Sanctimonious idiot Jeff Pearlman misses the point, spends 1500 words telling you that you missed the point

Are you up to speed on the whole Thayer Evans/Oklahoma State story thing?  Hopefully, because I don't really want to take the time to explain it.  (Have you already forgotten about it, because this post is about 10 days late?  Probably.)  The basics, in case you need them, are that Thayer Evans is a guy who is good at picking up on stories that people find interesting, but really shitty at adhering to basic standards of journalistic integrity as he crafts his reporting.  He's irresponsible and sensationalist.  He doesn't really do things like "verify his sources" or in some cases "have credible sources in the first place."  And please believe, I don't give a steaming pile of fuck about Oklahoma State, Auburn, LSU, the Honey Badger or Cam Newton.  But this is an indisputable fact at this point: Thayer Evans is a shitty journalist.  That should be the main takeaway from his Oklahoma State expose, because the fact that a major college football program doesn't follow NCAA rules and gives its players lots of benefits they shouldn't get is not news and thus not eligible to be a takeaway.

Anyways, what does Jeff Pearlman think about all of this?  YOU'RE MISSING THE POINT, AMERICA.  THE POINT IS THAT WE SHOULD ALL BE ABSOLUTELY OUTRAGED ABOUT THIS OUTRAGEOUS STUFF THAT OSU WAS DOING.  Jeff Pearlman is a dope.

I don’t know Thayer Evans. We’ve never met, never spoken. In fact, before a couple of days ago I’m not sure I’d ever heard of the man. Is he a good reporter? 

Not at all.  That's well known at this point.

A shady reporter? 

Yes.

Does he love Oklahoma and hate Oklahoma State? 

According to Jason Whitlock, yes, although that doesn't make his shitty reporting any more or less shitty.

Could he care less? I just don’t know—and, I’m quite certain, most other don’t know, either.

Everyone knows.  Use the Google machine.  Type in "Thayer Evans journalism ethics."  There's lots of smoke and plenty of fire.  Thayer Evans is an unethical journalist.

Here’s what I do know: Much of the criticism of his reporting methodology has been—on the surface—bunk. There’s this idea out there that, in order to properly and rightly report a story, one needs to interview a select group of people—generally the stars and head coach. If you don’t speak with them, the logic goes, you’re interviewing the wrong folk.

This is crap.

The criticism of Evans has little to nothing to do with his interviewee selections.  It has a lot more to do with his doing things like secretly recording conversations with interviewees who did not know they were going to become interviewees, not doing basic fact checking with regard to facts that could have easily been checked, and embellishing facts to spice up a story.  Jeff Pearlman is a dope, and in his quest to be OUTRAGED at another ho-hum NCAA scandal, is going to try to defend Thayer Evans.

Without fail, stars and head coaches are almost always the worst interviews/sources. Why? Multiple reasons: A. They’re the ones who benefited most from the team/program. The head coach of Oklahoma State was paid big money to guide a high-exposure program. He had endorsement deals, contractual perks, etc … etc. Unless he was ultimately screwed, there is, literally, zero reason for him to speak. Stars can be grouped in the same category. You’re Brandon Weeden. You were the starting quarterback at Oklahoma State; that ultimately led you to the NFL. What, exactly, are you going to complain about? Who are you going to rat out?

The job of a reporter (and it ain’t easy) is figuring out whose information is correct, and whose is not. 

See the fact checking link up there.  Apparently Evans isn't so good at "the job of a reporter."

It’s about feeling comfortable with sources; about having other people vouch for a source’s words and/or character. Ultimately, it’s a judgement call. 

That Thayer Evans has repeatedly demonstrated he sucks at making.

The thing that puzzles me—that has always puzzled me—is the brainless craziness that is college football. 

Crank up the Pearlman-o-matic 5000!  Here comes the sanctimony.

Whether Thayer Evans’ reporting was flawed 

It was.

or perfect, 

Not close.

clearly Oklahoma State did some very bad things. 

NOW EVERYONE WAG YOUR FINGERS AT THEM SIMULTANEOUSLY

This is obvious, and a fact no one seems to be denying. And yet … why don’t school loyalists care? We’re talking about 19-, 20-, 21-, 22-year-old (so-called) student-athletes 

ZING

once again being treated as pieces of meat. They’re models for uniforms, dollar signs for endorsement deals, images to place on the cover of university literature … and, rarely, actually people.

Yes.  All correct.  But we don't need shady fucktards like Thayer Evans to show us these things.  1) We already know them 2) presenting them in the context of a JUICY SCANDAL does nothing but titillate for the sake of titillating, rather than actually generating interesting analysis (something much of the reporting on the Ed O'Bannon case has done).  It is no longer news that players took money or had access to sex and drugs.  Sorry.  And if you want to report on those topics without following the basic standards of ethical journalism, then fuck you and fuck the people that defend you because they think you've uncovered the next Watergate.

I hear college football die-hards speak of their teams as “we”—we need to run the ball better; we need to come out strong against Oregon. This, of course, is ludicrous. These are often kids with flimsy academic credentials, being asked to carry a full course load while also practicing X hours per day, flying X miles across the country, missing X class and X class and X class. 

Oh my God, what are we talking about?  Jeff, you are the worst ranter ever.  At the very very least, even if you're going to be the dope that we know you are, try to stay on topic.

They would struggle to maintain a 2.0 average if they were solely enrolled in school (minus sports)—

That's completely untrue, fucking insulting to thousands of kids, and possibly racist.

and yet, we pretend all is OK and groovy and grand. We dress them up in our school colors, roll out the balls and cheer away. Then, seven or eight years later, when we see X player living in his mother’s house, barely able to read, 44 credits shy of a college diploma, we shrug. Shit happens.

If you love Oklahoma State, shouldn’t you be furious? Not at the reporter or the magazine, but the school and the athletic department and the football program? 

Yes.  But you already knew about all those problems before private eye Thayer Evans arrived on the scene to build his own personal brand with a poorly-vetted story full of uninteresting crap.  You can hate the NCAA and the way it treats athletes, and you can also hate Thayer Evans.  They're not mutually exclusive possibilities.

Shouldn’t you be demanding a clean system; a desire for all-around excellence; a chance for your guys to wind up as successes in business, not just a meaningless game against Baylor? Shouldn’t you demand to hear the truth from your university? Aren’t there better questions to ask than, “Why does Thayer Evans hate us so much?”

I have no sympathy for OSU alums who feel victimized by Evans because he's apparently an OU fan.  Fuck both of those schools and fuck that whole state.  But more importantly, fuck Jeff Pearlman for taking this angle on the story.  As a, you know, journalist, you'd think he'd understand why it's important that journalists adhere to ethical standards of their profession.  Instead he's busy making sure we understand that college football is broken.  Thanks Jeff.  We got it.

I’m a Jason Whitlock fan. I truly am. I thought his commentary on the Don Imus-Rutgers stuff was outstanding. His gun stuff was equally top shelf. He’s written some wonderful stuff through the years; some columns that I’ve read more than once.

That said, this has not been a good week for the man.

Whitlock is an asshole.  Still, this was pretty awesome.

Whitlock clearly sees himself as some sort of media sheriff; a guy charged with keeping the rest of us in line. 

The lack of self-awareness is staggering.

He likes calling out individual writers, pointing out their flaws, explaining (in not these exact words) why they suck and he’s awesome.

Pot kettle etc.  And yes, of course, I realize that the pot/kettle thing goes one step further, to me and this blog.  Except that I don't think I'm awesome.  I just think that everyone sucks.

In regard to Thayer Evans, Whitlock told an Oklahoma radio station, “Having worked with Thayer Evans at Fox Sports …”

OK, to start here. I’m pretty sure Whitlock did not work with Evans. Back in the day, when people shared offices, they worked together. I’m in this cubicle, you’re in that cubicle—we work together. Whitlock never shared an office with Evans, never spent great time (if any time) with Evans. Literally, they were located in two different cities. 

And we know that they never collaborated on a project, or shared notes, or discussed their trade?  I don't want to make a big deal out of this small point, but again, in his effort to make sure we understand that the REAL STORY HERE is that some NCAA athletes don't graduate, Jeff is bending over backwards to defend Thayer Evans.  It's pathetic.

By Whitlock’s definition, I worked at Sports Illustrated with Gary Smith. Sure, he was in North Carolina and I was in New York. And sure, we literally were never in the same room at the same moment. But we worked together because our paychecks were signed by the same person. No.

I like that this is his first criticism of Whitlock's piece.  "Let's start with the important stuff--sure, Whitlock and Evans worked for the same company, but did they truly work 'together?'  OPEN YOUR EYES SHEEPLE, THEY TOTALLY DIDN'T"

Furthermore, Whitlock talks about Evans’ loyalties, calling him a “huge, enormous, gigantic Oklahoma homer.”

Here's the best part.

However, Whitlock’s past desperation to work for Sports Illustrated was no great secret. His dream of being handed the back-page column. He, of course, was never offered a job by the magazine—and was, we can assume, angry about it. Does this not (by Whitlock-think) make him the wrong guy to go off on the magazine? Is he not as biased as Evans is presumed to be?

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

That's the greatest thing Pearlman has ever written, and we've definitely gone after him on this blog plenty of times over the years.  It's fucking priceless.  That might be the worst attempt at flipping the script on someone I've ever seen.

After slaying Evans, Whitlock noted, “I think the story is a cliché and bogus and suspect and just the wrong angle.”

You know what's fucking fantastic?  You want the full context of that comment?  To explain what Whitlock thinks is the right angle?  Here you go:

I have the obvious take (on the series) that I’m tired of these stories. We’ve been reading these stories for 30 years and I’m tired of people pointing out how corrupt participants are in a system that has been proven to be corrupt. The NCAA amateur system is corrupt, so we should not be surprised that there is corruption among the participants. I would like to see more of the focus on the NCAA and the system and fixing that, and then I’ll get upset about the corruption. I think the story is a cliché and bogus and suspect and just the wrong angle.

JEFF.  EARTH TO JEFF.  JEFF, GET YOUR HEAD OUT OF YOUR ASS IMMEDIATELY.  Whitlock has the EXACT SAME PERSPECTIVE on this issue as you do.  It's just that he, while acknowledging how fucking up NCAA football is, ALSO wants someone like Evans to not be a huge shithead.  See how he can have it both ways?  You could too, if you weren't such a sanctimonious dope.  That's the world Jeff Pearlman lives in: if an unethical "journalist" writes an unethical piece, but the tone of the piece is something Pearlman agrees with, it's asking too much of him to get him to acknowledge the shittiness of the journalism.

He also admitted, and I’ll place this in capital letters, that HE NEVER READ THE ARTICLE. Never. Not once. Not a word. DID. NOT. READ. IT. Even if you think the writer is a fraud, how in God’s name can you rip a piece you never read … then have other credible news sources give those words weight.

Whitlock should have read the article(s), but it doesn't change the fact that it is well established that Thayer Evans is a piece of shit.

Again, I think Whitlock is a good writer, and I have no personal beef. But he pulled this same crap when I appeared on his podcast several years ago to promote Sweetness. Whitlock welcomed me on, wanted to talk Walter Payton … but admitted never having read the book, because he doesn’t read sports books.

Uh …

OK, again, that's Whitlock being an asshole, but leave it to Jeff to complain about the nice (if awkwardly lacking in execution) thing that someone else did to him to help him sell his book.

My favorite piece of the Whitlock diatribe comes here: “There are a brand of sports writers who love doing these investigative pieces. They are not hard to do these days in terms of so-and-so got this money under the table. We’re into this area where unnamed sources can say anything, any of these he-said, she-said stories. I don’t respect the entire brand of investigative journalism that is being done here.”

All of that seems very fair to me, if heavy-handed.  It's not that this brand of journalism deserves no respect; it's that it's been done before, many times, and people like Evans use it to make a name for themselves because it's scandalous.  And that's pretty dumb.

Jason Whitlock has the absolute easiest job in sports media—and he knows it. He opines. That’s it. He doesn’t report. He doesn’t dig. He doesn’t make calls or seek out information. He takes the reporting done by others, sits in front of his laptop and comes up with a take. That’s it. He’s a good writer. Is he one of the, oh, 200 most-talented sportswriters in America? Probably not. 

I don't like Whitlock, but actually, I'm pretty certain he cracks the top 200 in the country.

(For the record, I’m by no means placing myself on that list either) 

Geez, I certainly hope not.  (Just kidding, Jeff!  You might be in the top 200 too.  No sarcasm.  But fuck you both anyways.)

But—and this is the big part—he’s loud. And obnoxious. He presents himself as a tough guy unafraid to take a tough stand, and people buy it. They absorb his self-righteous diatribes, because—on the surface—it seems to be driven by a desire to seek out truth and justice.

If any of you have every spent any time on jeffpearlman.com, you know the one thing you will definitely find there is a collection of self-righteous diatribes.

But, with men and women like Whitlock, truth and justice are often smokescreens for the parallel drugs plaguing the American media: Attention and fame. 

If you cannot see that those things are exactly what Thayer Evans is trying to obtain, you're fucking blind.

Whitlock seems all about attention and fame. Or, put differently,what sort of person states his own case for the Pulitzer Prize? What size ego must a man have to A. Think to himself, “I deserve the Pulitzer” and B. Write about it? I mean, between all the craziness of life and the highs and the lows and the ups and the downs, who even has time to ponder such a thing?

Whitlock is an asshole.  Pearlman is a dope.

For all I know, the Oklahoma State report is filled with holes,

It is.

and Sports Illustrated will have to apologize 

Oddly, they did not, although they should have.

and Thayer Evans will soon be selling insurance door to door in Ada. 

We can only hope!

I just don’t know.

As a journalist, however, I am deeply troubled by the blame-the-messenger mentality that has zoomed to the forefront.

As a journalist, what you should be troubled by is the state of journalism thanks to writers like Evans.  1% of the country is "blaming the messenger" in the sense that Jeff means it.  They are mouth-breathing OSU fans, and they want to discredit everything Evans wrote simply because they love their school.  The other 99% is blaming the messenger in the exact way everyone should be: by pointing out that Thayer Evans is a tabloid journalist who should be legally barred from ever going near a computer.

There is more here than just a reporter with a vendetta, and or a reporter who can’t report, or a magazine story.

It’s time we all try and see it.

Which is pretty much what Whitlock said, except with a lot more idiocy mixed in.

John Kruk's Tiny Brain Tries to Analyze Baseball

I try to avoid writing posts about my favorite teams. I really do. Even my favorite sports blog, the dick joke-tacular Kissing Suzy Kolber, suffers from occasional unfunniness as its writers spend too much time on lame jokes and irrelevant news stories about their favorite teams (OMG apparently the Redskins are going to sign a new long snapper!). But sometimes a dick-for-brains fatso like John Kruk takes a horrifically analyzed shot at the squad you live and die for. And that's when you're allowed to break your own rules.

So I'm sitting there in my mom's basement last night, watching Lord of the Rings, eating Funyuns, and playing Stratego against my stuffed animals like usual, when I realize that Baseball Tonight is on. The Rockies have just finished off an 11-1 drubbing of the Angels. Since there were only a handful of games because it was a Monday, and because the Rox have now won 17 out of 18, I realize that there's actually a good chance they're going to get some airtime! It only happens about once a month (usually in the context of "How can the Cubs/Dodgers/Mets/Phillies lose to a team like the Rockies? Impossible") so if you're a Rockies fan you don't want to miss it. As soon as I flip the channel to ESPN, I see a screen displaying the following graphic:

Dexter Fowler 77
Chris Iannetta 233
Troy Tulowitzki 345

And who is talking about this mysterious set of numbers but everyone's favorite unitesticle, Mr. Kruk. I quickly realize the numbers indicate each Rockie's career games played. What's John's angle? Unfortunately I don't have the exact quotes, but what follows are reasonably accurate representations of what he had to say.

I mean, as you get going deep into the season, you don't know how these guys are going to play. They're inexperienced. These guys just aren't known quantities.

It quickly becomes apparent that Krukie's mission for this segment is to tell the nice people at home why the Rockies suck and have absolutely no chance at getting to the playoffs this year. Now, here's the thing. Any analyst can hold that opinion if they want to and it won't bother me. Go right ahead. I'm not some kind of zealot, sitting here saying "If you don't think the Rockies are going to win the World Series then you can just shut the fuck up right now." It's not like that, I promise.

But if you're going to say that they're not a playoff contender, try to pick a reason for doing so that makes some vague semblance of sense. Seriously. Go way, way, way out on a limb and find something better than this. The back of their rotation is shaky. Their pen is leaning on castoffs from other teams like Joel Peralta and Josh Fogg. Even with Brad Hawpe's monster season, they're not getting much offensive production from their outfield. Fine! Great! Go ahead and say those things. But this? So Fowler is young and inexperienced, true. I'll give you that. He may crumble down the stretch. But Iannetta and Tulowitzki are in their fourth fucking years in the bigs. They've both missed time due to injury, which is why their games played totals are relatively low, but it's not like they're a couple of unseasoned 21 year olds who were in AA last year. THEY WENT TO THE FUCKING WORLD SERIES TWO YEARS AGO. They're not experienced enough for you, Kruk? Go fuck yourself with a fucking soup ladle. Asshole. Oh, and here's another great point from Sir Tubsalot:

They won't be able to win the wild card because they have too many teams to pass in the standings.

Here's your current NL wild card standings, which John apparently hasn't checked since Memorial Day. Two teams, leading them by a half game, with only three months left in the season? No way can they climb that mountain!

His latest entry in the "Baseball Tonight Clubhouse" print article series is dedicated to finding other nonsensical reasons as to why the Rockies are doomed. I can only imagine how long it would take him to type all this up. He must have dictated it to an ESPN intern, and then eaten said intern.

I've been in the middle of a couple of firings, and it always seems as if you play better immediately after. When you're a player and your manager gets fired, most players feel responsible. I've been a part of a couple of similar situations,

Wait, have you ever been in that situation before? You only said so twice in the last three sentences. He then goes on to say that their recent hot streak is attributable to the firing of Clint Hurdle and the arrival of new manager Jim Tracy, and that the bump they're experiencing as a result of a change in leadership won't last. That's all well and good, but let me just apply a classic FireJay label to this post: managers don't do that much. This is (almost) the exact same team of 25 players Hurdle was managing. Clearly they have a lot of talent, having beaten up on legitimate teams like the Cardinals, Brewers, and Rays during this stretch. The fact that Hurdle wasn't getting much mileage out of them and Tracy is doesn't mean they're only playing better because of Tracy. It's obviously a number of things, Tracy's arrival being one of them. A manager can't make a team that started the year 20-32 go on a 17-1 streak. He can help, but the players have to play the games. And it's pretty obvious at this point that the Rockies have a collection of players who are at the very least capable of winning the wild card.

Colorado's run is just that, a run. In my mind, this team is not a threat to win the wild card. Even though the Mets and Phillies have played terribly lately, the wild card is still going to come out of the NL East.

There you have it, folks. Why can't the Rockies do it? Because the WC is going to come out of the NL East, that's why. Duhhhhh. No analysis. No explanation. John Kruk is a fucking simpleton among simpletons. And again, if you want to say Colorado won't win the WC, that's fine. But to say they're not even "a threat?" With the second best run differential in the NL (trailing only the Dodgers, thus obviously ahead of the Mets and Phillies), they're not even a threat? What are you, fucking nuts? Why won't Florida repeat as NCAA football champions this year? Because Alabama is going to win it all. How's that for an airtight explanation?

Both teams are almost unwatchable at the moment, but I'm still certain the Phillies will win the division and the Mets will take the wild card. [no further explanation given; end of article; beginning of John's nightly run to 7-11 for as many hot dogs as they happen to have on the rollers when he gets there]

Possible reasons Kruk feels this way:
1) He played most of his career with the Phillies, so he'll naturally favor any playoff scenario which ensures they'll get in
2) He's felt this way since the beginning of the season (and felt that the Rockies were no good), and simply refuses to change his opinion out of stubbornness. Of course, as we learned from the Cleveland "2009 AL Central Champs in Waiting" Indians, early season groupthink can be a dangerous thing
3) Standard east coast bias- Kruk (and the other the media members with whom he associates) can name more players on the Phillies and Mets than on the Rockies, and they play in cities with which he is very familiar while the Rockies play in one of those flyover states, so there's no way the Rockies can contend
4) He genuinely believes that because Chris Iannetta and Troy Tulowitzki have only played about 250 and 350 MLB games respectively (and because they trail two teams by a half game each in the current wild card standings, surely an insurmountable lead) Colorado will not make the playoffs. Nevermind the fact that the Mets are depending heavily on Daniel Murphy and Fernando Martinez, who have combined for fewer than 150 career games played. The Phillies, to John's credit, are indeed a team chock full of seasoned veterans. Their rotation is a complete and total fucking joke, but hey, at least they don't have any inexperienced players

It doesn't really matter which answer is correct. All I know is this: John Kruk is a card carrying horse's ass. There isn't a lobotomy complete enough to save ESPN viewers from his retardery. The next time I have reason to believe the Rockies will be on Baseball Tonight (which might be some time after the All Star break, assuming they don't lose any games between now and then) I'm not going to bother watching.

Before I go, here's some bonus moron-speak from Baseball Tonight's Chris Singleton about the Rockies:

I think they're making their run too early.

Yeah, you know, he's got a point. Wins are worth double in September as compared to June. The Rockies would be much better holding back, staying a good 5 or 6 games out of the WC, and then hoping they can put together another 11 game winning streak during the last two weeks of the season. It's not a fucking bike race, Singleton. You don't choose when to make your fucking push. If you win your first 100 games and lose your last 62, you'll make the playoffs. If you lose your first 62 and win your last 100, you'll make the playoffs. Good thing you share a set with John Kruk- otherwise I would have wasted a lot more of the time spent on this post ripping you apart as opposed to him.

I never thought I'd say this, but relative to some of his coworkers, that Steve Phillips is kind of an OK dude.

The Important Part is that Andy Reid Looks Like a Bloated Walrus

Picking on things said by ESPN.com commenters is kind of like picking on things said by devout racists, the mentally ill, or Joe Morgan. I mean, it's kind of like the definition of low-hanging fruit. However I'm about to do exactly that. I think I'm justified in doing so because this particular comment was the "featured comment" on the website's front page last night. That is to say, out of every comment the site received on Sunday afternoon/evening, some clod at ESPN's offices thought this was the best/smartest/most relevant/most poignant/some combination of all of these. So I guess I'm more picking on that clod than the commenter himself, which I think is valid. Let's face it- how hard is that task? You go through a couple hundred comments and pick one that isn't stupid. And yet apparently it's not as easy as it sounds. How do I know that? Well, the NFL playoffs are down to four teams. Commenter 808forlife, what say you about their respective quarterbacks?
Donovan, Big Ben, and Warner are all Super Bowl QB's with plenty of big game experience. Flacco? Out of his league.

First of all, sir, I like your angle here. You have taken a controversial and not at all widely-held viewpoint and expressed it in a thought provoking way. Bully on you for that. But I digress; let's talk about why this is a "featured comment" worth blogging about. Here's what I'll give Mr. 808; Warner and Roethlisberger are legit. You won't find many people criticizing their big game credentials. Also, Flacco has never played in a conference championship game. (Although, to be fair, before last Saturday he had never played in a divisional playoff game and he didn't do too badly there. But let me get to the point.) So that's all well and good. Let's move past it and get to the retardery.

Take 100 reasonably passionate and well-informed sports fans. Ask them to do an association with you: say "Donovan McNabb," then say "big game," and ask them what's the next thing that comes to their mind. I am pretty sure that about 95 of them are going to say "Throwing up during the final drive of Super Bowl XXXIX." I mean, fair or not, that's just the first thing that comes to mind. Although the guy has had a moderate amount of playoff success, he's only made it to one Super Bowl and then allegedly lost his shit when the chips were down during that game. So I'm not entirely sure I'd rather have him over Joe "hey did you know rookies don't usually play well during the playoffs?" Flacco for the remainder of the NFL season. I'm not saying he's not good, but touting his big game credentials along with two guys who have actually won Super Bowls (without vomiting) is dumb. Thus, 808forlife/ESPN comment chooser, you've picked a real stinker here. You're both fucking morons, but one of you is just some asshole who comments on a sports website while the other is truly and completely terrible at his incredibly simple job. I guess I'd rather be the former than the latter.

Oh, and what about the other five fans who didn't associate McNabb and "big game" with throwing up during the Super Bowl? Four of them will say "Campbell's Chunky Soup" for some reason. And assuming the fifth is Jack M, he will say "Andy Reid is fat," which doesn't make a lot of sense in this context but is definitely true. That Jack is such a hater.

Peter King: Fat, Oblivious

So, there you are tubby. You look like a bucket of lard on a bad day. You baby gorilla. Why don't you work a zoo, and stop bothering people.

Kerry Collins is back, and he's not going anywhere. I don't know how many quarterbacks in the NFL today can go on the road, play the most fearsome defense in football, take a mugging for three-and-a-half quarters, then drive his team 80 yards in 11 plays to win the game. How many, really? Four? Five? I don't know.

That's right, you don't know. Much like anything that's not related to Denny's Grand Slam menu, you're totally clueless. Here's a little bit of information: Joe Flacco was having a terrible day against Pittsburgh last week, then led an 80 yard TD drive at the end of the 4th quarter. Does that make him one of the four or five best QBs in the league? No, no, no, no, and no.

Also, Flacco and Collins stats from Sunday:

Collins: 17/32, 163 yds, 1 td, 2 int
Flacco: 18/27, 153 yds, 0 td, 2 int

Kerry Collins: HOF Class 20??

The Giants are a pretty deep team. What must Plaxico Burress have been thinking in Miami or New Jersey, if he had his TV on Sunday? There was his sub, Domenik Hixon, rushing and receiving for more than 100 yards in the first half against Seattle before going out with a slight concussion, and there were the Giants, crushing the Seahawks 44-6, with their best receiver serving a one-game suspension.

My guess is he was thinking, "Shit, I could've padded my stats to a ridiculous degree against this embarrassing excuse for a football team. Holy shit, look at that white guy in the secondary! FUCK!"

Seriously, is Peter King really that dumb that he can't deduce the following:

IF Team A has an epically bad defense
AND Team B has an above average offense
THEN it doesn't mean shit that the Giants scored 44 points against the Seahawks without Burress

The Fine Fifteen

1. New York Giants (4-0). This is not only a defensively intimidating team and offensively efficient team, but also a very deep team. Tom Coughlin suspends his best receiver for a game, and his plug-in guy, Domenik Hixon, probably the fifth receiver coming out of training camp, outgains Seattle 117-115 and out-touchdowns the Seahawks 1-0 in the first half.

This is a commentary on the Seahawks, not the Giants, you dumb fuck.

2. Tennessee (5-0). Best game by a quarterback with a 52.0 passer rating in a long, long time.

No, it was a shitty game by a guy who had a 52.0 passer rating, but his team managed to win in spite of him.

4. Pittsburgh (4-1). No team in the history of NFL byes needs a bye like the Steelers right now.

Wait, the Steelers have injuries to important players? That has literally never happened to an NFL team before. I also literally shit my pants when I read that last sentence.

9. Baltimore (2-2). Joe Flacco's quite a bright prospect. Joe Flacco worries the heck out of me.

Me: Hey Peter, do you think I should go to the beach today?
PK: Yeah, go for it. The beach is a lot of fun.
Me: Great, I'll go get--
PK: But the beach can also be really boring and not fun.
Me: Uh...thanks, brah.

c. I've nailed you a few times, Warren Sapp,

PROBABLY NOT THE ONLY NFL PLAYER UV NAILED, LOLZ!!1

h. Kyle Orton looks more and more like the answer for Chicago, at least temporarily.

So, in other words, he may or may not be the answer. You see, that's Peter King using his access to tell you things that you, the average slack jawed American, could never figure out.

4. I think this is what I didn't like about Week 5:

b. In Wisconsin, at 1:05 p.m. local time Sunday afternoon, the Brewers were down 5-0 and the Packers down 17-7.

20 years from now, we'll all be able to tell our kids where we were at 1:05 pm on Sunday October 5, 2008.

f. This isn't Delaware, Joe Flacco. The strength of your arm won't get the ball through defenders. They'll catch it here.

I get it Flacco sucked. He's not that great right now. Might not ever be. But he threw the exact same number of picks as your new man hero, Kerry Collins, so please at least be consistent, you fucking asshat.

b. One other dumb playoff baseball thing: During the White Sox-Rays opening game, TBS showed 2008 fights between the Rays and Yanks, then the Rays and Red Sox, and Harold Reynolds said this sent a signal that the Rays wouldn't be pushed around by the power teams of their division anymore. Presto! Division title. What crappola. The Rays have been fighting for years. They brawled with the Sox in 2000 and finished 69-92. They brawled with the Sox in 2004 and finished 70-91. They brawled with the Sox in 2005 and finished 67-95. If you're going to use clichés, at least make them true.

The irony is too much.

g. First two games of the BoSox-Angels series ended at 1:25 and 1:29 a.m., respectively. There's some East Coast love.

Angels season ticket holders should be required to skip work to accommodate Peter King, et all East Coast baseball fans.

i. You're the smart one, Bill Plaschke. You recognize Manny Ramirez quit on a great team once, and he'll do it again. In the first three innings Saturday night, Ramirez scored from first on a hard double to right, then tagged up at first base and went to second on a medium-deep fly to center field. I can guarantee you that in eight years in Boston he didn't do those two things in one season, never mind twice in one three-inning stretch.

Looking at game logs will no doubt prove Peter King right. Don't bother questioning the legitimacy of his claim.

l. Finally got to see the premiere of Family Guy, and if I had to pick, I'm not sure which TV character I'd chose as the best in history -- George Costanza, Barney Fife, James West or Brian the dog. Brian's quite a maverick.

Yep, that's the reason Brian is funny...because he is a maverick. Look out Dean of Cinema and Telvision Studies at USC, this guy's gonna eat your lunch...LITERALLY!

Peter King: Pudgy, Clueless

See what I did with the title there? Expanding Jack M's joke? I know, it's really funny. That's why we make the big bucks, without even putting ads on the blog. Love to. Yes. Beautiful. Alright, enough of that.

This had to be one of the most dramatic Sundays in the 24 years I've covered the league. Around 9:30 Sunday night, I got Mike Shanahan on the phone (now there's a guy who was in the vortex of this compelling day)

It's useless "asides" like this that make Peter a bonafide zilcheroo. Great editorial, jackass. Thanks for filling your readers with that valuable extra tidbit of analysis. The Cowboys- now THERE'S a team with a batshit crazy owner! Buffalo- now THERE'S a town with shitty winter weather! Stuart Scott- now THERE'S a guy with only one working eye! Saying really obvious stuff with a "Now there's..." setup is fucking annoying.

and started telling him about the weirdness in Seattle, about Kurt Warner looking like a '58 Johnny Unitas, about Green Bay leading by 21 and trailing by one and winning by 23 (all in the same game), about Matt Cassel on the road against Brett Favre, winning his first start since high school ... and, well, I guess at one point I paused.

"What happened to the Colts?'' Shanahan said. "How'd they win?''

I don't need to hear Shanahan's tone of voice to know that he was humoring Peter. Yes, tell me another story! Ooh, that's exciting! It sounds like you had a really fun day watching football.

"Peyton Manning,'' I said. "Four offensive linemen out, Dallas Clark out, down 15-0 in the Metrodome, they can't run, Vinatieri misses a chip-shot and it looks like they'll lose, and Manning just, I don't know, wouldn't let them.''

"Wow,'' he said.

That is so neat!

Re: Denver's win over San Diego

The great thing about the (game winning two point) conversion was Cutler's coolness.

Oh yeah? Did it remind you of something one of your favorite QBs like Favre or Brady would have done?

I always say what makes Manny Ramirez such a great hitter is he treats an at-bat in the World Series the same as he treats one on March 17 in Bradenton.

1. I'm not sure this is true.
2. You had hundreds of available football comparisons. Why did you choose this?
3. Cutler has never played a playoff game, and as exciting as Sunday's game was, it took place more than three months before the playoffs start.

Same deal with Cutler.

Yeah, I saw Jay taking some hacks down in Florida this spring. He looked pretty calm. Needs to work on his baserunning, though.

But can you argue with Shanahan's call, now that you've heard his logic, even if Cutler hadn't converted?

Christ. Check your verb tenses, Joe Morgan. Someone get this guy an editor. At least Joe spins his webs of grammatical nonsense on live TV. Doing the exact same thing in a print column is inexcusable.

Re: Green Bay's win over Detroit

Maybe rocky times will be coming for Aaron Rodgers, but when?

"It's only two games,'' he cautioned via the cell phone Sunday evening.

Too bad. Looks like Peter already has Aaron's phone number. You know, they say that after a breakup you need time to heal before getting into another relationship. Otherwise, you get into that nasty rebound cycle and people can get hurt. Has Peter just replaced you-know-who with Rodgers? I guess time will tell.

Rodgers is in a weird spot with Favre.

Thanks mostly to the media. And specifically, you.

At the end of last season, the formerly chilly relationship got warm, with Rodgers going to Favre's home for dinner. But a frost settled over the friendship in the offseason, when Favre retired and then came back, hopeful of getting his old job back, a job the Packers had given to Rodgers. When they both went to the ESPYs in Los Angeles, they didn't connect, even though they were in the same audience.

ESPY-related gossip. Fascinating, relevant stuff.

I asked if the relationship was harmed forever.

"I sure hope not,'' Rodgers said. "I have so much admiration for Brett. I would love for the relationship to go back to what it was.''

Did the Packers even play a game on Sunday? Who gives a shit! Rodgers and Favre may or may not be friends anymore (that is, if they even were in the first place)! I would rather read about the fucking Patriots than this.

New England 19, New York Jets 10

What a segue!

Matty Ice.

Bill Belichick wants Cassel to steer the ship. In the Meadowlands, he led the Patriots to five scoring drives in eight possessions, and on the ninth and final possession of the day, he did what the Patriots dreamed he'd do but probably didn't think actually would happen. He knelt on the ball for the final play of the game, before a two-thirds-empty stadium.

Overdramatize things much? As if the Patriots had absolutely no prayer of winning the game... then heroically perservered, and came out on top thanks to following their dreams and believing in themselves.

On fourth-and-three from the New York 29 with 1:56 left, out of the shotgun, he had dumped a safe five-yarder to Wes Welker to get a new set of downs and seal the game. He didn't try to do too much, just end the game.

Oh yeah, most QBs are going for the end zone in that situation. Gotta pad those stats. Making the safe, game sealing play? Fuck that. That shit is for pussies. My name is Rex Grossman, and I'm here to throw touchdowns.

If he keeps doing that, he might invite comparisons to the last unknown quarterback the Patriots thrust in the lineup after an injury to a famous quarterback.

Fuck you, Peter. Fuck you with an Estes rocket.

But let's not go there yet. Way, way, way too early.

Too late.

Next to the phrase "game-manager'' in Webster's, there is a photo of Matt Cassel.

Trent Dilfer and his Super Bowl ring? A thing of the past. Tell me about a guy who's virtually guaranteed to be better than Tom Brady by week 6: Matt Cassel.

Quote of the Week II:

"I spoke with Mr. Fisher. I asked him what was going on and he proceeded to tell me about getting a call from Vince Young's therapist and she was worried about him. I asked him, 'What made her worry about him?' He stated, 'His mood, his emotions, he is injured, he wants to quit, and he mentioned suicide several times.' He went on to state that [Young] left his house with a gun.''
-- Andrea N. Swisher, Nashville Metropolitan Police officer, in her report of the Vince Young drama Monday night.

Interesting. You know, it's a strange saga going on for the Titans there. I wonder how they're going to deal with it in the long term. Head coach Jeff Fisher sure has his hands fu-

"Mr. Fisher'' is Tennessee coach Jeff Fisher.

OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOHHHHHHH. That's who. I thought you were referring to recently deceased chess star Bobby Fischer, but had forgotten that he was dead, forgotten that he doesn't/didn't have any association with the Tennessee Titans, and had misspelled his name.

Quote of the Week IV:

"I'm sick about Tom Brady.''
-- Peyton Manning.

Did he really keep a straight face (or normal voice, if delivered on the phone) when he said that?

Factoid of the Week That May Interest Only Me

Re those quarterbacks you saw in East Rutherford Sunday afternoon:

Favre, through two weeks, has earned $1.41 million in base salary.

The three New England quarterbacks on the active roster -- Cassel, Matt Gutierrez and Kevin O'Connell -- are scheduled to earn a combined $1.16 million in base salary this year. For the full season.

Up is down! Down is up! Cats are making friends with dogs! Future HOFers nearing the end of their long term contracts which they signed at the end of their prime make a lot more money than completely untested career backups! Nothing is as it seems!

Adrian Peterson vs. Walter Payton.

I thought of this Sept. 8, when Peterson, of the Vikings, ran over Green Bay's Al Harris on the left sideline on one romp and cut across the grain for a 34-yard scamper, leaving Packers defenders grasping. I know, I know. Payton did it for Chicago for 12 years. Peterson's done it for one. This new element of my column is not intended to say I think the modern guy is as good as the former guy. It's designed to compare a star from today to a star from yesterday in terms of style of play, greatness and personality.

Talking to Peterson last year, I liked the fact that rushing 20 times for 224 yards at Soldier Field meant something to him because he was doing it on Walter Payton's turf. Most young players don't appreciate history, but Peterson not only knew who Payton was, he knew he ran something like him.

So we're giving an NFL player who grew up playing running back points for knowing who Walter Payton was. Huh. Tell you what- I didn't think O.J. Mayo was very mature until I heard him mention during an interview that he was a big fan of Michael Jordan. Can you imagine? What a guy!

The Awards Section

Offensive Player of the Week

Jay Cutler, QB, Denver. An amazing performance by an emerging star, who came back from throwing a costly interception in the fourth quarter, deep in San Diego territory -- allowing the Chargers to take a late lead -- and drove Denver the length of the field (aided by Ed Hochuli) for a touchdown pass to Eddie Royal with 29 seconds left. That made it 38-37, Denver. Shanahan (as noted earlier) chose to go for two. Then, cool as a cuke, Cutler bounced on the balls of his feet three times, a la Joe Willie, and fired a completed conversion pass to Royal between three Chargers.

Everyone break out "cool as a cuke" in conversation this week and see how it goes over. If your friends and colleagues react the same way I did, they'll think you just dropped an obscure racial slur.

Matt Cassel, QB, New England. A workmanlike day (16 of 23, 165 yards, no touchdowns or picks), but let's realize what this man did. In his first start in the NFL, and his first start at quarterback since a high school playoff game in 1999, he jogged onto Favre's new home field Sunday in New Jersey, and beat one of the top 10 quarterbacks of all time. Pats 19, Jets 10. Read Sports Illustrated this week (the big tease) for my take on how he got to the Patriots and who got him there.

I would sooner ride a hot air balloon into a hurricane, but thanks for the offer. Also: I fucking hate Matt Cassel already. What's it been, like 8 days? Awesome. Thanks Peter!

Ten Things I Think I Think

I'm not going to give the thoroughly misguided human (if he or she is indeed human) who began selling the Bernard Pollard Fan Club T-shirts online after the Tom Brady injury any more attention than this one sentence and this one question: What would your mother think of you if she knew what you were doing?

Take that, you possible non-human. You mom might be upset that you are celebrating someone else's pain. Maybe. Or, she might think it was enterprising of you to make money off something as ultimately meaningless as this. Could go either way.

Vince Young reminds me of who Bruce Springsteen wrote and sang about in "Glory Days.'' And Young's glory days were in Austin, not Nashville.

You've never heard that song, have you?

I think it's going to be a tough few nights sleeping for Ed Hochuli.

I bet- nay, I guarantee- that he's over it. San Diego still had 2 chances to win the game (on 4th down and on the 2 point conversion).

And I can't even bring myself to comment on any of his baseball related thoughts. Here, I'll summarize for you- Cliff Lee, Roy Halladay- good?, Red Sox, Red Sox, Yankee Stadium sad face, the Red Sox are the most interesting team ever, Peter King is a moron. That's all I got.

Peter King: Fat, Stupid

Reading MMQB is like going to Chipotle. Every time you walk in, you hope it's going to be as good or better than Qdoba, but it never is. The point I'm trying to make is that Qdoba's steak queso burrito is outrageous, New York Magazine called it "a playful but mysterious little dish." Also Peter King probably eats 12 or 13 of those a day.

VINDICTIVE MANNY STAT OF THE WEEK

The first month on new jobs for Manny Ramirez and the man who replaced him in Boston, Jason Bay:

Manny:
AVG: .415
OBP: .508
H: 44
HR: 9
RBI: 25

Bay:
AVG: .315
OBP: .358
H: 35
HR: 4
RBI: 29

Ramirez is unconscious, as we figured he might be, trying to show the Red Sox didn't appreciate him.

Get it? Because Manny is sometimes lazy in the outfield. He makes a lot of stupid mistakes. I guess the main bullet point of my presentation would be that Manny Ramirez isn't a very good fielder.

But Bay's been superb with runners in scoring position, and 29 RBIs in August -- in any month, for that matter -- is big-time production.

Yes, RBI's, the great equalizer among all hitters. In no way are RBI's related to your teamate's ability to get on base. Take your "unconcious" .508 OBP and jam it up your ass Manny.

Later in the column:

Is Dustin Pedroia a real person? He just had a 43-hit month, with six home runs. He is 5-foot-8, maybe. He just went 4-for-4 on back-to-back nights, reaching base 10 times in 10 appearances in the two games. Terry Francona batted him cleanup twice. Ozzie Guillen pitched to David Ortiz and intentionally walked Pedroia. Ozzie Guillen said, "I just [intentionally] walked a jockey.'' This is an amazing story we're watching.

So in sum:

Over the past month, Pedroia and Manny have almost the identical number of hits, and Manny has 3 more home runs. Here's how Peter King sees it:

Manny = Asshole having flukey month
Pedroia = The most amazing story ever! I texted Pedroia to ask him how it feels to be having the greatest season ever, and he wrote back "Plz stop txting me." His focus is unbelievable!

1b. I like the reinstatement of Pacman Jones, or Adam Jones, or whatever his name is this week.

Notice PK's use of the nickname Pacman Jones...

1k. The Dayton Daily News, one of the papers covering the Bengals daily, has begun referring to Chad Johnson as Chad Ocho Cinco, from the looks of Saturday's paper. "The week leading up to the Baltimore game represents the first full week of practice time Ocho Cinco, T.J. Houshmandzadeh and Carson Palmer will have together since the 2007 season finale at Miami,'' beat man Chick Ludwig wrote Saturday, apparently with a straight face.

Are you fucking kidding me? In 1b, you refer to a player by his nickname, and then 9 bullet points later you deride a writer for referring to a player by the nickname they legally adopted. You are a fat asshole.