MMQB: When there is nothing better to do, Peter King shall jab at the Skins

[EvilMonkeyBoy]

It's a pretty dead time in pro football right now. The other day, for instance, Giants coach Jim Fassel dismissed his players for most of the next month, and the majority of his colleagues are doing the same with their teams (with some exceptions, such the hard-working Falcons), giving them a final break before training camp begins.

Given that there's not much happening on the field, I thought this might be a good week to opine on the 10-year anniversary of NFL free agency, which was born in 1993. I think free agency is a great thing for the league. It gives teams anti-Steinbrenner insurance and protects a Daniel Snyder from going wild with signing bonuses one year without it eventually -- and hugely -- affecting his team's salary cap. At the same time, free agency allows every team, every year to have some sort of hope during the offseason. I've often said that, as a Giants' fan growing up in Connecticut in the late-'60s and early '70s, "hope" was often a four-letter word when it came to my favorite team. From the time I was 9, in 1966, to 1975, when I graduated from high school, the Giants got over .500 only twice and never made the playoffs. Us Giants fans learned to never hope for the playoffs. Granted, a bad front office helped keep the franchise down, but the "old days" in pro football aren't days to long for, in my opinion.

I like the current system because it's fair to 32 cities. You can't go from 2-14 to the Super Bowl unless something really fluky happens, but you can go from 5-11 to the playoffs if you have a smart offseason and develop your young players quickly. Of the really bad teams last year, the only ones I see with almost no playoff shot right now are Cincinnati, Houston, Dallas, Detroit and Arizona. The purists (I have heard John Madden talk about this) would say this is bad for the game, because great teams staying great is good for football. Why? Who says it's so wonderful to have one team dominate for a long time? You tell the fans in Philadelphia during much of the '70s and Tampa in the '80s how great dominance by a handful of teams is for the sport. And show me the TV ratings that prove a dynasty is good for a sport. Ask NBC folks what sells their Olympic coverage, and they'll tell you the underdog sells. How much fun was it to see Green Bay get back to contention early in the free agency era with swashbuckling Brett Favre and Reggie White and thanks to the moves of Ron Wolf? My feeling is it's much better to have 27 teams with legitimate hopes in July than it is to have 10, and the old days you had 10. Maybe.

I phoned Ernie Accorsi, the GM of the Giants, to ask him about it because I remember how he felt about the system when it first came into being -- he didn't like it. The old-line NFL guys hated the adjustment, and they resented the fact that teams that farmed talent well would often be doing it just to lose it to teams on the bottom of the league who hadn't been as smart in team-building. As the late George Young used to say: "Football's not like baseball. In baseball, you can just plug in a new second baseman and he'll do fine. In football, you just can't plug in a new right guard and expect things to run smoothly." Most of that has been pretty much debunked. Teams just work harder to get the new right guard ready in April, May and June, so he pretty much knows what he's doing by the time training camp rolls around. This isn't to say it's always smooth; teams with lots of new players usually struggle early. But free agency as an angry talking point has pretty much been eliminated from the football world these days.

"It's a hard thing to admit, thinking back to the early days of free agency," Accorsi said, "but I think our system has worked better than any system in the modern history of sports. I'm not sure in most sports now that Cinderella can win. When's Cinderella won in the NBA? Cinderella hasn't won an NCAA title since Villanova almost 20 years ago. In our league, Cinderella can win. Baltimore was Cinderella three years ago. New England was Cinderella two years ago. That's great for our game. It's great for the fans."

Accorsi remembers Young raging against the system, and also teaching him that the cap would be the last thing he thought of at night and the first thing he thought of when he woke up. Accorsi told him he was wrong -- it was also the thing he kept thinking about when he'd wake up at night too.

"We've learned to live with it," he said. "In the final analysis, if I'm a Milwaukee Brewers fan today, I don't think I'm ever winning the World Series. If I'm a fan of any football team, I know I've got a chance. The bottom line is, it's been good for every team in the game."

Couldn't have said it better myself.

"Antonio Osuna was placed on the disabled list with a stroined grain."

--Update man Jerry Recco, on WFAN radio in new York, reporting the news that the Yankees were shelving a relief pitcher.

Anatomy of a pitching victory:

Phils reliever Jose Mesa entered a 2-2 game against the Boston in the 12th inning. He gave up a run on a single and a triple and stood to lose the game as the Red Sox went up 3-2 in the top of the 12th. The Phils scored in the bottom of the 12th to tie it. In the top of the 13th, Mesa gave up two runs on a single, double and single and stood to lose the game as the Sox went up 5-3. The Phils scored three runs in the bottom of the 13th to win it.

Two innings, five hits, three runs, twice putting his team in a deficit.

And he gets the win.

The last batch before vacation goes hither and yon, all the way up to that little stretch of sand with the fun baseball league in Massachusetts. On with the show.

YOU'RE A LITTLE INCONSISTENT ON TRAVIS HENRY. From Bob Farr of Rochester, N.Y.: "Love your articles. I never have had a reason to write, until now. My question for you is why is it OK that the Dolphins can sign Brian Griese, but you took the Bills to task for drafting Willis McGahee? Your post-draft column regarding Travis Henry contradicts this week's regarding Jay Fiedler. I know that Travis is a better running back than Jay is a QB, but fair is fair."

Simple, for a couple of reasons. How many teams spend a first-round pick to draft a great running back to back up a great running back? That's one reason. Here's the other: Fielder is a 31-year-old journeyman, just a couple of years removed from the time when no team in the league wanted him, who failed down the stretch last season to quarterback one of the five best teams in football into what should have been a lock playoff spot. All his fault? Of course not. But he could have been much, much better in season-closing losses at Minnesota and New England. Henry is a 24-year-old diamond-in-the-rough who, in his first year starting full time, was the NFL's fourth-leading rusher. Henry was told by Bills coach Gregg Williams two weeks after the season they were going to expand his role next year and that he'd probably carry the ball more. This is a man you want to replace?

I'M PROBABLY THE WRONG GUY TO ASK ON THIS. From Dwayne Davis of Tulsa, Okla.: "In fantasy football, who would be your No. 1 draft pick today if you had to draft one player to ride to the championship?"

Wow. This past onen was my first year at the game, and I've been roundly criticized for my first draft. I would probably steer clear of Priest Holmes, because of his hip, and Marshall Faulk, because I doubt he will be healthy for 16 weeks. Knowing how they're going to play offense, and knowing he's going to more of a factor in the receiving game year, I'd take Ricky Williams of the Dolphins, probably.

WOULDN'T WE ALL LOVE TO SEE THIS? From Paul Katz of Radburn, N.J.: "Re: NFL game length. Do we really need a timeout after every kickoff? Big waste. While we're at it, maybe we convert another timeout to the 30-second variety."

Paul, the NFL has, I believe, 56 half-minute commercials slated for each game. You have to put them somewhere.

YOU GOT IT ALL WRONG ON THE NEW SOLDIER FIELD. From Ben Keys of Chicago: "I think you missed the point of Chicagoans' disappointment with the 'new' Soldier Field. Sure, it was a dump, but it was OUR dump. I think the main reason why we are taking it so personally is because of our experience with the United Center. Despite similar claims that the old Chicago Stadium was a dump, it was truly a magical place to watch a game. With the blaring organ music and screaming fans all crammed into that little box of an arena, it gave us a potent home-field advantage and a perfect sports-watching atmosphere. But then came the United Center. With two new layers of luxury boxes, the UC has roughly the same seating capacity as the Stadium, but has four times the cubic volume! That makes it four times as hard to make it as loud as the old Stadium. The sheer size of the place, plus the "luxury box clientele" has made it near impossible to recreate the feeling that games at the Stadium once had. The same goes for the new Soldier Field. The fear is that the size of the new stadium is going to cost us some of that beloved home-field advantage. The wind isn't going to whip through the columns like it used to, and the noise of the crowd won't feel the same if it's a much expanded space to play in. Sure, it would be nice if the toilets worked and the place wasn't falling apart, but to force upon us another poorly designed stadium (don't even get me started on New Comiskey) is unbearable. No pun intended."

Bob, a great letter. Great points. I would agree with you about Comiskey. Been there three times and it's far and away the worst new baseball stadium. No feeling. Cold. Ugly. Anyway, the reason I've always been down on Soldier Field is that, unlike the other old football stadiums, Soldier Field to me has zero personality and only slightly more character. RFK was priceless. I loved Cleveland Stadium, with the fog rising above the stands that always shook. Ditto Mile High. But Soldier Field, to me, was the hallmark of an inconvenient, cold and uncomfortable stadium. Maybe the new place will stink, but it won't stink worse than the old place.

SOME VERY GOOD ADVICE ON THE CAPE COD LEAGUE. From A. Farber of New York City: "Helpful hints for enjoying Cape Cod League baseball games: Go to a game at Veteran's Field in Chatham, by far the most beautiful of all Cape League fields. Sit directly behind home plate; those seats are, bizarrely, always vacant. Heckle the ump, loudly. The fans love that. And ALWAYS buy tickets at the raffle -- the league doesn't have much cash, and it needs the help. Those are the best baseball games anywhere, ever. You won't be sorry you went."

I'm fired up to see a Cape game or two in July. My brother-in-law, Bob Whiteley, tells me that a few years ago he and his daughter Katie went to a game in Orleans and saw a crafty southpaw pitch a masterpiece. After the game, Katie and a bunch of fans went down to talk to the guy, who was nice and pleasant and autograph-inclined. Turns out it was Barry Zito.

YOUR BOY PARCELLS HAS GIVEN UP. From Andy D. of Dallas: "I have a hard time believing even for a second that it's Bill Parcells' decision to stand pat at quarterback with Chad Hutchinson and Quincy Carter. How can this guy, who I've admired for two decades now, be told to (and apparently accept it) shut up and go with these two guys? A decent quarterback could put them in playoff range. Why the defeatist attitude?"

Two things, Andy. One, I agree with you partially on the quarterback thing. I would have paid for Brian Griese or Jake Delhomme to come in and win the job, because Hutchinson, this year, is going to be just a guy. But Parcells clearly wasn't overly enamored with either of those guys, or he would have told Jerry Jones that Hutchinson wasn't the right idea. Parcells is not going to sit back and let Jones run roughshod over him, I can promise you that. Two, give Parcells a chance to fight the battles that are worth winning. That's how I'm looking at this. He's done it aggressively everywhere else he has been. Don't let this one decision brand him in your mind as a guy who's packed it in and is just coaching for the dough.

YO, PETER. THERE IS LIFE WEST OF THE MISSISSIPPI. From Scott McIntyre of Altoona, Iowa: "Your games-to-watch list all but ignores the western half of the country. What about San Francisco at St. Louis on Sept. 14? And after all your Fiedler/Griese/Plummer writing, how could you ignore Oakland at Denver on Sept. 22? And since we can't let that issue die, here's my perspective: Griese's talent qualified him to replace Gary Kubiak, not Elway."

Well, you make good points about the games, but we will have to agree to disagree about Griese. I think he's better than you do, and I think he's better than apparently most of Denver does. Not that I wouldn't have done what Mike Shanahan did, because you can't hang onto a quarterback you've lost faith in.

1. I think I probably got more mail this week on my prediction that Travis Henry would win the rushing title than anything else. I didn't give my basis for making this call, so here it is, all you anti-Henrys: As stated earlier in the letters section, coach Gregg Williams has told Henry he's going to try to feed him the ball more, particularly late in games when he's trying to run the clock out. Last year, in eight games Henry carried the ball fewer than 20 times; Ricky Williams had three such game, LaDainian Tomlinson had five and Priest Holmes had three. Yet Henry exceed 125 yards rushing in six games; Williams also had six, Tomlinson four and Holmes five. Put all those things together, along with the fact that the Bills' line will be better, and I see 1,700 yards in Henry's future.

2. I think the sleeping giants in this league this year might be the Giants.

3. I think of all the interesting things they've done in the offseason, the one thing the Washington Redskins haven't done is acquire the pass-rusher they badly need. That is, unless you count Regan Upshaw, who has 15 sacks in the past four years.

4. I think the Steelers have been as proactive as any AFC team in recent salary-cap history in getting their roster in shape, and in getting draft picks signed so they can contribute early. I suppose I understand them holding the line on Tommy Maddox and keeping him as one of the lowest-paid quarterbacks in recent history -- they think he hasn't proven his stuff over a full season, I guess -- but I don't know what more they expected him to do last year. He played about two-thirds of the season, threw for 2,800 yards and 20 touchdowns, then led the Steelers to 67 points in two postseason games. He sounds like a guy who is sort of steaming but mostly happy about his chances this year, which is what I would be too if Jon Kitna's salary were going to dwarf mine.

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

a. Coffeenerdness: I can't drink the white mocha. Gives me an upset stomach.

b. The Mets not only lost a game last night. They lost about half the trade value in a truly choke-filled reliever, Armando Benitez. When the going gets tough, he starts walking.

c. I did a stupid thing in my rotisserie league. I traded Nomar Garciaparra. I've had this thing for A-Rod, and so I traded Nomar in a big package for A-Rod and a lesser package. I will regret that for a while, and not just because Nomar plays great. I love watching him play.

d. The stupidest baserunner I've ever seen, other than Steve Lyons, is Charles Gipson.

e. The Rangers are talking about trading for Jaromir Jagr. If I were a Rangers season-ticket holder (I am not a bank president, so I can't be), I would tell Glen Sather to keep his money this year. And I would add: For the past six years, we've gone for fading stars, and look where it has gotten us. Now you want a guy three years past his prime? Hey, try picking some 19-year-old players. That's how hockey works. You mine for talent. You don't acquire Geritol-swiggers.

6. I think Orlando Pace will eventually be in camp, Rams fans, but not before he makes some silly trouble for the team. I don't get the best feeling about what kind of chemistry that team will have in training camp.

7. I think I hear good things about the early days of the marriage between Steve Mariucci and Joey Harrington. I still think the Lions would have been happier had they taken a more physical receiver like Andre Johnson in the first round, but I understand the pressures of selecting the local kid, Charles Rogers. If Harrington can increase his completion rate from 50 to 60 percent this year, the Lions will win seven games, and Matt Millen will have a nice Christmas.

8. I think I get a kick out of Troy Vincent, reigning NFL Man of the Year. He didn't make a right turn on a red light the other week in Philly because the NFL Man of the Year should not risk such little earthquakes in his life.

9. I think I was making out my training camp itinerary the other day, and I had a tough time paring down the list of places I wanted to go. So many questions. So many fun camps to see. I'm going to start with the depleted Jets, the defending Bucs, the Jaked-up Broncos and ted Cards, I think. I hope to see 20 teams in the month beginning July 22.

10. I think the next column you read from me will be on Monday, July 28, datelined San Antonio, if all goes well. I return to work the previous week and begin my training camp jaunt. Until then, I say: Hope you have a good summer. And a dry one, if you live in the East.

Sports Illustrated senior writer Peter King covers the NFL beat for the magazine and is a regular contributor to SI.com. Monday Morning Quarterback appears in this space every week. Click here to send him a comment.

[@DCGoldPants]

is he wrong about the pass rush from our DL?

[EvilMonkeyBoy]

Originally posted by Dagwood Bufford

is he wrong about the pass rush from our DL?

One takes the leap from being observant to taking a jab when they have talked about it many times before, and when they haven't been in the news in a month.

[Luca Brasi]

Yeah, unfortunately we didn't address every single "need" the team had this offseason. We were only able to upgrade our offensive line from terrible to excellent, our wide receivers from mediocre to excellent, our special teams from terrible to above average, as well as provided excellent depth along the defensive line while adding a safety and a former 1st round running back.

Damn front office.

[Die Hard]

It's very easy to deduce a team needs a pass-rushing lineman. It's another thing to actually acquire one. Teams just don't make them available. The only way to do it is to draft one.... but unless you're in the top 10 picks of the draft... it's not available to you either.

So the most common route is to overpay for average talent. So if a team can pay a decent salary for average talent... they've done well for themselves.

The Skins have done well.

[The Evil Genius]

I guess Smith's 9 sacks last year didn't count for anything...yeah I know...Smith is close to 40.

He was last year too.

Arrington's 11 sacks must have slipped by King's wet noodle too...perhaps it was the Starbucks?

[luckydevil]

He is right, we badly need a pass rusher. However I think we will be fine and "get-by"

[Golgo-13]

I would like to hear Peter King's suggestion on where we should have gotten this elusive pass-rusher from. I hate when people criticize but then have no better solution in lue of their criticism. But I guess that's his job...

[Awesome]

He sure did pull that out of his fat, smelly butt. well, don't have anything to say, might as well bash the skins.

Oh, how i loathe Peter King and his stupid, fat, wart-ridden butt!

[Even Madder]

He's right that the Skins didn't get the pass-rusher they need, but it's a cheap shot because he doesn't give them credit for the things they did do. If they hadn't fixed the OL or WRs or picked up Canidate, he'd be nailing the skins for that.

Getting a pass-rushing DE was about 5 on the list, after OL, WR, S, DT. Check, check, check, check... oh wait there's one the Skins missed! Better write that in my column!

What a freakin' loser.

Still, the skins have a weak DL. Oh well. Every team has a weakness, and that's it for the skins -- at least I think so. Will the LBs and DBs make up for the lack of pass rush? I hope so.

Anyone who says that Smith and Arrington will generate the pass rush weren't watching last year. The Skins had no pressure on opposing QBs. None. And that was with a better DL than they will have this year (the only changes are replacing Gardener with Noble, and replacing Smith with Upshaw on some downs -- that's getting worse, not better).

I think the skins will be fair at stopping the run though. Hopefully the skins offense will be scoring enough that opponents will have to play from behind.

[Flowtrain]

Originally posted by Golgo-13

I would like to hear Peter King's suggestion on where we should have gotten this elusive pass-rusher from. I hate when people criticize but then have no better solution in lue of their criticism. But I guess that's his job...

What about KGB? He got the same tender that Coles received and he's a disruptive pass-rusher who vastly improved his run defense last season. Is he better than Coles? It's an impossible comparison - but they're certainly comparable up and comers. KGB had two productive seasons compared to Coles' 3/4 of a season and pass rushers are more of a scarce commodity in the NFL. But in the end, we all know offense wins championships.

[The Evil Genius]

Flow,

The knock on KGB is that he is one-dimensional. He excels in the pass rush but gets pushed around when it comes to rushing plays.

I know the critics thought he played better last year...but to me...he is a more polished Kalu (who the Skins gave up on).

And I still disgaree that 20 sacks - however they came - should be overlooked.

The Skins got some pass rush last year - the problem is - some of us here think they should resemble the Bucs or Eagles D.

[@DCGoldPants]

Well, this is Kings MVP pick for the 2003 season. He plans on crushing 1 per game played in the NFL. So, how many games are there a weekend? then MNF?

[panel]

Originally posted by Dagwood Bufford

Well, this is Kings MVP pick for the 2003 season. He plans on crushing 1 per game played in the NFL. So, how many games are there a weekend? then MNF?

Damb, am I hungery!

[sippin2020]

I think Lavar will have something to say about that badly needed pass rush.

[Even Madder]

The Skins got some pass rush last year - the problem is - some of us here think they should resemble the Bucs or Eagles D.

I first read this and thought, "When the hell did they get some pass rush last year? He must be crazy." I was thinking of the Eagles game where McNabb had all day in the pocket to find someone, and several other examples of the same.

But I guess they did. The skins were ranked ninth in the league with 40 sacks, fifth in passing yards allowed, so they did generate some pressure. Not when it counted, but still.

It's pretty impressive when you think about it. They got stuck with horrible field position and were always playing from behind because the offense truly sucked -- and that's when they weren't fumbling. The fact that they did so well even though they had to generate their half their pass rush from one aging DE (9 sacks) and a LB (11 sacks) is pretty impressive. Kinda gives you hope for this year.

[Dirk Diggler]

I agree with the old coot.

[bulldog]

the salary cap in some form may be necessary to protect the game, but it also promotes mediocrity.

teams like the Jaguars sign players like Hugh Douglas that in years past would have stayed with the teams they blossomed with.

so, in the end everyone is 7-9 to 9-7 with a few teams without injuries rising to 12-4 or 13-3.

and in most cases those 12-4 teams fall back to the pack the following season.

it's a 'catch lightning in a bottle' league the way that major league baseballl is now.

Florida, Anaheim, Arizona pop up and win the World Series and then disappear from sight.

Of the recent winners the Rams were able to string out a good record after their SB win: 10-6 in 2000, and 14-2 in 2001 before slipping in 2002 with all the injuries.

Others such as the Patriots and Ravens pretty much disappeared after the one year.

Neither was a bad club the year after, but the magic was clearly gone.

[redman]

You know, the one thing that Shakespeare failed to write was a good action adventure script.

We had the best offseason in the league. Peter King can shove it.

[rtandler]

The Skins' pass rush from the D-line (counting Lavar from the DE alignment) last year was directly responsible for two wins last year. Arrington's sack and strip of Warner in the late going saved the Rams game and Smith's sack and strip of Hutchinson that Arrington recovered for a TD were the go-ahead points in the Dallas win.

If that's a weak pass rush, I'll take it.

[Redskinswhoopass]

Two Words: Smoot-Bailey

[OrangeSkin]

LaVar was unhappy on the end last year, so I doubt he'll be playing it again. Upshaw should pick up a lot of his production.

Plus Bruce will be a lot hungrier with the record in sight and this most likely his last year.

I'm just not extremely concerned with the pass rushing situation.

[Gamebreaker]

I think the pass rush will be lacking, but our defense has been impressive for a while without one. The last time we had a good pass rush was in '00, since then our defense has remained in the Top 10 overall rankings.

The defense will be fine, having a pass rush would make it a tad bit better, but it's nothing to worry so much about. Peter King is simply grasping straws here, someone should remind him the Skins didn't have a pass rush last season, post their ranking in defense, and tell him to f#$% off.

[AJWatson3]

oh, he's a NJGiants fan... that explains all his $hit we have been hearing that is anti-Redskin!

we improved ourselves better than any team in the east... no more need be said.

[Bang]

I think looking at the Redskins DL on the surface one would consider it more of a run stopping line than a pass rushing line. Nothing wrong with that, considering the Redskins relatively dismal performances as a run D over the last 5 years or so.

I think what Peter King is missing is the linebackers. We have a tremendous amount of speed that can come from the outside and up the middle. Toss into the mix the threat of a roaming LaVar Arrington and the Redskins should be able to create mismatches that will lead to pressure on the QB.

I am concerned about the DL only in terms of it's overall speed. But i think our speed at LB makes up for it in the pursuit department. Sure we could have signed K'Beer B'oogalooga from Green Bay, but when you look at the 11 million dollar signing bonus he got, and the contract he signed to merely rush the passer, it is simply not cost effective for the Redskins. Cost effective for this team was spending 13 million on a supersonic WR, and bolstering the OL. if you look at the Redskins as a whole coming off of last season, pass rush is behind both receiver and OL in the need dept. WAY behind.

The other little bash in the front of this article on Dan Snyder is one that bugs me.

COLOR=orangered] I think free agency is a great thing for the league. It gives teams anti-Steinbrenner insurance and protects a Daniel Snyder from going wild with signing bonuses one year without it eventually -- and hugely -- affecting his team's salary cap.[/color]

What about protecting from a Mike Shanahan? What about protecting the league from a so-called mastermind paying out huge bonuses to dogs like Brian Griese, only to cut him a couple years later and swallow a 7 million dollar hit.. what about paying out huge money to a stiff like Chester McGlockton, or Jake Plummer? What about mike Shanahan who continues to pay the darling of 1998 Terrell Davis to sit on his IR?

ah, but Peter King couldn't possibly see that. He's too busy zerooing in on any faults he can find with Snyder, same as every other 'journalist'. It's easy, it's popular, and it doesn't require fact checking to insure that the readership will swallow it. Smacking at Mike Shanahan would be unthinkable, especially since Peter King spent so much time patting him on the back and calling him a mastermind back when he had his ready made inherited hall of fame QB. How hard would it be for Peter King to look at the record, notice that since Elway has left Denver, the 'mastermind' has a worse playoff record than NORV for pete's sake, and in his ONE playoff trip, he scorec 3 points and got booted home? Add that one top of his GM gaffes and Peter king could have a whole entire article.

But that would entail work. Not much, but some. And to Peter King, work is putting on shoes that match without a mirror.

By the by, while I am on it, how's everyone like the nearly universal idea that seems to be prevailing that the Ravens can win their division. They have a couple QBs with next to no experience, they have no WRs to speak of, tey have a decent OL, a good defense, and a decent runner.

How is it that the Redskins, who i think are more well rounded in the WR dept, better off in the QB dept, and as good as them on the defensive side and OL.. how is it that nearly every writer and every prognosticator sees Baltimore as being so vastly improved as to win the AFC North, but the Redskins endure such comments as "..for all their spending they will still only go .500..."

Logic, please. Can anyone see it?

Boy, of all the owners, you'd think maybe people would hate Art Modell more, but I guess not.

~Bang