Rivers owns small edge over Eli
Getty ImagesEli Manning (left) has a Super Bowl title, but does he automatically have the overall edge on Philip Rivers (right)?One of the most passionate letters to hit this mailbag came from Maurice in Chicago.
Maurice takes strong exception to my position that Michael Vick should be reinstated this fall. Maurice not only believes Vick shouldn't be allowed to return to the NFL until 2010 at the earliest, he even suggests considering a lifetime ban.
"You don't show remorse by just saying 'I'm sorry,'" Maurice said. "You have to follow up with actions such as talking to kids in the inner cities to try to steer them away from dog fighting and violence, working with the Humane Society and PETA in some capacity."
I'm sure Maurice is very much like most dog lovers. Vick probably will never be forgiven by them, and that's understandable. His actions were horrid and his jail sentence was well-deserved.
Maurice is so passionate about the position that the letter was handwritten and came through conventional mail. I accept that I probably can't sway your position, Maurice, but I still feel strongly about my thoughts.
An athlete's career is a short one. An injury or a stupid act could end that career quickly. Vick recently became a free agent. Knowing that 32 NFL phones are silent should remind him of the consequences of his horrid acts.
But I remain firmly of the opinion that he should be allowed to play this season. At the very least, getting back into the league in 2009 can enhance his new mission in life: to speak out about dogfighting. No person in this country can speak with the power of someone who lost it all as Vick has. He needs to start his Humane Society commercials and his testimonials once a judge allows him to speak publicly in late July.
Vick served two years in jail. Missing three years in this sport would be too much. It's time for Vick to help stop dogfighting. His best platform is being given the chance to finish what's left of his NFL career.
He put himself in a position to have a short NFL career after jail. He served more jail time than his dogfighting partners. Having him sit out might satisfy those who are angry with him, but it slows what needs to happen. He's paid his debt to society. He needs to satisfy those to whom he is financially indebted.
Let's go to this week's mail.
From the inbox
Question: John, who … would you rather [play] at quarterback on your team, Eli Manning or Philip Rivers?
From Branko in Calabasas
Answer: This might be the best debate of the late 2000s. Obviously, this debate is going to affect the salary scale for quarterbacks because both stars are in the final years of their contracts and are due top-dollar deals. I'd slightly favor Rivers because of his leadership and his flair for playing well in late-season games. The edge is small, though. Manning got hot at the end of the 2007 season, and he won a Super Bowl. Both quarterbacks have faced adversity, and I think Rivers has a slightly better track record in dealing with it. Rivers advanced to an AFC title game with a torn ACL that needed postseason reconstructive surgery. He's won playoff games even though his two favorite weapons -- LaDainian Tomlinson and Antonio Gates -- were far less than 100 percent for two playoff seasons. Manning wasn't the same quarterback at the end of last season without Plaxico Burress. Great question.
Q: John, I've been reading a lot of your columns and have seen you don't say anything about the Dolphins. Do you think last year was just a fluke? And do you think Pat White was a good upgrade to the Wildcat?
From Larry in Rock Springs, Wyo.
A: Remember, this is a mailbag, so I answer what is in the box. The Dolphins aren't a fluke, but they also should suffer a slight drop this year. That's what happens when you go from worst to first, and the worst -- a 1-15 record -- is pretty dramatic. The usual trend is for that team to drop by three games, which would take the Dolphins from 11-5 to 8-8. The roster is much more solid under Bill Parcells, and clearly the team is building a bigger, strong defense. I'm still a little worried about the receiver position. That needs building.
Q: Hey John, how long do you think it will take for the Patriots to re-sign Vince Wilfork, Richard Seymour and Logan Mankins to extensions? What are other big contract disputes in the NFL right now?
From Jorge in Boston
A: You have to think one of these players will be signed, and I'd put my money on Wilfork getting the first shot. He's too valuable in the 3-4 defense to leave. I don't know if he's going to get a four-year, $32 million deal or if the cost is going to be more, but I think he gets the first nod. Mankins has put himself in position to get a contract worth $6 million to $8 million a year. The Patriots could find other guards, even though they have a difference-making guard in Mankins. I get the feeling that Seymour is third on the list. Something for one of the three needs to be done soon, or the Patriots risk hurting team chemistry.
Q: Is Hines Ward a Hall of Fame player? If not, what would he need to accomplish to become one?
From e-mailer John
A: Unfortunately, I think he's going to fall short because of the numbers. That might be unfair, but we've had trouble getting Cris Carter in during his first two tries. It took Lynn Swann and John Stallworth more than a decade to make it. It took forever for Art Monk to get in, and he retired as the all-time reception leader. As Hall of Fame voters, we seem to be struggling with how to rate modern-day receivers. In the 1970s, when teams predominantly ran the ball, receivers were delayed in getting into the Hall because they didn't have the number of catches. Now, it seems many voters are taking the position that receivers get too many opportunities, so their numbers might not mean a lot. I've been on the push to get more receivers into the Hall, but I have only one voice. More voters are starting to come my way, but it might not be in time to help Ward initially. Maybe in time, though.
Q: Hey John, I know you've always got a keen eye out for trends in the NFL and was wondering if you'd spotted this one and what your thoughts are on it: Some teams are picking up a third (or fourth) starter-quality OT either through the draft or free agency (e.g., Chicago, Detroit, Jacksonville, New England, the Giants), whereas others barely have two legit starters (Buffalo, Cincinnati, Kansas City, Oakland, Washington) despite there still being quality free-agent tackles available. Are the former teams just taking advantage of the deep OT draft pool of the last two years, or are they bolstering against what happened to Jacksonville last year, or something else? And are the latter just throwing caution to the wind, or do they not have the salary-cap [room] to land a quality free agent or what?
From Brendan in Lynchburg, Va.
A: Good observation. The Bears, Patriots and Giants are playoff contenders looking for veteran insurance policies in case of injury. In the case of the Bears, they are reloading their offensive line to protect Jay Cutler. It's pretty clear the Bills, Bengals, Chiefs, Raiders and Redskins are trying to get younger. The Redskins had the oldest offensive line in football last season, and they paid the price. Pete Kendall and Jon Jansen are now gone, although they did pick up a good veteran backup in Jeremy Bridges. The Jaguars' moves were more of an illusion. They picked up Tra Thomas, but they are going to go with rookies Eugene Monroe and Eben Britton. It's hard to say what the Lions are doing. They had age along the line. Now, they have more age. That's gotten them in trouble in the past.
Q: Do you think the Wildcat [offense] thing is getting way too much attention? In truth, it worked in one game last year, when the Dolphins caught the Pats off guard with it. When the Fins and Pats met again (and [Bill] Belichick had time to prepare for it), the Pats whooped on Miami. I think many teams -- I'm a Cowboys fan -- should spend a lot more time working on the fundamentals than on playing around with a goofy 1950s high school formation.
From David in Sacramento
A: David, this is a fad that might last a couple of years, but I do believe defensive coaches will catch up to it. Credit the Dolphins with not only trying the idea, but being advanced in how they tried it. Defensive coaches didn't know how to practice against it last year, so the Dolphins were always four steps ahead of their opponents with what they were doing. They might be a step ahead this year, with Pat White doing some of the work at Wildcat. There are limitations to what can be done, and slowly but surely the defensive minds in this league will find a way to slow down the advancement. More of the head coaches of this league are defensive minds. Once one figures out the right formula for stopping it, watch how fast it goes away. Still, it will be a big thing in 2009.
Q: Greetings, John, I am a big-time Falcons fan. I am wondering why the Falcons aren't getting as much respect as they should in the Power Rankings. Chris Houston gets better every year at corner along with the rest of the young players. The Colts won many years with a young and inexperienced defense. Why can't the Falcons?
From Jeremy in Decatur, Ga.
A: Don't worry about the Power Rankings now. Enjoy them as the season progresses. One of the reasons the Falcons got a lower ranking is because of their tough schedule. All the teams in the NFC South were hammered with tough schedules. This isn't a matter of disrespect. What should happen, though, is the Falcons will continue to develop around Matt Ryan and a strong organization. The Falcons hit the jackpot with Ryan. He's the real deal at quarterback. Conventional thought is that a good, young quarterback will struggle in his second season. I think he will only get better. I'll keep saying this until it's proven wrong. The NFC South now goes through Atlanta every year. Now, they won't win the division every season. But you have to first look to Atlanta and see the direction of this division. It will be similar to what you see with Indianapolis in the AFC South.
Q: John, I am a diehard Giants fan, and now that the defense is healthy I think they have most of the pieces for a strong Super Bowl run. However, I am still concerned about their lack of a true No. 1 wide receiver. Hakeem Nicks is a rookie and won't contribute much, and I am not exactly enamored with Domenik Hixon, Steve Smith and Sinorice Moss. What are the chances the Giants still pull off a deal for Braylon Edwards, Anquan Boldin or even Chad Ochocinco?
From Ryan in New York City
A: You hit on the biggest question with the team. We saw the problem in December and January when Eli Manning was blitzed. Without a tall split end to jump up and catch passes to his left, the passing offense was inconsistent. Manning didn't have his go-to guy. It's going to take time for Nicks to develop. I don't doubt his abilities. As much as I believe in building through the draft, I would have made a trade. I would have given up a No. 1 for Braylon Edwards. The Giants weren't going to get Anquan Boldin for the No. 2 and No. 5 they were offering. Giving up a No. 1 and No. 3 might have been too much. But with Edwards in the last year of his contact, I thought he would be the perfect guy to replace Burress.
Q: I'm a Chiefs fan, and I just read that both Brian Waters and Mike Vrabel skipped the "voluntary" OTA session -- after attending the mandatory session over the weekend. To me, this is a joke. It tells me how important football really is to them, especially Vrabel. First of all, Todd Haley and Scott Pioli are promoting Vrabel as this great leader, and saying that they want players who "want to be Chiefs" and their so-called leader from their first major acquisition is a flake! I believe in Pioli as a GM, but this looks really bad to me. I give Waters a little slack because he was on board with the program until Haley insulted him. Pioli needs to admit his mistake and get rid of Vrabel now.
From B.J. in Sacramento
A: There is no question the new management inherited some problems. The franchise is at a crossroads. Last year they had a great draft, but they were too young. This year they tried to go for some veteran leadership. We'll see how well that works out. This isn't going to be an overnight fix. The Chiefs spoiled their fans by being in contention every year, but that allowed the roster to get too old. They went too long with older players. Too many had to be replaced at one time. Hang in there. Remember the good memories and hope that Haley and Pioli can build the team back to respectability.
John Clayton, a recipient of the Pro Football Hall of Fame's McCann Award for distinguished reporting, is a senior writer for ESPN.com.
- Schefter: On the Saints and Colts
- Rumors: Eagles plan to get nasty
- Millman: How to bet football
- Tools: PickCenter | Game Predictor
- Draft: Mel's Big Board (11/25) | NFL draft blog
