Week Eight Picks ... Plus some NBA Ramblings

It's that magical time of the week again, when I get to force myself to sit down, make my picks, and see what else comes out in the process. Today, there is the unique situation that is the NBA lockout (A.K.A. the lockout that nobody ever heard of or cared about). It appears that the NBA lockout is coming to an end shortly, and so we're left to determine what that means to us. For the vast majority of sports fans it will mean very little, and that is a huge indicator of how dramatically David Stern misplayed his hand here. The owners well very vocal about their willingness to miss an entire season if need be, yet here they are running back to the table hoping to not miss one regular season game. Why would that be? I would posit that it is because the owners suddenly realized that they were having the proverbial lockout ... about which nobody cared.

To that end, if very few fans were legitimately sad about the lockout, how many could they expect to come back after a year. Hockey has experienced a resurgence recently, years after they canceled their own season via lockout, but Hockey has the same core fans it always had. The NBA has no such luck. Much of their boom in popularity in the 1990s came from general sports fans who were attracted to watching the greatest of all time. The lockout in 1999 gave them a convenient excuse to move on to something else ... baseball, football ... and only recently have some of those fans come back. Now, they see little reason to stick, and with the NFL having resolved their own labor impasse, with baseball rolling along, why would they?

But in the midst of all of this I listened to an interview with Billy Hunter, one in which Hunter misspoke several times, and generally made himself sound like a fool. Still, one concept jumped out at me. Hunter stated rather clearly that the plight of his players was like the plight of "everyman" in that "the MAN" was trying to arbitrarily cut their income. Hunter implied that this wasn't legal, was practically "un-American," and that it shouldn't be allowed to happen.

Now, those of you who know me well know that I try to keep my personal life out of this blog, but in this situation I can't help myself. For anyone working in the social service field right now in the state of Indiana what Hunter has said is downright hysterical. No matter how bad Hunter and his cronies feel David Stern is, I can point my fingers at someone much more Machiavellian in his actions, and much more successful. Ladies and Gentlemen, Director of the Department of Children Services for the State of Indiana: Jim Payne



Now, to understand the man, in a short moment, you just need to understand what he did with his budget this year. Director Payne took the budget that Mitch Daniels gave him, then handed it back and said "give me 30% less." He then proceeded to whip all his regional directors into shape to spend even less than that depreciated budget. Then he took the amount saved, and took THAT out of their budget for next year. He has sent memos out threatening discipline for case workers who place in certain programs. This is all fact.

Now, if Indiana was struggling financially this could be expected. This man, and his Governor, are, after all, hard core fiscal conservatives, the kind who cut indiscriminately in order to get the budget right. But, as Mitch is all too happy to report, our state is currently running a $1.2 billion surplus. Hold on, let's look at that with the zeros: $1,200,000,000. So these cuts are on top of that surplus. And when Director Payne sent out his rates for next year, after all this success and savings, he still cut rates by an average of 35-40% next year. Some agencies took a hit of as high as 50% of their rates; the smallest hits were in the 20-25% range. Of course, they can do this because they are the government, and they make the rules. It is estimated that over 80% of agencies will be unable to survive these cuts, and that will lead to a huge spike in unemployment across the state. Of course they don't care, because this fits Mitch's fairy tail: I came to Indiana, I turned the state into a money maker, I left with a great budget on the books.

So to Billy Hunter, I'd like to say this: go to Hell. You think that the NBA owners are being fascist for asking for 3% more in all basketball related income to go to their end? It still ends up with your union being the highest paid union, per person, in the WORLD. Higher than MLB, NFL, or any other sporting unions. Guess what? If they cut the percentage of income guaranteed to the players by 50% your players would still be millionaires if they were smart. The league minimum wage right now? For a rookie (0 years experience) $473,604. For a year. I'm not going to broadcast my salary over the internet, but let's just say it would take me well over a decade to be able to earn that much money. The more you complain about this, and try to make it seem like you're fighting the good fight for "everyman" the more you seem completely out of touch and make me root for ownership. Even if they are suggesting cuts it's nowhere near the type of draconian cuts that I'm dealing with right now. Get a reality check you jack-ass, and get back to playing basketball for the fifteen fans who still give a damn.

On to the picks:

Last Week Against the Spread: 8-4-1
Last Week Straight Up: 10-3

Season Against the Spread: 52-46-5
Season Straight Up: 71-32

EARLY GAMES

Indianapolis (+9) over Tennessee - Is there anyway this line should actually be this high? Both teams got crushed last week, and while the Colts looked much worse they are also the unquestioned worst team out of these two and were playing the better team. A nine point spread? ESPN's insider has the game at a six point spread, but if I've got to pick on the nine point line I'll take the Colts to cover based on this logic: if Jim Caldwell lays another egg he might be fired before he gets a chance to make it to week nine. I'll take the Titans to win based on this logic: they are the better team, and much like Houston last week, they now face a MUST WIN game if they want to stay alive in the playoff hunt. I just can't see the Colts, who played a number of teams tough, getting killed in this one.

Saints (-14) over St. Louis - If Dallas could cover a large spread against St. Louis, and if New Orleans continues to move along at a good clip like last week, this shouldn't be a problem, even considering the game is on the road.

Giants (-10) over Miami - Miami almost blew the "Suck for Luck" sweepstakes last week; they won't make the same mistake twice. In other news, Tony Sporano's house is reportedly up for sale. I'm a little surprised it wasn't up for sale this past summer when ownership was aggressively courting Jim Harbaugh.

Panthers (-4) over VikQueens - Carolina may, in fact, be this year's good bad team. Good enough to beat the bad teams, bad enough to lose to all the good teams. Time will tell, but if they are this game should be easy.

Ravens (-13) over Arizona - Only because it's Arizona (a bad team) coming east. Otherwise I'd go the other way to punish the Ravens for that no-show against Jacksonville. This line is even higher, but I need Flacco to have a great game this week because Aaron Rodgers is on his bye week ... so Flacco is my starting QB in fantasy land. I think that I should still be able to start Rodgers and get 30 points even on his bye: they guy has been so money he should be able to do that as well, right?

Texans (-10) over Jags - I don't like this line at all; it's like they are just trying to screw with me. On the one hand, you've got Jacksonville just coming off of not just covering the spread against Baltimore, but winning the game. Then you've got Houston, coming off a thrashing of Tennessee, but due for a classic Texans let down game. It seems like the Jags will cover this spread, but I can't take Blaine Gabbert on the road, even if he is getting ten points.

LATE GAMES

Buffalo (-6) over Washington - Rested Bills going against a flailing Redskins team ... I like the Bills. Also, the Bills should be pissed because they are the "home" team playing in Toronto. Win it for the City of Buffalo, eh?

Detroit (-3) over Denver - two straight losses, the gloss is off a little, and the scheduling Gods deliver Tebowmania. I think Detroit will be praising Jesus after this win. I wonder if Tim will be doing the same? Also, if Knowshon Moreno has a breakout game I might hunt him down personally to ask him why he waited until I cut him, after a few years of having him on my team, to decide he cares. I promise if I held on to him in my fantasy league that McGahee never hurts his hand.

New England (-3) over Pittsburgh - very quietly the Steelers are 5-2, after looking left for dead at the start of this year. This game will go a long way towards determining if they are the team I predicted them to be (tough, veteran, able to take advantage of the lockout shortened off season) or the team that Baltimore exposed week one. Sitting here right now I'm going to say New England will win by a TD, but Pittsburgh will come out and will get the 6 wins in the second half they'll need to win the division.

San Francisco (-9) over Cleveland - did anyone else look at the box score from last week's Browns game and ask "really? Nine total points?" I mean, when the Ravens and Steelers play they get more than that. That wasn't good defense. That was just really bad football.

Cincinnati (-1) over Seattle - Please get Tavaris back on the field. Football Jesus (Whitehurst) emphatically answered "YES!" to the question "is it possible that Tavaris Jackson was really the best option for this team at QB?"

SUNDAY NIGHT

Dallas (+4) over Philadelphia - fresh off a bye week, Vick's nightmare continues. I like DeMarco Murray, and if the Cowboys are smart they'll ride him hard to get Romo's confidence back.

San Diego (-4) over Kansas City - The Chiefs got lucky last week by catching a reeling Raiders team. No such luck this week: they get a pissed off Chargers team instead.

Week Seven Lines ... With Some Cubs Mixed In

I have a number of things on my mind that I'd like to write about, but given the time constraints I'll limit myself to a brief view on the state of the Cubs on the eve of the Theo Epstein era, and then get on to the lines.

Epstein comes to the Cubs having established himself as a giant killer. He killed the Yankees (albeit with a huge payroll) and killed the Curse of the Bambino ... twice. He was the GM who oversaw the 2004 and 2007 championships in Boston, and the renovation and rebirth of Fenway as a modern ancient ballpark. He has the name recognition, and he balances a desire to utilize new age statistic analysis with old school scouting techniques. But does Epstein have the chops to tackle the biggest mystery in major professional sports? That question is not the big one you'd think: why haven't the Cubs won the world series since 1908? That question, instead, is this: how is it possible that the Cubs haven't even been in the World Series since 1945?

The Cubs ineptitude is legendary; songs have been written about it, and it has become a part of the city's mystique. Most people know about the 2003 run that ended with three straight losses to the Florida Marlins. ESPN recently did a documentary on the Steve Bartman game, and the phenomena of "scapegoating" when teams lose. As I watched the documentary with my girlfriend, a Tigers fan, I had to explain what it is to be a Cubs fan. I explained Bartman, but also Gonzalez. I explained the sin that Dusty committed by waiting far too long to come out of the dugout to calm Prior down. I explained the sinking feeling, and what it's like to just know that it isn't going to work out for your team because it just can't. But above all else, something took her by surprise: 2003 was the first playoff series win that the Cubs had since 1908. Think about that.

Now, of course, some of that is due to the old set up, when one team went to the World Series from each league, and there was no playoffs. When the NL and AL started their own championship series there were then only two rounds. But it still drives the point home: the Cubs have one playoff series win since 1908, and prior to 2003 they had none. This is the legendary ineptitude that Theo now faces. The Red Sox won playoff series, and even made World Series with semi-regularity. The Cubs just lose.

That said, Epstein is a good move. I don't believe that he is the best move, and I'll be a bit befuddled if Andrew Friedman ends up leaving Tampa for Los Angeles and the Cubs never really looked into him. Given his impressive track record in Tampa, where he's had a payroll no higher than half of the Cubs annual payroll, and often times only 25% or less of the Cubs payroll, I'd like to see what he could do with the Cubs resources. I think that his scouting acumen, coupled with his discipline in signing contracts, would have been a unique fit for the Cubs. But we know what Theo can do with the Cubs resources. At his best he invests those resources heavily in the draft, building a minor league structure that becomes the backbone of major league teams. At his worst, he dumps tons of the money he has floating around into contracts that are too much for far too long. The last guy, Jim Hendry, had the latter skill down pat. He struggled mightily with the former. Who was the last minor league, before Castro, to be drafted by the Cubs and really thrive? That's the damning epitaph on Hendry's Cubs GM tombstone: Prior ... to Castro. As the Cubs aged they had nobody to step in. When injuries happened, nobody was ready to step in. The lack of young talent took what could have been a decade of playoff baseball in Chicago (from 2003 until present time) and instead gave us three distinct playoff seasons (2003, 2007 and 2008), as well as two almost there, but not quite years (2004 and, to a lesser extent, 2009).

This is essential because any year could be the year if things break just right. Hell, 2003 was nearly the year and it almost assuredly would have been if Alex ****ing Gonzalez hadn't handled that routine double play ball the same way my three year old nephew would have. (In case you were wondering, Gonzalez and Baker is where I lay all the blame for 2003). The Red Sox were not the best team in baseball in 2004 ... but they caught fire at the most unlikely of times (game four of the ALCS, down 3-0 to the Yankees) and didn't lose again. The key is that they had made the playoffs that year, and had a team that was good enough. This year, much like the last time they made a run like this, St. Louis has a pretty average team. They backed in to the playoffs, and had a pretty ugly regular season. Still, like the year they beat the Tigers, they may very well win it all. Any team can catch fire over a 15-19 game stretch. The White Sox in 2005 is another example of this fact: they were not that good, but they caught fire. And now they have what the Cubs haven't since 1908.

So the key to the farm system is that it helps to sustain playoff viability over a longer period of time. Even the Yankees, with their history or trading prospects and losing draft picks to get veterans via trade or free agency, have frequently brought up prospects who help. They practically print money, but they know the importance of cheap in house options that can be accessed on short notice. Hendry never got that memo. Epstein has to remember it. He needs to develop a system that will produce a Bucholtz, Lester, and Pedroia, among others. And that will take time. If I was going to hand write an agenda for Theo, it would look like this:

1. Spend at least 50% more on the draft next year than you did this year.
2. Pay someone to make Soriano go away. You'll have to eat $10 million per year to do it, but he won't be blocking your prospects at least.
3. Give Zambrano one last chance. One of two things will happen: he will show he doesn't have what it takes, and you just cut him, or he will look good, and you sell high on him during a contract year. If you try to cut bait now you gain nothing.
4. Trade Marlon Bird for prospects.
5. Let Aramis walk if he really wants to, and take the draft picks. If he chooses to stay, remind him he must be a leader.
6. Offer Carlos Pena arbitration. If he takes it, great: you have a one year stop gap at 1st with decent numbers and a good glove. If he doesn't, great: you get more draft picks.
7. Trade Carlos Marmol tomorrow.
8. Trade Geo Soto the day after tomorrow.
9. Trade Ryan Dempster in July.
10. Remind yourself that on the big league roster you currently have two untouchables (Castro and Garza) and two almost untouchables (Cashner and Barney). Everyone else can go, all in an effort to build towards tomorrow.

Epstein will hopefully avoid falling into the Pujols/Fielder trap by remembering that good 1st basemen who slug are a dime a dozen, and that a long contract to an elite player is wasted capital at this point. Simply put, the team most likely will not do too great in the next few years. That's why I didn't put "Fire Quade" as the top thing to do. Keeping Quade gives an easy scapegoat when the team is 20 games under .500 in June or July, so I can understand the logic in keeping him. If he does get rid of him, he needs to bring Ryne Sandberg in, no questions asked. I'm not a huge Sandberg apologist, but I do know that he is the only person on the market that would have the unconditional patience from the fans necessary to make it through a few losing years before the team is good again. No matter what direction Epstein decides to go, I hope that a multiple year rebuilding plan is a core concept. If it is the team will be able to build the core to make the playoffs 7 or 8 times in a ten year period of time. That will give them the best chance to win their second playoff series since 1908 ... and make their first World Series since 1945 ... and, by default, their best chance to win their first World Series since 1908.

On to the picks:

Last Week Against The Spread: 6-5-2
Last Week Straight Up: 9-4

Season Against The Spread: 44-42-4
Season Straight Up: 61-29

DAY GAMES

Browns (-3) over Seattle - This game is the consummate toss up in my mind. Whitehurst is making his first start, but he looked better than Jackson for Seattle last week. Cleveland has looked lost most of this year, and Hardesty for Hillis is probably a wash, although there is the potential that Hardesty might go off. It feels like this is a game where Seattle has just a little more gumption, but I'll just ride the favorite and be glad I'm not in a market where I'll have to watch either of these games. What's that? I'm working Sunday? Never mind...

Atlanta (+4) over Detroit - I've given this a good deal of thought, but at the end of the day the San Francisco game feels a bit like a turning point for the Lions, and not the good kind. I still believe that they'll make the playoffs as a wild card, but I also think their over hyped start, particularly when coupled with the nature of their close, come from behind wins, indicates a team that will lose a number of more games. Atlanta needs this game a lot more.

Houston (+3) over Tennessee - This was another tough game to pick. I could talk myself into either team here, particularly with my correct view on Houston falling apart the last few weeks. But Houston needs to win this game to keep the upper hand in the division, and I've got to believe that somehow they'll find a way to win. Otherwise, the Titans may win the division going away ... at 9-7.

Denver (+1) over Miami - Miami has a horrible home record, and Denver has Tebow starting in a defacto home game. I may not buy his skills in the big picture, but in the moment he can carry this team to a victory easily.

San Diego (+1) over NY Jets - a lot of close lines that could go either way this week. I'll pick San Diego because the Sanchize continues to prove me (and his countless other doubters) right with each errant throw.

Chicago (-2) over Tampa Bay - Okay Martz. Cutler cussed at you, then you call an offensive game plan that actually makes sense. You've got me buying in for this week, but don't you dare betray my trust.

Carolina (-3) over Washington - Let's just say that I believe Grossman > Beck. And I wasn't exactly a Grossman apologist. In fact, I was the opposite of that. I was a truth teller. Bad Rex!

LATE GAMES

Oakland (-6) over Kansas City - As scary as it is, this only makes sense if Palmer actually starts. That's how bad Boller is.

Pittsburgh (-4) over Arizona - Pittsburgh can't seem to decide if they want to be good, or bad. Arizona knows they are bad. I think the Steelers can cover this line.

Dallas (-14) over St. Louis - The Rams are bad, and now they start A.J. Feely. I can't wait to see how Tony Romo makes me regret this pick.

Green Bay (-10) over Minnesota - How, in the world, is Dallas a heavier favorite than Green Bay? This is a good line.

SUNDAY NIGHT

New Orleans (-14) over Indy - Indy has a great start on the "Suck for Luck" sweepstakes. Look for New Orleans to help them continue to work towards another once in a generation QB.

MONDAY NIGHT

Baltimore (-9) over Jacksonville - The Ravens handled Houston last week at -8... they should be able to handle Jacksonville at -9.

NFL - Week Six Picks

Last Week Against The Spread: 9-4
Last Week Straight Up: 10-3

Season Against The Spread: 38-37-2
Season Straight Up: 52-25

And so, with a great week overall, I'm sitting fairly pretty heading into week six. Still, last week's lines were pretty easy, not requiring a great deal of thinking. The big shockers (Seattle beating the Giants, the 49ers killing the Bucs) were definitive blows to my logic, but the rest fell in line. Accordingly, this week I'll be sticking to my guns, with minor adjustments to my thinking, particularly as it pertains to the 49ers who appear that they may actually be good.

But before I delve into the lines, let me spare a few moments to comment on the state of my Bears. It seems that now, after years of complaining about Lovie Smith, and pointing out how inept he is, the rest of the world is catching up to my opinion. Everywhere you look there are articles breaking down how poor this team is, and how poorly coached it is. From the front office down there appears to be no semblance of a coherent plan. This truly is a situation where completely cleaning house is necessary ... but they unnecessarily extended Lovie after last year, all but guaranteeing that he will get two more years after this one. The Bears' ownership is far too cheap to can a coach with that much guaranteed money left on the contract.

My Lovie Smith stat of the week for last week was this: after four weeks the Bears had taken 19 time outs. One was taken for the traditional purpose of stopping the clock to conserve time. One was taken as a result of losing a challenge (something that Lovie is better than most at ... but I digress). One was taken because the lineman couldn't tie his shoe. The other SIXTEEN were taken by the offense because they couldn't get lined up right. Think about that... sixteen of nineteen time outs... and that's your Lovie Smith stat of the week.

On to the picks:

DAY GAMES

Atlanta (-4) over Carolina - Cam Newton is the prototype for the Bill Walsh quote right now: he's just good enough to lose you the game. Two years from now? If he can keep his head on straight and mature he may be just great enough to win it all for you.

Indianapolis (+7) over Cincinnati - I can't believe that Cincinnati is 3-2, and I also can't believe that they are a seven point favorite. Marvin Lewis is off to a strong start for coach of the year.

San Francisco (+5) over Detroit - this game is right in the Vegas zone, where I don't know which way to go. I'll ultimately take the points, but hedge my bets by saying Detroit will win. So there.

Green Bay (+15) over St. Louis - Can I get a refund on my St. Louis to win the NFC West bet? I was sucked in like a lot of other people. In other news, Aaron Rodgers is incredibly hot right now, and may just salvage my fantasy season. I've had to pardon Drew Brees before for saving a fantasy season; I'm not sure that I can do the same for Rodgers.

Buffalo (+3) over NY Giants - the Giants, at home, are the favorites, so Vegas is saying these teams are even. I'd buy that evaluation, but I like the roll the Bills are on, and the Giants showed last week that they are vulnerable against the pass. If Tavaris could throw on them I bet Fitzpatrick can as well.

Jacksonville (+13) over Pittsburgh - This doesn't look right... even with a line this high.

Pittsburgh (-13) over Jacksonville - I don't like this either. But okay.

Washington (+2) over Philadelphia - how is Philly favored here? Am I missing something. Or, right. Bad Rex.

LATE GAMES

Oakland (-7) over Cleveland - Don't look now ... but the Raaaaiiiiiiidddddeeeeerrrrrsssss are a pretty decent team.

Houston (+8) over Baltimore - If Matt Schaub plays.

Baltimore (-8) over Houston - If Shaub doesn't play.

Baltimore (-8) over Houston - final answer.

Patriots (-7) over Dallas - this seems too easy.

New Orleans (-5) over Tampa - I like the Saints by a TD in this one.

SUNDAY NIGHT

Bears (-3) over VikQueens - Woo Hoo! I get to pick the Bears!

MONDAY NIGHT

NY Jets (-7) over Miami - With Henne out this should be higher.

Week Five Picks

Getting ready for week five of football ... here are the picks:

Early Games:

Bills (+3) over Eagles: The Dream Team is falling apart, and Michael Vick feels entitled. Not a good combination.

Chiefs (+3) over Colts: I may feel bad for Manning, but I do not yet feel bad for Colts fans. Enjoy the next decade of bad football Indy.

Vikings (-3) over Cardinals: If Minnesota doesn't win this game they have to bench McNabb for Ponder.

Giants (-10) over Seattle: Tavaris looked good last week; I'm doubting that he will repeat the effort.

Tennessee (+4) over Pittsburgh: This game will go a long way towards telling us if Pittsburgh is going to be dealing with the super bowl loser hangover, or can get it back together. I'm doubting that they are going to get it back together given the porous nature of their offensive line.

New Orleans (-7) over Carolina: The cracks are starting to show in the Cam Newton show.

Bengals (-1) over Jacksonville: I'm not sure why Cincinnati is doing well, but they are.

Raiders (+5) over Houston: for Al.

LATE GAMES

Tampa (+3) over San Francisco: the 49ers have looked good, but this should be a real test of their non-NFC West legitimacy.

Chargers (-4) over Denver: this line is this low because San Diego has not seemed capable of covering higher lines, right?

New England (+8) over NY Jets: the Jets are reeling; the Pats smell blood in the water and want to redeem themselves for laying an egg last year in the playoffs.

SUNDAY NIGHT

Packers (-6) over Atlanta: Let's just say that Aaron Rodgers killed the Falcons last year in the playoffs, and the Atlanta defense is worse this year.

Detroit (-6) over Chicago: Jay Cutler, meet Ndamakong Suh. He's going to be on you all night long...

Week Three against the spread: 8-8
Week Three straight up: 11-5

Week Four against the spread: 7-9
Week Four straight up: 10-6

Overall against the spread: 29-33-2
Overall straight up: 42-22

On Life

Periodically I feel driven to write about something based on something I've read. Normally this happens when I'm either: A) royally pissed about something, or B) shocked and numbed by something. Today's treatise happens to be a unique combination of both. I don't promise that this will be deep and thought provoking anymore than I can promise that ever. Sometimes I hit the mark; often times I miss. But I do feel like right now is a good time to share with you some of my personal philosophy, particularly on life in general.

Today I finally got around to reading the excerpt that Sports Illustrated had from Jeff Pearlman's new book on Walter Payton. The book has taken a great deal of heat lately for taking an iconic figure, best known for being an amazing running back and an even better person, and running him through the mud via bringing out all the skeletons in his closet. And it does this a full twelve years after the man passed away tragically, well before his time. I've heard the vehement crack back against Pearlman from the likes of Mike Ditka, Mike Singletary and Brian Urlacher. I've heard the halfhearted defenses from some in the Chicago sports media, promising us that the author was only doing his job as a journalist. And I've talked to a few people about it, seeking out their views on the issue.

I'll be the first to say that it pained me to read through the excerpt. I'll also say up front that I will undoubtedly own the book someday after I run into it for $3.00 at the bargain book store or Amazon.com, mostly because that's where all sports books go, and I have a book buying addiction. But the excerpt mostly got me thinking of the reason why the reaction was so vehemently against Pearlman. Honestly, you are hard pressed to find anyone who will stand up and say "yup, that was Walter, he was suicidal, depressed, hiked up on pain killers, and generally negative in life after the NFL." But why the negative reaction? Ditka, Singletary and the likes almost seem as if they are defending a Saint or a war hero with their adamant rebukes of Pearlman's work. The answer, in fact, may sit firmly in that last thought.

Hero ... can a football superstar truly be a hero? Charles Barkley famously articulated the concept that he was not a "role-model" and that he didn't want to be. What was lost in translation for much of the media who belittled Chuck for "dodging" his status as a defacto role model was that his argument was actually quite sound. "Stop looking to me to raise your child from an NBA game and commercials and step up and do it yourself" was really the gist of Barkley's sentiment. On the flip side, the media is right: Barkley was a role model, whether he liked it or not, because kids will always look up to those they wish to become. Hell, a good many adults will do the same thing. Both sides were right, and both were also wrong. It all depended on your point of view.

And still, what hurts the most about the new revelations about Payton, true or not, is mired in that same controversy. In this case it comes down to one question about Payton: hero or not? Walter the player was brilliant, but he also played right before the dawn of the new media age which would lionize sports stars like Michael Jordan, Tiger Woods and Peyton Manning. That Payton was an all time great is not in question if you watched the tape, but what made him more than a football icon was the way in which he carefully crafted an image that was supported by all those around him. If the book is right he was a part of a sham marriage for the last decade plus of his life ... but his wife has nary a negative word to say about him. She stood by him until the end. She did not take the opportunity to make it a big deal, to allow it to tear apart Walter's image. If what the book professes is true, many other key players around Payton had the same opportunity ... and passed on taking the man down.

What does that tell us? It's impossible to say for certain, but if I had to guess I'd say that it reveals one simple fact: Walter Payton was bigger than life, and served a greater purpose as an idea than he did as a man. And those around him understood that, and worked hard to protect that image. Mike Singletary famously had a fallout with Payton due to Walter's infidelity ... yet he came back to his side in the end to make peace, counsel his friend as he headed towards death, and now stands up to defend him. Mike Ditka still has his back over a decade after he passed. Something about Payton's legacy is worth defending it ... and these people are defending in an outspoken, forceful way.

And that leads me to the opposite of Payton's death: the sudden and extremely unexpected death of Apple icon Steve Jobs. The man who created Apple, was forced out, then came back to Apple when it was on the scrap heap and built it into a mega power in the media world. The same Jobs who stepped down as CEO barely more than a month ago. Last I checked, we don't even know what happened. The media speculates it was cancer, or something of that ilk, but for all we know it could have been a car crash. Jobs in death is much the same as in life: shrouded in intentional mystery. Jobs is the anti-Payton: there is no image to protect here beyond that of a brilliant business man. You could tell me anything about Jobs personal life at this point from him being a devout Catholic to him routinely flying to Taiwan to solicit prostitution, and I'd probably not be able to argue with you. We don't know him. Many may admire him. But we don't know him.

Jobs legacy will be in the tangible: Apple is now a major world player, and it wouldn't have been without his return. The IPod you use daily is a reminder of him. The IPhone that your friends are falling over themselves to use is a reminder. If you are super geeky, the computer you have is a reminder of him. But very few people will draw on Steve Jobs, the person, for inspiration. Many people, conversely, draw on Walter Payton the person for inspiration. Steve Jobs was a person. Walter Payton became something more: a concept, an idea ... a hero.

It's all summed up in the title of Payton's book: Never Die Easy. It's a simple concept that is illustrated beautifully in the way he ran the football: don't take the easy way out, and if you are going to fail then do so giving it your all. It's a creed you can live by. And when we take an assault to the idea that we have raised up ... to the hero we idolize ... then we react very negatively. That's what your seeing around the nation as Pearlman's book gets its ten seconds of fame before it will undoubtedly fade into nothing, and then eventually into my bookshelves off of the discount rack. We need Payton now more than ever because he is not a man, or the memory of a man, but the memory of something we all can hold on to for strength. And we are not alright with someone trying to wake us up to a simple and extremely beautiful fact: we are all human. It's what gives us life, that imperfection that allows us to fail and allows us to experience joy when we succeed. Walter Payton may or may not have done the things outlined in the book. I don't know, and honestly I don't even care. Because at the end of the day I know that there are two Walter Paytons living inside my mind: the man and the idea. The man may have been flawed, but it doesn't matter because I didn't know him. The idea is the athlete, the greatest of all time, the hero. I know him deeply ... and he will live on inside of me forever.