VICK BETTER WITH KIDS THAN DOGS

And although the title is supposed to be funny, it's also very true. I have to commend Vick in what he's doing. After reading about his ten minute speech to freshmen at a Philly charter school, I really think that Vick believed in what he said. Here is a snippet of what he said:

“Growing up, I had dreams and I always wanted to have this great, lavish life and make it to the NFL, go and accomplish great things and leave a great legacy. That was my goal from a young kid,” Vick said. “My future was promising … at some point, I got sidetracked. I started listening to my friends and doing some things that were not ethical and not right.”

This was the main point of his speech to the Philly high school students: being negatively influenced by others, and I think it's a great point. (“I was influenced by so many people when I should have been a leader, not a follower.”) When the media is telling all of us, but especially children and young adults, what they should be doing, eating, saying, buying, etc., it can be hard to know what we should be doing. I think it's great that Vick talked about this and that he had experience with this, especially when it led him to go to jail. Although he may not have been a follower, or he may not be speaking from the heart, but I want to give Vick the benefit of the doubt.

I think everyone, especially children and young adults, are highly influenced by famous people, athletes included. I think that even the act of Vick talking about this issue and how he has gone through it will positively influence many. As long as Vick can acknowledge his problem and how to turn around and fix it, he will be a good role model for those who can see what happens when you choose the wrong path. I really hope that Vick can stay out of trouble. Do it for the kids.

Jaclyn Kahn

GIANTS NERVOUS ABOUT QB LEAK BEFORE SEASON BEGINS

Best opening line in an article: "What's pink, puffy and screams a lot when it's not whining? Right, it's Tom Coughlin!"

You may be asking yourself, well why is he so angry? Did another of his players shoot himself in a crowded club? No, this time, Coughlin, the coach of the New York Giants, is angry because the Washington Redskins recently acquired backup quarterback, Andre Woodson. Just after Woodson learned some Giants' plays, calls, and signals he was shipped over to the Redskins. This is what is making Coughlin see red. Lots and lots of red.

The thing that I don't quite understand is how Coughlin automatically thinks that the Redskins are trying to cheat and learn how they play. Of course if that was the case, then Washington has a brain since they are in the same division as the Giants, and this of course could help them when they play them all TWO times this season. Coughlin needs to relax. I think that he would be someone who would draft a player just to find out impertinent information so that he could get his team to the top. And if he really didn't want that to happen, then maybe he shouldn't have cut Woodson. Problem solved.

I find it funny that Coughlin is calling (or the media is having us believe he is calling) Woodson "Benedict Andre." The simple fact is that if you thought he had any talent at all, you would have kept him on the roster and wouldn't have let him go to any team that wanted him. And speaking of Benedict anyone, I can recall when the "god" QB on the Giants was signed to the San Diego Chargers and refused to play for them until he was traded to the New York Giants. So Benedict Andre doesn't even come across as the bad guy of the organization. He got cut. He went somewhere else. Get over it. Wait and see if the Redskins can beat you this season. IF they beat you all two times, maybe you could make a case for cheating, but it could also be the incredible overhype and under performing ape you call quarterback.

Jaclyn Kahn

CAN YOU GUESS THE MOST VALUABLE AND MOST WORTHLESS TEAMS IN THE NFL?

It might not come as a shock to you which team is the most valuable and which team is the most worthless. And these terms are talking about how much revenue the team has collected. So, let's have you guess which team is the most valuable.

No, it is not the Patriots.
No, it is not the Colts.
Obviously it is neither the Jets or the Bills.

The most valuable team is (drum roll please): The Dallas Cowboys, reaping a total of $1.65 BILLION dollars. I feel like I'm the guy from those lottery commercials. Again, I want to point out that this doesn't mean the Cowboys are the best performing team: as of now, they are currently ranked (offseason)14th in the league. So let's call them a step above mediocre.

Here are the rest of the top five most valuable teams, which was decided by Forbes. Notice where these teams are located, because I bet location has a lot to do with earnings.

2. Washington Redskins
3. New England Patriots
4. New York Giants
5. New York Jets

Okay, so now let's have you guess which team is the most worthless, and by worthless, not the crappiest team in the NFL but the one that earns the least amount of money.

No, it's not the Bills (you jerk!)
No, it's not the Lions, Tigers or Bears (oh my!)
And no, it's not the Rams either.

The most worthless team is... the Oakland Raiders, a team which is currently ranked as the third worst NFL team in the league. Has to make all other teams (except the Rams and Lions... and Bills) feel better.

So if your team hasn't been mentioned as the most worthless, you can breathe a sigh of relief that your team might not be heading anywhere, like the dumpster. However, if you are a fan of one of the bottom five teams (which I will list below), you may want to up how much you spend at the stadium or on your favorite team's merchandise, or find a new team to root for. Me? I've already found one (just in case).

28. Detroit Lions
29. Jacksonville Jaguars
30. Atlanta Falcons
31. Minnesota Vikings (Note: This might change. Read "And Which Jersey Will You Buy?")

Jaclyn Kahn

SLOWNESS OF GAME EVEN BORES MLB OFFICIALS

One of the biggest knocks people have against baseball is the snail-like speed of the game. Unless you are at the game or it is genuinely exciting, it might be more appealing to take a hammer to your head then sit through an entire game. Apparently, MLB officials seem to agree. I found it really interesting when I found out that Boston Red Sox' closer, Jonathan Papelbon, was fined $5,000 for taking too long to throw his first pitch Friday night.

As goofy as this seemed when I first read the article, I think this is a good idea by MLB. Like the NYC honking law, I doubt this rule has ever been enforced, but I say start hampering down on players! Games last longer than they ever have, and most of the time they are not that fun. A typical Yankees or Red Sox game lasts over four hours! I like that MLB took a stand here. I think there are way too many pitchers that take their sweet time between pitches. Nothing drives me more crazy then when a pitcher shakes off the catcher three times then walks off the mound. Pitchers will say this timing rule will throw off their rhythm, but get used to it! After all, you are professional athletes!

I think if MLB is going to crack down on this rule, then it is only fair to impose fines against other players that take too much time to do something. Right now it appears that only pitchers can be fined, but how about expanding this to hitters as well. They are as much to blame for the length of games these days. A batter should not be allowed to step out of the batters' box after every pitch. Think about how much time would be saved if a batter didn't wonder around doing who knows what between pitches. I have personally perfected the art of running to the kitchen to pour a drink and returning to the TV before the next pitch is thrown. I heard Bud Seliq a couple years ago say there was an understanding between umpires and hitters about stepping out of the box. However, I've never seen an umpire get into it with a player about taking his time. Seliq says a lot of things, but we all know he is a joke of a commissioner.

I normally rip baseball for their decisions, as it is a horribly run league, but I'll give them credit for this. Thanks for finally thinking of the fans who do not want to watch games till all hours of the night. Unfortunately, I doubt any extensive time rules will pass through the Players' Union, and I am sure Papelbon will appeal and get his five grand back. That is how baseball works after all.

Pat Morgan

FUTURE LOCKOUT = DISTRESS FOR ALL

I just came across an article that has me riled up in more than one way. No it has nothing to do with Brady or Favre, or even Vick, at least not directly. No, the article is all about the idea of a 2011 lockout in the NFL. And no, the lockout won't be because of the football players' union who wants more money. According to this article on Yahoo! Sports, the owners of all 32 teams in the NFL will be the ones who cause this lockout.

First of all, I don't know what I would do with myself in the fall of 2011 if there was no football. I'm sure fans of hockey could tell me how much it stinks to not be able to see the sport of choice. I don't even know if there has ever been a strike in football, and I'm too lazy to go research that. Either way, I know that as a fan, I will be very disappointed if we have no football due to having issues renegotiating salaries.

Second, I am actually surprised it's not going to be a strike from the union. What bothers me is that owners and managers have been forking over big bucks for the players that they want. Salaries that might almost be comparable to baseball players. So in theory, if these owners didn't try to outbid one another for rookies and star players, there wouldn't be as much of an over-salaried player. Football players don't make as much as baseball players do, and there is a good reason why. Salary caps are there for a reason people, so stop paying big bucks for rookies you haven't even used yet! (cough cough Jets cough cough). Feeding the fire only causes more fire.

Next, if owners are going to have a lockout, then they are going to lose a crap load of money. Think of all of the accessories, jerseys, clothing, food, memorabilia, etc that will not be sold, and that is just at the stadium! I know that if my Bills aren't playing then I'm most likely not going to be buying t-shirts or jerseys or anything because there would be no reason to wear them (unless I have a make believe season in my head and the Bills are coming out as the number one team, although somehow they would be losing then too...) I understand that the owners wouldn't be shelling out as much cash to their players, but they wouldn't really be making any profit on anything, except for die hard fans that might buy some things for Christmas or something like that.

Most of the article is about how players should be more conservative with their money, especially since their is this fear about a lockout. Honestly, and this might be because I don't make the kind of money they do, but players should already know that they should be conservative with their money. Save some of it for Christ sake! I would think whether or not there is a lockout, players who burn through their big dollar paychecks are going to end up in financial trouble anyway. Understandably, once the money stops coming, there will be more of an issue of "poverty" and debt. I have to say (and I guess I am going back on my word about how this won't be about Vick) but he was in financial trouble and that didn't have anything to do with a lockout.

All in all, I think that a lockout sucks for everyone involved, but most importantly, for the fans. Both owners and players have to realize that the NFL is for the fans. All of the merchandise, all of the winning and losing, it's for the fans. Without it's fans, the NFL would be nothing like it is today. We are the ones who keep it running, and sometimes that is true in the financial sense. I think that owners and players and the unions should figure out some way for the players to continue to play, to not be selfish, and think of the fans.

Jaclyn Kahn

JUST SAY NO TO BRANDON MARSHALL!

The hot football topic the last couple days here in New York has been whether the Jets should trade for Pro Bowl wide receiver, Brandon Marshall. The Jets clearly could use a big time receiver in their offense, and Marshall would definitely give them just that as he has had over 100 catches in each of the last two seasons. However, his attitude in Denver lately combined with his troubled legal history has me hoping the Jets go in a different direction.

On paper the move would look great. The Jets really need to add another receiver at some point. Jerricho Cotchery is a really nice receiver, but he is not a #1. Marshall would give the Jets that weapon, but is it worth bringing in someone of his character for a couple high picks and David Harris? I say no!

It takes a lot of guts for me to admit to watching such a horrible show, but Woody Paige on Around the Horn made a great point about Marshall. He is really one legal offense from being suspended for a year under Roger Goodell's new behavioral policies. Yes, the Jets would not have to pay him if that happened, but they would not get those high draft picks back. I don't think it is smart to bring in a guy which such problems to any team, but especially a team located across the river from New York City. I would save those picks to get a good wide-out in the 2010 draft or in hopes that the Cardinals try and trade Anquan Boldin again.

Even if Marshall is a good citizen off the field, he has become a really headache on the field for the Broncos. He has been skipping practice, not flying with the team to preseason games, and even when he is around, he acts like such a child. It's been said that during practice he has batted down balls thrown in his direction if they were not thrown right. If the Jets got Marshall, I would root for good things obviously, but I rather not take the chance with him. If Brett Favre was still the quarterback, I would say maybe, but I rather not subject the rookie quarterback to his antics. A veteran could deal with it, but he could make life absolutely miserable for Mark Sanchez and possibly ruin his development.

Pat Morgan

P.S. I swear I don't ever watch Around the Horn! I was just really bored yesterday afternoon!

WRIGHT RETURNS AFTER BEING HIT IN THE HEAD

David Wright returned to the field last night just two weeks after being plunked in the head by a Matt Cain fastball. At the time, the New York Mets figured their star third baseman would be lost for the season like almost all their other stars. It certainly did not look good, but thankfully Wright avoided any major post concussion issues. I am not a Mets fan, but it is good to see any player who sustains such a serious blow to the head return to the field.

I realize the Mets season is lost and it really does not really matter in the standings that Wright has returned, but it is a big lift emotionally for a team that has seen everything go wrong this season. Maybe this should be the time when management names Wright their team captain. The Mets clearly need to re-tool many parts of their team, but making Wright the face of the franchise is the right move right now. He has had trouble hitting in the clutch, as Mets fans will be quick to point out, but he plays hard every night and hardly ever misses a game. Unless they get an unbelievable deal for him, they should want him as their captain.

I mentioned the Mets need to cut ties with some of their core. I think Jose Reyes should be the first one out the door. When things are going well he can be more valuable than Wright, but he has been way to inconsistent and weird lately. He just absolutely disappeared this season with an injury no one has given an exact answer to. I am sure Mets fans will be split on this issue. Believe me I know, as for some reason many Met fans have chosen me as someone to vent to about their team. Hello! 101 years since my team last won a title! Seriously though, trade Reyes, keep Wright, and your team will be much more stable for it.

Again, it was great to see Wright return to the field last night. Even if he's choosing to wear a helmet other players make fun of him for. Can you blame Wright for taking extra precaution after being drilled in the head though? I don't, but I like the reference Brian Costa, from the Star-Ledger, uses for Wright wearing that helmet. How dare he give me the raspberry?!?

http://www.nj.com/mets/index.ssf/2009/09/david_wright_says_he_will_keep.html

Pat Morgan