 3-3 Patriots for a few paragraphs.

And I didn't even mention our Hall of Fame QB, who now takes two intentional groundings a game, throws it into traffic in the red zone and randomly ducks during pass plays even when nobody is behind him.

Bitching about your Hall of Fame quarterback who is having a pretty good season. Now that's something every sports fan can identify with and understand as being something a Patriots fan could and should complain about. Bill doesn't sound spoiled and overly-whiny at all.

The more I'm thinking about it, I might skip this game altogether and take my kids to a pumpkin patch or something. Who needs to be angry on a Sunday in mid-October, the greatest month of the year? And if you think I'm overreacting, check out these e-mails …

Yes Bill, we are aware there are other whiny, bitching, spoiled Patriots fans who write into you complaining that everything isn't perfect and it is a travesty the Patriots have the audacity to show up on Sunday with a .500 record. You have created this generation of whiny bitches and they want to be just like you. Congratulations.

The Patriots with a one score lead give me the same feeling as A-Rod batting in the 9th inning. —Cory, Miami

Good one Cory! Relevant AND it bashes A-Rod.

Here's all you need to know about the state of the Patriots, and the defense in particular: On that last Seattle drive, I would have absolutely bet anything I owned that the Seahawks were going to score and beat us by one point. I'm going to to punch a wall now. —Kyle, Cambridge, MA

This is Bill's fault. He has created generation of idiots who use their own feelings as justification their opinion is right.

We know how this ends right? We're either looking at a season ending like the 2006 season ended or the 2009 season ended. Why should I invest three more months of my life for that? —Cabot, Miami, FL

The Patriots made the playoffs in both of those seasons by the way. If there was any way Cabot could sound like any more like a fair weather fan, I am not sure how this could occur.

WHY SHOULD I INVEST IN A SEASON WHERE THE AT THE VERY MOST THE PATRIOTS MAKE THE PLAYOFFS? THE PATRIOTS SHOULD JUSTIFY THEIR VERY EXISTENCE IN THE NFL IF THEY WON'T WIN THE SUPER BOWL EVERY YEAR, RATHER THAN ME JUSTIFY MY UNREALISTIC EXPECTATIONS!

In February of 2005 Tom Brady was 27 years old, had three Super Bowls, and was coming into [h]is prime. Now he's 35, still has three Super Bowls and is exiting his prime. How is this possible? Trading 80% of your first round picks is a start. Wasted prime. —Muzz, Woburn MA

Dear God, this is almost as bad as Cabot's email. These Patriots fans are the equivalent of wealthy 16 year old girls who are pissed off their daddy bought them last year's model Range Rover. Buy some balls and stop whining about the "wasted prime" of your quarterback when your team has missed the playoffs twice since the year 2000. Have some fucking perspective and quit acting like a baby who had his binky taken away. These specific (and not every Patriots fan, not at all) Patriots fans have had it better than nearly every other NFL team over the past decade, yet these guys choose to act like they cheer for the St. Louis Rams.

This is what Bill Simmons has caused. His decade-long whine-fest at ESPN has caused his SimmonsClones and Simmonsites to be just like him. They have become prissy little drama queens who treat every loss as the end of an era and fully expect their favorite team to win a title every year, and if they don't win a title every year they curl themselves into a little emo ball of sadness and use Bill as the outlet for their frustration. This is the current state of fandom.

ESPN's NBA Countdown (+13.5) over TNT's Inside the NBA

Take the points. At worst, we can hang around and hit a garbage-time 3 to cover the spread … right?

Maybe Bill will write a rap song about how cursed the Celtics are and perform it on "NBA Countdown."

8 comments My Larger Point Is To Show Rick Reilly Is Terrible

Rick Reilly isn't a very good writer. I say this as a person who reads a lot of sportswriting. Like a lot. I read much more bad sportswriting than good sportswriting and I do this intentionally. So this makes me an idiot I would guess. What I have learned is what Reilly writes is neither funny, interesting, insightful, original, creative, or worth the amount of money he gets paid to write. Rick has written an ode to the next great quarterback in the NFL, Andrew Luck. Rick becomes the 900th person to handicap which team will end up with the next greatest Hall of Fame quarterback in the history of the NFL of all-time the greatest quarterback ever who is so good we ignore he has a horrific neck beard, otherwise known by mortals as Andrew Luck. Nothing you will read here is original, except it has Rick's own brand terrible writing, which I guess makes it original in its own way.

On a side note, I personally believe Andrew Luck will succeed in the NFL. Many sportswriters are very, very, very sure Andrew Luck will succeed. Insanely confident. It is the type of confidence that essentially screams, "I have seen one quarter of a Stanford game and everyone seems pretty sure Andrew Luck will be great so I am really sure too." If Luck busts I can't wait for the "We all thought he would be so great in the NFL, boy were we all wrong" articles from sportswriters. The problem is these same sportswriters are the ones saying Luck will be a great NFL quarterback, but they will assume everyone else makes the same assumption of Luck's future greatness like they have. I'm not sure that's true. I've watched a few Andrew Luck games and he seems like he could be the next Peyton Manning or he could just be a very good NFL quarterback. I think Luck could also bust in the NFL, it seems highly unlikely, but let's wait until he gets drafted first before preparing to write about his NFL legacy. Rick Reilly is incapable of doing this.

Because if you really love your NFL team, you want it to lose this season like a Jenny Craig class.

Mostly in this post I am going to spend my time angrily bashing Rick Reilly for these types of shitty analogies. Rick Reilly's humor is what happened when one person told him they laughed at one of his jokes when he was a 15-year old kid. Later some editor saw that Rick played well with the same demographic I will never understand and then eventually for some reason he got his column at the back of Sports Illustrated. Some people don’t need positive reinforcement or self-esteem because they then begin to believe they are more funny and special than they really are. It’s unfathomable in my mind that Rick Reilly wrote the sentence above and thought this was amusing, funny or inventive. He’s just collecting his paycheck and writing his weekly 500 word column at this point.

That's because the worst team gets to draft the best quarterback to come along since Peyton Manning himself -- Andrew Luck of Stanford.

Apparently Aaron Rodgers, Tom Brady, Phillip Rivers and Drew Brees don’t exist in Rick Reilly’s world. They both came along after Peyton Manning did. What Rick really meant to write was Luck is “the most hyped college quarterback to come along since Peyton Manning.” There’s a difference and Rick Reilly is too lazy to understand the difference or care about the difference. He’s counting his cash right now.

Luck is so indescribably good, I fully expect somebody to lose in their bye week.

Don't get crazy. Luck is being projected to be indescribably good in the NFL because he is a very good college quarterback. Whatever team that drafts him will probably be very happy with him, but Luck's greatness is very describable. Let's hold the hyperbole for at least another year until Peter King adopts Luck as the next white quarterback to win his heart over.

He's such a lock NFL star that,

No, he’s not a lock NFL star.

as this season wears on, you will see more tanks than in an episode of "Jersey Shore."

What irritates people the most about Rick Reilly and how much he gets paid is that any 10^th grade remedial English student could write like he does. There’s not nothing special about him. He writes something like, “Putting John Elway in charge of the Broncos is like letting the captain of the Titanic be Commander of the US Navy,” and then begins counting his dollars. His writing is overly lazy.

That’s why the initial comparisons of a feud between Bill Simmons and him were intriguing to me. I would be pissed if I were Simmons and ESPN backed a Brinks truck up to Reilly's door. This is because Rick's writing is uninspired and not at all creative or special. He doesn’t even try to be creative or special in his writing because he’s already set for life and there is a certain sub-set of the population (most likely those same people who watch “Two and Half Men,” buy Kenny G albums, and go to see “Twilight” movies…I have never met any of these people) who enjoys what he writes no matter how much the quality declines.

SIGNS YOUR TEAM IS PURPOSELY TRYING TO SUCK FOR LUCK:

1. Faking injuries during plays.

2. Betty White really is your flanker.

3. Stud running back keeps pretending he has strep throat.

4. Quick-kicking every third down.

5. Starting Tebow.

Not hilarious. Not funny. Not amusing. Not insightful.

On a side note, Rick Reilly has buried Tim Tebow in at least one of his columns, so I can’t wait for him to suck up to Tebow if he ever becomes an NFL-caliber starting quarterback. This is part of the problem with completely burying a player, you look like an ass when you are wrong. I still don’t think Tebow is necessarily ready to be the Broncos starter, but I will enjoy the dynamics of watching him run John Fox’s offense. Fox’s idea of offensive creativity is throwing a pass after running the ball six straight times. To see a marginally NFL-ready quarterback in his system is going to be fun to watch.

The Race To Last Place has been fierce so far. Four teams have managed to go the entire season defeated at 0-4, while seven others have only one blemish on their records at 1-3.

Maybe part of the reason Reilly’s writing doesn’t go over well with me is because he writes about sports in a desperate attempt to be cute and funny and isn't as concerned with accuracy. I don’t appreciate this and would like a little accuracy. For example, in this case Rick Reilly is pretending these teams are trying to lose games so they can draft Andrew Luck. It is not entirely true for the teams Rick lists. I can handle a little bit of humor, but my literal-mindedness has to point out some of these teams are not only trying to win games, but they probably wouldn’t draft (or draft him and trade him) Andrew Luck if given the #1 overall pick. I know, imagine the horror that a team may pass on or trade the greatest neck-bearded quarterback to come along since Kyle Orton.

There haven't been this many dedicated losers in one place since Comic Con.

Or at a Reilly family reunion! Zing!

Everybody has to be sure not to do their part.

Here's the way I see Luckapalooza right now:

This is where I get annoyed with Reilly’s attempts to be cute. His jokes aren’t even funny and some of these teams probably would trade the pick if they got the #1 overall pick. Basically, some of these teams aren’t losing to get Andrew Luck on their team and Rick’s attempts to be funny fail…which leads to my annoyance. If a sportswriter is going to write an article that isn’t factually accurate and is supposed to be amusing, for God’s sake make it amusing at least.

SUCK FOR LUCK SWEEPSTAKES

“Suck for Luck?” I bet Rick Reilly thinks he created this term.

10. Carolina Panthers (1-3): Unless Alabama's lawyers can get all Panthers wins vacated, it's going to be difficult.

They would have no interest in drafting Andrew Luck. They believe they have their franchise quarterback already on the roster. This is one of the teams Rick will list that are “Sucking for Luck” which probably would trade the #1 overall pick if they got it.

8. Denver Broncos (1-3): Slim. John Elway is calling the shots now and Elway would sell his mother to the North Koreans for a win. Tough break for Broncos fans.

This would be the ultimate showdown. Tim Tebow v. Andrew Luck. Which media-hyped quarterback would it be?

7. Jacksonville Jaguars (1-3): Trending happily down. Players know a horrible season might get the whole team moved to L.A. Where would you rather live?

In a world where Rick Reilly doesn’t get paid a lot of money to write columns like this one. The Jaguars also drafted a quarterback in the Top 15 this past year, so they may or may not have interest in getting the #1 overall pick.

6. Minnesota Vikings (0-4): Have you ever played the card game Hearts?

No one but you has ever played the game of Hearts, Rick. You are the only one to ever have played a game of Hearts. Please do enlighten us all.

Donovan McNabb is the Queen of Hearts of the NFL. He's worth minus-13 points to any team that starts him.

HAHA!! Good one! This took, what, 10-15 seconds to think about and write down. Great work.

Christian Ponder. That's my response to Rick Reilly saying the Vikings are playing poorly to get Andrew Luck. What would the Vikings do if they could get Luck and already had Ponder on the roster? These are the in-depth questions that Rick's attempts to be cute while making this list don't answer.

4. St. Louis Rams (0-4): This week they lost their best pass defender, Bradley Fletcher, and their best receiver, Danny Amendola, for the year. So things are going their way. They don't need Luck, but they could get two No. 1s, two 2s and Ozzie Guillen in a trade for him.

Ozzie Guillen! Get it? The Rams would get Ozzie Guillen because the White Sox didn’t want him anymore and they traded him to the Marlins! I wonder if Terry Francona would be thrown in as a Manager to be Named Later?

3. Indianapolis Colts (0-4): Rest your starters now, Colts. Forget what your 35-year-old superstar quarterback, Peyton Manning, said Thursday about coming back in December. Don't let him!

This is my not-so-secret wish. I want the Colts to get Luck so that way Peyton Manning can pull a Brett Favre and refuse to tutor, mentor or even work with Luck because his ego won’t accept that he can be replaced. Actually, I want the Colts to trade the pick to another team because Peyton Manning tells them he plans on playing for 3-4 more years and has no intention of giving up the starting quarterback position.

He has a spinal injury that doctors say is 50/50 career-ending. And it might take two years to know. Draft Luck and he'll be your starter until 2027.

I still enjoy how Rick is assuming Luck is going to be a franchise NFL quarterback. It’s not like it is hard to tell which college quarterbacks will perform well in the NFL or anything. I am sure Peyton Manning will handle the news well that he isn’t really in charge of his career and the Colts are planning on him being out for two years, even though this isn’t his plan, and they are going to replace him immediately. That should go over well.

The only problem is how would Manning take it?

The “only” problem is the Hall of Fame quarterback who still wants to be the starter for the Colts. Other than that, drafting Luck and immediately installing him as the starter should go as smoothly as giving JaMarcus Russell a free meal at Golden Corral.

(See what I did there? Anyone can write like Rick Reilly)

But if you think Manning would be happy with Luck waiting for him to screw up, you don't know Manning. He might never speak to the kid, much less give him a single practice rep. To avoid all that mess, the Colts could (gasp) waive Manning -- they have an out clause on Manning's contract in 2012 that would save them most of the $90 million deal they signed with him.

Rick really struggles when he starts talking more in-depth about the NFL. There are quite a few issues Rick presents here which Rick brings up but doesn't address at all:

1. Waiving Peyton Manning so they can go with the rookie quarterback definitely seems like the way for the Colts to go? Really? Not trying to trade Mannings? Teams just don’t waive quality NFL quarterbacks, even in this situation when Manning has come off major neck surgery.

2. So Rick Reilly knows Peyton Manning and knows he would basically freeze Andrew Luck out. Isn’t this a huge dick move by Manning? I find it hard to believe Manning could be so threatened by Luck he would resort to these measures. Of course, I don’t know Peyton Manning and apparently he is a much bigger asshole than I ever thought he was.

3. Rick Reilly is so convinced Andrew Luck is going to be a great NFL quarterback he thinks in order to avoid any potential distractions with Peyton Manning, the Colts should just waive Manning? Manning isn’t in his prime, but it takes balls to just cut Manning from the roster. This is especially true with the current roster the Colts have, which we have come to learn has relied an incredible, incredible amount on Manning to play well and win games.

Yes, all this would be ugly and dramatic and Manning would deserve better

You, Rick Reilly, are the one suggesting this as a solution. You can decide in your hypothetical fake situation if Manning deserves better or not and decide whether to give him better. You say the solution is to waive Manning to get his contract off the books, but then you say Manning deserves better. In reality, if Manning would essentially be a terrible teammate to Luck than maybe he doesn’t really deserve better.

1. Miami Dolphins (0-4): They have a real chance to pull off the Sweet 16. Their only decent player, QB Chad Henne, is out for the year with a shoulder injury.

Chad Henne is the Dolphins only decent player, as long as you ignore Cameron Wake, Brandon Marshall, Jake Long, Daniel Thomas and a couple other players on the team. Other than that, losing Chad Henne is the Dolphins losing their only decent player.

If the Dolphins can keep from doing something stupid -- like signing former Jags QB David Garrard -- Hurricane Andrew can be theirs.

David Garrard is the type of quarterback who can lead teams to wins immediately, which is why he is still a free agent. Teams aren’t exactly falling over themselves to give him their starting quarterback job. Note to Rick Reilly: It isn't 2008 anymore and David Garrard isn't seen as a quarterback that win games immediately for a team.

5 -- Kansas City: Four games left against teams with a combined 2-14 record to this point. They need to be careful. If they just play as a team, they could find themselves completely out of Luck.

“Out of Luck!” Not only does it mean something in the context of the sentence, but it is also a play on words! You’ve just earned your money Rick Reilly, sleep well tonight knowing you have done a thoroughly average job.

Remember, people, if it's broke, don't fix it.

No truer words about Rick Reilly’s writing have ever been spoken.

The way to greatness is backwards.

I take that back. No truer words about Rick Reilly’s writing have ever been spoken with this sentence.

7 comments I Guess We Just Be Happy Rick Reilly Isn't Plagerizing His Own Columns Anymore

Rick Reilly isn't a very good writer. He is the sportswriting equivalent of Eddy Curry. He makes a shitload of money, doesn't appear to do anything productive except get a paycheck and seems to enjoy flaunting to the public the fact he is extremely overpaid. I half expect Reilly to gain 100 pounds and just essentially give up doing his job effectively...well, I take that last part back because Rick Reilly has already given up doing his job well. Here's the latest evidence of this. Rick Reilly has written a Big 10 primer for the Nebraska football team in his latest excrement-ridden column posted on ESPN.com.

There are three major problems with this column:

1. Nebraska joined the Big 10 eight months ago. Reilly is just getting around to writing this column? The topic isn't even really relevant at this point since Nebraska joining the Big 10 was a big story eight months or more ago. Sure the college football season is starting very soon, but Nebraska joined the Big 10 over eight months ago. This column feels more relevant if it had been done back in December.

2. Rick Reilly tries to be funny. He isn't. It is sad to read. Needless to say, I will mock him mercilessly for this. He deserves it. The jokes are obvious and not funny. Rick Reilly jokes are like the jokes in an Adam Sandler movie, except more obvious and painful, if that's possible.

3. Rick Reilly wrote it. That's probably the major problem. He has no shame nor does he even pretend to give a shit. This is the best he will do and you as the reader will fucking deal with it.

Hello, Nebraska!

That's how it starts.

Now that you're joining the 12-team Big Ten, nothing is going to make sense anymore. I know it doesn't for me.

The Big 10 has 12 teams! What's up with that? It is funny to point this out because the name of the conference is the Big 10 and there are 12 teams in the conference. What should the Big 10 call itself? The Big 12. That's already taken.

"Why do we drive on parkways and park on driveways? It doesn't make sense."

Growing up as a Colorado Buffs fan, we were taught that if Nebraska was playing Libya, we should be there with a giant poster of Moammar Gaddafi.

As a Nebraska fan, we were taught the Colorado-Nebraska rivalry didn't exist as much anymore. Colorado actually has to win some games to make it a rivalry don't they. Look at all the red.

Because your state gave us Johnny Carson and Larry the Cable Guy. Besides, you kicked our butts to the state line every year and we're frankly glad to see you go.

I just said that.

You are joining one of the great football traditions in America, a fabric woven with sturdy football, passionate fans and the time-honored institution of selling your jerseys for tattoos.

And Nebraska is leaving a conference with a pretty good football tradition, passionate fans and the time-honored tradition of raping women. Of course to Rick Reilly, Colorado players raping women isn't as concerning as the lack of moral decency to sell a jersey for a tattoo. What a morally bankrupt conference that Big 10 is.

You know, stones-glass houses that type of thing? If your favorite school had a scandal over the last decade based primarily around the sexual assault of women, I wouldn't think mocking another school for a player selling a jersey for a tattoo would be something you would do. Of course, Nebraska football players don't exactly have a great history with women either, so them joining a conference where players sold jerseys for tattoos doesn't seem as bad as second degree murder.

Your new rival -- Forget Oklahoma. Now it's Iowa, like it or not. You close out your regular season with the Hawkeyes on the day after Thanksgiving at home. Iowa's a natural for you. Both your states are so flat you can watch a train pull out for three days.

Wow, how not funny was this? Both states are flat so they should naturally play each other in football!

Is there anyone who doesn't think Rick Reilly has given up at this point? I would like to meet you, if so.

Football-wise, Iowa has been better than you lately,

Since 2004, each team's record:

Iowa: 57-31

Nebraska: 56-34

That means Rick Reilly is correct about this. What are the odds he just guessed when he made this statement? 95%?

Rick Reilly doesn't do research on the Internet, he writes columns that evoke emotion (mostly he evokes anger in me). The last thing Rick Reilly looked up on the Internet was probably the Erin Andrews video.

Dress code -- Now that Jim Tressel and The Vest are gone from Ohio State, there is no dress code.

The only dress code in the Big 10 is the code to cover up the body parts where you got free tattoos in exchange for memorabilia!

(Rick Reilly high-fives me for that joke)

Your lunatic screamer of a head coach, Bo Pelini -- the man who could be an entire season of "What Not to Wear" -- is going to fit in nicely.

He wears a sweatshirt during games. I didn't realize he was required to wear a tie and dress shoes. Besides, Taylor Martinez's father complained when Pelini wore dress shoes they fit too well up his son's ass. He prefers the tennis shoes Pelini wears because after Martinez has fumbled for the 9th time that game it doesn't hurt as much when Pelini puts a foot up Martinez's ass.

Your fans aren't exactly ripped from the Armani catalog, either. Oy, that Sea of Red some of you wear: red socks, red overalls, red cowboy hats. Goes nice with your necks, though.

Working class people are stupid, poor dressers, ugly and probably have poor hygiene! This is comedy!

What should Nebraska fans wear? Ed Hardy shirts? Goes nice with your douchetastic writing, though.

Divisions -- The Big Ten is divided into two divisions: Legends and Leaders. Yes, these are incredibly anvil-brained names for divisions, but you should have seen the stuff that lost out:

The new division names in the Big Ten suck. We get it. The Big 10 named their divisions in December. It is now July.

Second -- Princes and Potentates

Third -- Behemoths and Brutes

Fourth -- Cheats and Soon-to-be-caught Cheats

How is selling a jersey to pay for a tattoo cheating again? It had nothing to do with playing the actual game...and that's cheating? I know we don't want facts to get in the way of Rick Reilly trying to make a terrible joke.

The Michigan Man is full of pride in himself and his Michigan degree -- so much so that you're going to want to bring a throw-up bowl along with you.

Sadly, the Michigan Man has had to reduce the volume a little lately, having not beaten The Ohio State Man since the debut of the Edsel.

"The debut of the Edsel." Now there's a reference that is neither funny, accurate nor timely. That's a hard trifecta to achieve when making a joke.

OHIO STATE

You're coming to the Big Ten at a lucky time, Nebraska. Ohio State has been the king, but if the king is not dead, it's on one knee and searching around for its mouthpiece. Buckeyes fans are usually very nice people, but all this vacating of wins has caused them to vacate their manners. They harassed Golden Boy QB and ESPN announcer Kirk Herbstreit into moving to Nashville and they sent death threats to the college newspaper sports editor over Tressel. Remind me, what did those guys sell?

I must have missed the memo that said Ohio State fans were nice before the Terrelle Pryor scandal. I'm pretty sure Herbstreit moved out of Ohio before the wins were vacated. I know, I know...details, who needs them when trying to make a point?

The problem is, Wisconsin has even bigger and stronger linemen than you do. Do you realize that the last lineman you had taken in the first round of the NFL draft was 27 years ago? Dean Steinkuhler?

We all know an NFL player is only considered to be a good player based on where he was drafted and not what kind of player he ended up being in the NFL. I guess guys like Carl Nicks, Russ Hochstein, Dominic Raiola, and Will Shields don't count as successful offensive linemen since they weren't drafted in the 1st round.

The Badgers have had five in that time!

OMG! For realsies?

I'm afraid Wisconsin is you, Nebraska, only with much better parties and more wins.

Well, that and Wisconsin is Nebraska if Nebraska had five less national titles, 212 less wins, 123 more losses, 31 less conference titles, and 31 less consensus All-Americans. All of this in only 76 more games played all-time by the Nebraska football team compared to the Wisconsin football team. But, if Reilly finds it more fun to just call them the same team in order to further the stereotypes of Nebraska and Wisconsin as white people who love planting corn and have red necks that he wants to perpetuate then he should go right ahead.

God knows I shouldn't expect or require Rick Reilly to do any deep thinking or actual research when he can just write words down on a page and cash his huge ESPN checks.

Q: Why do Penn State players wear black shoes?

A: Reportedly, coach Joe Paterno believes it makes his players look slower, which is not true. Bowl games do.

Big 10 teams are slow! I have never heard this joke before! This statement required no research and is intended to be funny! Are you entertained yet? We've heard all of the jokes and criticisms of the Big 10 dozens of times before this column. Yet, Reilly thinks he is making funny jokes or relevant points. He isn't. He is showing just how out of touch with sports he truly is.

Q: How is the health of the 84-year-old Paterno?

A: His ears still hurt a little from The Big Bang.

BECAUSE JOE PATERNO IS OLD! NO ONE ELSE HAS EVER POINTED THIS FACT OUT UNTIL RIGHT NOW!

Q: Where does Rick Reilly spend most of his free time?

A: Up in his own ass.

That wasn't intended to be funny.

NORTHWESTERN

You will see a few people in purple shirts with a stupid cat logo on them. You do NOT have to worry about them. But be nice to their students. A lot of them end up running big media companies. The Wildcats found a really good coach in Pat Fitzgerald, though.

It is so very clear the last time Rick Reilly paid attention to sports was the late 1980's or possibly the middle 90's. Northwestern has made three straight bowl games and have won 9, 8, and 7 games over the last three seasons. That's progress and they really aren't a pushover anymore. But again, it is easier for Rick Reilly to just base his Big 10 knowledge on his memories from 1989.

ILLINOIS

You draw more for your spring game than the Illini do for regular-season ones. I'm not kidding. You drew 66,784 for your spring game this year. The Illini didn't even average that for home games last year.

That's amazing to know. Illinois stadium, Memorial Stadium, has a capacity of 60,200 and the Nebraska Huskers' stadium has a capacity of 81, 607. There's no way the Illini could have drew as many fans as the Huskers spring game. Unless Rick has any ideas on how to fit 6,000 more people into a stadium space that maxes out at 60,000. If so, I would love to hear them.

INDIANA

Just awful. Being a football fan in Indiana is like being a scuba fan in Tibet.

Being a football fan in Indiana is also like selling Kate Spade purses in Ethiopia. See, they are poor in Ethiopia and they can't afford expensive things like Rick Reilly can because he makes a lot of money. In fact, I don't want to startle you, but ESPN.com actually paid him to write this column. It is sad to think about isn't it? Bleacher Report probably would have rejected this column. ESPN.com gives it the front page and then gives Rick Reilly is own show called "Homecoming."

As for you, Nebraska, the Big Ten is really going to take an instant dislike to you. Why? Saves time.

Plus, what conference would want a heralded program like Nebraska that brings enormous revenue, national appeal, a large fan base around the country and instant national recognition like Nebraska does?

Also, those games at Memorial Stadium with the freezing rain and the howling wind and nothing around for 100 miles to hide behind but corn stalks? They're not fun. Put it this way: You're going to have LOTS of visiting team tickets to re-sell.

Which shouldn't be a huge problem for Nebraska considering they have sold out every home game since I can remember. There isn't anything else to do in Nebraska and if any visiting team wants to sell their tickets there are probably going to be tons of takers for those tickets. What a terrible point.

What an idiot. I know Reilly is trying to be cute and funny, but the fact visiting teams won't travel to Nebraska will have a 0% effect on game attendance for Nebraska home games.

You know what might impress them, though? Your bowl record. You're 24-23 all time. You better knock that crap off.

In the Big Ten, that's just showing off.

That's probably because Big 10 teams are slow and can't compete with other conferences in bowl games!

To complete this column, Rick Reilly did zero research while waiting 8 months to write about the topic and he based most of his comments on stereotypes about the Big 10, while he covered the gaps in the stereotypes about the Big 10 he couldn't remember with terrible jokes. Just a typical Reilly column.

Rick Reilly is the 11-time National Sportswriter of the Year.

I didn't even know the Special Olympics had a writing category.

That was rude, I apologize to anyone participating or affiliated with the Special Olympics. I shouldn't drag your name through the mud by associating you in any way with Rick Reilly.

9 comments MMQB Review: Don't Make Peter King Get His Followers to Bankrupt Hertz! Edition

There may be a lockout, with no end in sight, but Peter King is still writing his MMQB...with no end in sight. Yes, there may be no NFL games on the horizon, but this doesn't mean Peter King has stopped writing his weekly NFL column. Even if there is no NFL news, it doesn't matter. MMQB really wasn't about the NFL anyway. It was about interviews with players, Peter's complaints about traveling, Peter's observations about the world and it was a forum for Peter to take his frustrations out on corporations who have drawn his ire. So MMQB is essentially just without the player interviews and quotes at this point, which isn't necessarily a bad thing.

The last time I swung a golf club was a year ago, at the 2010 Tom Coughlin Jay Fund Celebrity Golf Classic, in which, I'm sure, I was the worst golfer on the famed Stadium Course at Sawgrass.

In an alternate world where Peter King is a good golfer and someone else is a terrible golfer, Good Golfer Peter King would use this space to complain the terrible golfer shouldn't be on the Stadium Course at Sawgrass and should probably work on his/her game at a different place. Because we live in this world and Peter King is (as he reports) a terrible golfer, it is fine for him to play on a nice course and be terrible at golf...because he doesn't have Good Golfer Peter King criticizing him.

If everyone remembers the last time I covered MMQB, Peter stated he was going to try to keep the lockout talk to a minimum. Naturally, he lead off his next two MMQBs with tidbits about the lockout. When Peter says he isn't going to do something, immediately look for him to do that one thing.

'' We're headed for a period of nuclear winter for the next four or five weeks. There's no pressure on either side to move. There hasn't been any pressure since the March 11 deadline, which, not so coincidentally, is the last time either side made any sort of tangible move in the talks. That's 73 days without any real progress.

A part of me hopes the NFL stays locked out for two more months and then when the league and the players finally decide they should get a deal done, few people show up to the games and ratings plummet. The realistic part of me knows this won't happen at all. I would be first in line to go to NFL games and watch the games on television. The NFL and the player's union will probably agree on a deal, probably the same one they could have agreed to back in early April if both sides weren't too busy posturing, on August 31st and the season will start after that and the public (including myself) will be happy and forget all the anger we have at this stupid lockout. Right now though, I have frustration at no agreement having been reached and very little negotiating actually taking place.

I don't expect anything to happen until the three-judge appeals panel rules whether the NFL can continue to lock out the players, and by all accounts, that decision won't come until late June, at the earliest.

Can we get a judge to rule the two sides have until June 15 to come to an agreement? Would that be possible? We all know the NFL season is going to start in some form or fashion at some point, can't an agreement be reached now? I really feel like both sides could come to an agreement, but they feel better that they fought for what they wanted more strenuously if they let it drag on and on.

I respect Ray Lewis, and I also do not travel in his circles.

(whispers) Peter means to say that he is a white person while Ray Lewis is not white.

I don't know who has told Lewis the crime rate by the general populace in America is going to go up if there's no pro football this fall, but someone has, and he's buying it. Lewis told Sal Paolantonio of ESPN: "If we don't have a season, watch how much evil, which we call crime, watch how much crime picks up,'' he said. When SalPal asked why, Lewis said: "There's nothing else to do.''

Perhaps this is part of the problem with both sides. NFL fans do enjoy football and really want to see football. They can't imagine people would have something else to do besides watch the NFL. Perhaps both the owners and the players really don't think there is anything else to do during the Fall if there isn't football on, and therefore, because their huge egos tell them this they think there is no way a person could used to not watching football. It's very egotistical reasoning. People have other things they can do rather than watch football.

I want the NFL season to start, but here's what I will do without an NFL season. Instead of doing all the things I need to do on the weekend BEFORE my favorite team plays, I will just do those things at my leisure and perhaps build the weekend around college football. I want the NFL, but what kind of egotistical asshole thinks people are going to be wandering the streets like zombies with nothing to do without the NFL? Sure, many people will miss it, but the time will be replaced somehow.

It's a nice headline, but I'm not buying it. I suppose it could happen, but unless we get burglars and thieves saying they did it because the NFL wasn't on TV on fall Sundays this year, I'm not buying what Lewis is selling.

As well you shouldn't. I find it hard to believe a person who is bored and wants to commit crimes doesn't commit crimes Monday through Saturday because of the anticipation for Sunday. Does crime escalate the week between the NFC and AFC Championship games and the Super Bowl? There's no football games that week.

Ray Lewis has left the park with this statement. People love to watch NFL football. Believe it or not, their lives nor their livelihood won't be changed incredibly if the NFL season doesn't start on time. They will be temporarily saddened, but will find a way to fill the void. Those people who chose to commit crimes may end up committing more crimes during the time they would normally watch football, but I don't know if I see people turning to a life of crime without the NFL. You know whose lives and livelihood will be changed? The owner's and player's lives.

I'm prejudiced, obviously, because I had a good working relationship with Dick Ebersol, chairman of NBC Sports Group, who parted company with his new bosses at Comcast, stunningly, last Thursday. He was a very good boss. A unique boss.

A lofty boss. A boss of nobility and ideals. A man's whose name slightly does sound like the word "aerosol."

Now, not everyone is going to have the same memories as I have, because bosses in billion-dollar businesses have to be, well, bosses sometimes. I think what made him good -- and what will make him good again -- is his curiosity. Everything interested him. So I thought I'd ask a few people who knew him well in the business in the past few years for an observation or two about what made Ebersol good.

That sounds great! I would love for a significant amount of space in MMQB to be dedicated to nuzzling the ass of a wealthy ex-NBC executive. I bet there is someone who had something negative to say! I would bet I would be wrong! Ebersol was just so great! Here are some quotes to prove it:

Roger Goodell, NFL commissioner: "Dick had this attitude that not a lot of people in the TV business have. It was, 'If we float all boats, it's good for everyone.' That's why you would see on the Thursday night kickoff game to start the season NBC plugging the FOX and CBS games the following Sunday.

Dick did always love plugging things.

Peyton Manning, Indianapolis quarterback: "The thing I always felt about Dick was he was all in.

Dick loves being all-in. We all knew that about him.

Also, why is Peyton Manning commenting on Dick Ebersol? Doesn't he have something better to do?

"The other thing about those production meetings: He'd have great gadgets for us every time. You know, flip video cameras, iPods, whatever. It got to the point where we [players] wondered,' What's Dick going to have for us this week?

Maybe I am confused. So Dick Ebersol gave the players gifts in the production meetings? I feel like this should violate something somewhere. Can you imagine the shit ESPN would get if it was found out one of their executives bought the Patriots diamond watches? Maybe I am misunderstanding this sentence.

John Madden, former Sunday night game analyst:

"I remember on one of our road trips, we're staying in the same hotel as the Boston Celtics. You look at the marquee at the hotel and it says, 'NBC, film session, 9 a.m.,' and 'Boston Celtics, film session, 10 a.m.' Doc Rivers is such a good friend of everyone. He told us, 'If you guys want to come over and watch with us, come on in.' So I'm all excited about that -- breaking down film with the Boston Celtics!

They most likely promised John Madden there would be snacks available. Then "BOOM!" John Madden was there in a flash.

Dick goes over a little bit early, and I go over there around 10, and there's one player in there -- that Big Baby guy.

John Madden was actually talking about Kevin Garnett, not Glen Davis.

They got all this food,

I told you they enticed John Madden with food.

"This isn't the last you'll hear of Dick Ebersol,'' Madden said.

Hopefully this is the last I hear of him in MMQB.

Remember Ken Dorsey?

That mediocre Miami Hurricanes QB who was surrounded by an incredible amount of talent and tricked everyone into thinking he was a quality quarterback? I think I remember him.

Interesting that he just finished eight days working with the first pick in the draft, Carolina quarterback Cam Newton, and they'll be back at it again today in Bradenton, Fla.

(Ken Dorsey) "Here's what you do Cam. You find a way to get the best players at each position on your team to play with you. Then, you play quarterback. It's that easy."

(Cam Newton) "Am I getting paid for this?"

(Ken Dorsey) "Not yet."

(Cam Newton leaves the field)

Newton was able to get a Carolina playbook, with Panthers offensive coordinator Chudzinski's encyclopedic offense, to take with him during the lockout. Dorsey spent last week instructing Newton in the finer points of the offense, in addition to telling him the expectations and coaching methods of Chudzinski.

(Cam Newton) "What's this line on either side of the offensive linemen?"

(Ken Dorsey) "Those are your two wide receivers."

(Cam Newton) "Wow, there are TWO wide receivers on each pass pattern in the NFL? This is going to be a big transition for me. Can we practice the quarterback draw play again? Do you think Coach Chud will be able to run this play for me 65% of the time?"

It sounds smart and valuable. Compared to the other highly drafted quarterbacks, Newton ought to be as advanced as he can be when the lockout ends. How important will that be?

I don't know, Peter. Generally it is important for you quarterback to know the offense.

We'll see, because there's going to be a tremendous amount of pressure on the Panthers to play Newton early.

Not really. The Panthers could always put Jimmy Clausen back there, lower the fans expectations a bit, then put Cam Newton in the game. I don't know if anyone expects Newton to be ready to start at the beginning of the year.

You really need to read this story.

Let's skip this part.

Saw longtime and well-respected football writer Vito Stellino's Twitter take on the curbing of offseason programs due to the lockout this spring. I liked it well enough that I asked the former Steeler glory-days beat man, now with the Florida Times-Union covering the Jaguars, to expand his thoughts for MMQB. Here they are:

Is it going to make any difference that the lockout is wiping out the NFL's offseason program?

Eagles coach Andy Reid recently said the less practice time a team has (because of the lockout), "the worse the product. We don't do those minicamps, those OTAs, and all those sessions just for the heck of it. There is a reason why we have those things ... We try to get the utmost out of it.''

Reid may not realize -- he's only been coaching in the NFL since 1992 -- that the real reason for these things is Parkinson's Law. Work expands to fill the time available for its completion.

They have these things because the players make so much money that they don't work in the offseason and are available to practice.

Yes, this is true. Also, the Eagles have a new defensive coordinator this season so the fact the players aren't available to be in minicamps could slow up his ability to integrate what new wrinkles he wants to incorporate into the defense. So it may be nice for him to be able to do this. Minicamps aren't the most crucial part of playing football, but I think they have value in that they keep the players engaged and help to integrate new players on the team faster.

As recently as the 1970s, there were no offseason workouts. Teams had one minicamp an offseason. Tony Dungy even worked in a Pittsburgh bank after he signed as an undrafted free agent in 1977.

Some NFL players have taken jobs during this lockout. I don't get the point. It's better for a player to take another job than to focus on the one job he does have?

And Terry Bradshaw used to talk about not picking up a ball in the offseason.

Clearly not picking up a ball in the offseason is what led him to his great ability to have an incredible team around him that made him look a lot better than he actually was.

What this guy doesn't seem to understand is there wasn't free agency in Terry Bradshaw's playing days. Players move from team-to-team more often, so it becomes more important for these new players to be integrated into the team earlier than Training Camp.

And maybe the players were more refreshed after having an offseason away from the game. All these offseason workouts may just wear down their bodies.

Perhaps. Maybe the players would get out of shape in the offseason if there weren't offseason workouts? Maybe no one noticed this in Terry Bradshaw's time because every team had players come into games slightly out of shape. Maybe if one team didn't have offseason workouts and the players became lazy and out of shape everyone would probably notice this.

Did the product suffer because of the lack of offseason workouts? You can argue the players are bigger, faster and stronger today and it is a more sophisticated game. But was it any better for the fans?

I would argue it is better for the fans. I am pretty sure the attendance, television ratings and overall popularity show that fans really, really, really enjoy the NFL. So yes, it is better for the fans today, or at least the fans seem to enjoy the NFL more than they did back in "the good old days."

Remember in the 1970s, two Super Bowls in four years pitted Bradshaw vs. Roger Staubach.

Remember, this has absolutely nothing to fucking do with offseason workouts. The last two Super Bowls pitted Manning v. Brees and Rodgers v. Roethlisberger...which also has nothing to do with offseason workouts.

Not to mention, the overall popularity of the NFL isn't decided or measured based on the skill level of the two quarterbacks that end up going against each other in the Super Bowl. It's not like the NFL sucks if two teams with average or above-average quarterbacks make the Super Bowl.

Yes, the offseason workouts -- combined with free agency and cable TV -- have kept the NFL in the news all year round and helped make the game more popular than ever. And that has meant football writers don't have to cover things like golf the way they used to. I know you can't live in the past, but I would debate the game isn't any better for the fans. Too bad Andy Reid was only a teenager in the 1970s. He would understand the NFL did just fine without OTAs and offseason programs.

The NFL may do fine without OTAs and offseason programs. I'm not sure I would doubt this is true. I would say if some teams did OTAs and other teams did not, the teams that did the OTAs may be more successful during the upcoming season. These offseason workouts make sure the players are still engaged with the team and aren't letting themselves go during the offseason. The offseason programs and OTAs are a way of evaluating players and letting the team develop some chemistry by limiting the time away from the game and the team.

"It would have forever severed the players of the NFL from a fair share of the revenue.''
-- NFL Players Association executive director DeMaurice Smith, to Brian McGovern and Maurice Jones-Drew on their Sirius XM NFL Radio show, on the last offer owners made to players, March 11.

Well, I guess. But it's hard to imagine the NFL offer -- $161 million per year per team in salary and benefits in year four of the proposal with no backside if the NFL's revenue estimates were higher than projected (when the players wanted $161 million per year per team PLUS backside revenue) -- was so monumentally, impossibly difficult to bridge. It's why I maintain that the difference between the two sides is not so great that some real negotiations couldn't bridge the gap.

Unfortunately, it doesn't look like either side is dedicated to doing some real negotiations. It's rather annoying.

Peter also displays the fact he seems to side with the owners when refuting this statement made by DeMaurice Smith. There was no backside in year four of the proposal if the NFL's revenues were higher than projected, but what are the odds the owners would admit to revenues being higher than projected? These are the same owners who are claiming they don't make enough money as it is now. The players want that backside revenue guaranteed because they (possibly rightly) know they won't see that money if it isn't guaranteed.

Mr. Starwood Preferred Member Travel Note of the Week I

Oh yes, this is Travel Note of the Week I...because there are two things that pissed Peter off this week.

Hertz Should Be Ashamed of Itself Dept.:

I rented a full-sized Hertz vehicle for my two-day trip to North Carolina and the National Sportscasters and Sportswriters Awards. Two days, $44 a day. Drove the car 169 miles. The tank read 5/8ths when I pulled into the Charlotte Douglas International Airport's Hertz lot at 5:35 a.m. Tuesday.

"Did you fill the tank with gas?'' the courteous check-in gal asked.

"No, sorry,'' I said.

She noted the mileage and handed me the receipt.

The receipt for charges of $249.31.2

The gas for driving less than a half-tank cost more ($89.40) than renting the car for two days, minus taxes ($88). Hertz charged $8.99 per gallon for refueling. That seems fair (he said sarcastically).

Yes, Hertz is charging WAY too much for gas. It's ridiculous to charge $8.99 for refueling. Still, Peter is a guy who travels a lot, as seen by the fact he bitches and whines every week in MMQB about things that happen when he travels. Peter should know to fill the car back up with gas before turning it in. If he had done this, he could have completely avoided the charge at $8.99 per gallon for refueling. So while Peter has a point about the price, he can't bitch because he made the decision not to fill the car back up with gas.

Three-eighths of a tank of gas for $89.40? If that's not price-gouging, I don't know what is.

I am not sure this is exactly price gouging. Peter could have purchased a cheaper, comparable product on the way to turn the rental car in and he chose not to. So he had options and he chose not to take those options, so I am not sure this is exactly price gouging. There weren't really limited options nor was Peter in a situation where the only gas he could purchase was at the $8.99 rate. He could have filled up his car for half of the price and chose not to. Yes, Hertz charges a lot for gas, but as a veteran traveler Peter King should know to put gas in the car himself so he can avoid the excessive charge. I don't know if I would count this as price gouging.

For example, if I am thirsty and I pass up gas stations that offer a 32 oz soda for $0.99 and then choose to go to Applebee's and purchase a drink, should I really be bitching they charge me $1.99 for a glass of soda? I had comparable options and chose not to take them. That's not exactly price gouging.

Hip To Be Square Dept.:

I will never get used to a person at 9:58 a.m. -- as happened Sunday in the row in front of me on a Boston-to-Washington United flight -- saying to the flight attendant with the beverage cart coming down the aisle: "Two Stolis on the rocks. No water.'' And then, by 10:13, both of the little vodka bottles, and the plastic cup, empty but for the ice. Vodka shots are something I can't do at 11 at night, never mind when Cheerios should be on the tray table.

As we all know, if a person doesn't live their life the exact same way Peter King lives his life, that makes them weird. Maybe this person was afraid of flying and required a few drinks to relax them before the plane gets too far in the air? Maybe this person had another reason for wanting a drink. Still, Peter lives to sit in judgment. He seems to essentially stare down people in public while they go about their lives, like he does to people on trains he rides on. What's really weird is that Peter will pay attention and take notes on what other people are doing while traveling. He should mind his own business and find something to do, rather than stare at what other people drink or do while traveling.

5. I think some clarity is in order for Hall of Fame Weekend in August. It's happening. Regardless of the state of the labor situation, the 2011 class will be inducted on Aug. 6 at 7 p.m. in Canton. Can't wait to see Ed and Steve Sabol and their extended family and friends that weekend. Promises to be an emotional and memorable weekend.

It is a big weekend for Peter King as well. Peter was responsible for advocating Ed Sabol be inducted into the Hall of Fame and somehow got enough members in the room to vote for him. As we have discussed prior, Sabol did have an impact on the NFL, but I don't know if there was a reason to put him in the Hall of Fame when there are eligible and worthy NFL players who could have made it instead. Of course, Peter will insist up and down he doesn't have as much pull among Hall of Fame voters as many people, Jason Whitlock included, seem to think. I believe the fact Ed Sabol made the Hall of Fame proves otherwise.

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

a. To those who hate interleague play in baseball: I respectfully disagree.

In your face, haters!

The biggest complaint is from those who have no desire to see Houston-Toronto, Detroit-Pittsburgh, etc. Fine. You're in Toronto. Instead of getting three with the Astros, you'd get -- let's say -- three more with Kansas City, Oakland or Seattle. Whoopee!

"Fine, let me make up a fake scenario to prove my point where I pick three of the worst draws in Major League Baseball and then say that's who your team would face instead of the Astros."

What if Toronto would get three more games with a team that was a bigger draw? Peter can't seem to fathom that would happen. I don't hate interleague baseball, I hate much of Peter's reasoning for defending interleague baseball.

There are some ho-hum matchups, but there's also the Cubs at Fenway for the first time in 93 years,

See, interleague baseball is good because it allows the Red Sox to have an interesting matchup. That's really what interleague play is about anyway. This is some great "Bill Simmons" like reasoning here. Interleague play isn't bad because it provides a good and interesting matchup for Peter's favorite team.

(Red Sox fan) "We're so fucking cursed."

(Cubs fan) "No, we're fucking cursed."

(Second Red Sox fan) "Everyone should feel so badly for us. We are so cursed and so many bad things have happened to us."

(Second Cubs fan) "No way, we had a curse put on us because of a billygoat. Remember Steve Bartman? We are so cursed forever! Everyone should have sympathy for us. Why don't more people feel bad for us because we have it so bad?"

If these interleague games happened in 2003 I am not sure I could have survived being in the crowd. It would have been like two fan bases whining at each other the entire game, completely ignoring the fact a game is being played. Needless to say, Dan Shaughnessy would write a book about it as well.

the Yanks at Wrigley Field, the good fans of Cincinnati getting a chance to see Jose Bautista in their little bandbox,

I know the entire city of Cincinnati is lining up to see Jose Bautista.

Albert Pujols taking his shot at an equally homer-friendly Camden Yards, Roy Halladay's return to Toronto,

(Bengoodfella falling asleep)

the Red Sox throwing the fans of the woebegone Pirates a three-game weekend series.

The Red Sox being kind enough, out of the goodness of their hearts, to come to Pittsburgh and bring some real joy to them. Not only do the Pirates get to play a team from the American League AT HOME, we all know the American League is clearly superior to the National League, but they get a chance FIRSTHAND to see actual Red Sox fans. It's going to probably the highlight of the calendar year for the entire city of Pittsburgh when the Red Sox dedicate some time to taking their great team and fans to the city of Pittsburgh.

Interleague play's a no-brainer. It's different. It's fun.

Drinking two vodka tonics on a plane is different and fun as well. Peter doesn't seem to like this kind of fun though.

c. Really fun to be in Fenway Park Friday night for the Cubs' first trip to the park since the 1918 World Series, when Babe Ruth roamed the land for the BoSox. Sat behind four Cub fans out in right field, and in front of two others who'd never been to Fenway and were Cub season-ticket holders. All very interested in Fenway, all seeming down-in-the-mouth about their Cubbies ... and all quite polite. Pleasure to have you in the house, Chicago.

Oh, and your welcome for the privilege of playing in Fenway Park AND getting to sit near Peter King.

f. Am I the only person in the United States who never watched Oprah?

Yes. This doesn't make you special though, so don't feel special.

k. Coffeenerdness: What a tremendously pleasant airport you have, Jacksonville. Two Starbucks about 10 gates apart too. Nice job.

Congratulations concrete, inanimate object. You have done well!

Great job of providing us with oxygen plants. You really carry a burden few could take on.

Sidewalks...why don't we ever have enough time to thank you?

Where would we be without your ladders? A heck of a lot closer to the ground, that's for sure!

l. Beernerdness: I've got a good bar for the craft-beer-nerd crowd. (And don't you dare call Blue Moon a craft beer on Twitter, which I made the unforgivable mistake of doing the other day. The craft-beer-nerd crowd jumped through the Twitterverse, into my laptop and right down my throat, indignant that Blue Moon's no craft beer; it's brewed by that evil empire out at Coors. Sheesh.)

Sheesh. How dare you craft-beer-nerds jump down Peter's throat and try to point out his factual incorrectness?

Can't Peter just continue to write something and not have someone point out he is wrong?