Despite the Dolphins struggles this season, Nick Saban still has few peers when it comes to building a team.

Opinions make the sports world go 'round. My feeling is this: I liked Saban a lot coming into this job, and his year and a half in Miami has only very slightly dimmed his luster in my eyes. He's 12-13 in trying to revive a sinking ship. Give him time, and I think at the end of Year Three you'll see a very good NFL team. Saban's too bright a football mind to fail.

STEVE WANTS ME TO RANK THE COACHES. I WILL, WITH AN ASTERISK. From Steve of New York City: "Regarding your assertion that Nick Saban is a top five NFL coach, could you please let your readership know which eight of the following NFL coaches who have, you know, actually accomplished something at this level, don't quite measure up to Saban: Parcells, Belichick, Dungy, Holmgren, Reid, Cowher, Gibbs, Fox, Shanahan, Billick, Fisher and Gruden? I don't understand how anyone could rate Saban higher than all but four of that list of coaches. In 10 years, who knows, but right now, he sure hasn't shown it.''

Steve, it would be pretty easy to line up the winningest coaches, in order, and say they're the best coaches in the game. Chuck Knox has more wins than Paul Brown. Steve Owen has more wins than Bill Belichick, Jim Mora (the father) more than Bill Walsh. But would you say Knox, Owen or Mora was a better coach than any of the other three? No. The number of wins is not the way to rank coaches, particularly one who has coached 25 NFL games. But you asked for my top five NFL coaches. I'm going to answer the question this way -- which coach would I take if I were starting a team right now? Because it's silly to pick guys who might be in their last year, or last two years (e.g. Parcells, Holmgren, Gibbs), in my opinion. In some order, my top six: Belichick, Shanahan, Fox, Reid, Saban, Dungy. Hard to cut that to five. All of them are premier coaches.

PATRIOT BRAIN DRAIN. From Vernon Harmon of Wheeling, Ill.: "A thought occurred to me over the weekend regarding New England. Yes, they have had some personnel defections recently and some injuries, but I'm starting to think that the real difference in the Patriots is the loss of Charlie Weis' play-calling, game-planning, and game-day adjustments. Consider what Weis has done at Notre Dame and how Brady has been very good but not quite as magical as he used to be, especially in big games. What do you think?''

I think you're right. You look at all the bright men who have left Belichick's staff -- Weis, Mangini, Romeo Crennel, Jeff Davidson -- and you have to think it's had an impact. I agree that Weis' play-calling helped Brady a lot, and I know he misses having him around. But every successful coaching staff loses coaches. I think the New England defense is playing better with Dean Pees running things instead of Mangini, so you can't use brain drain as the reason for all their failures.''

I DON'T THINK JIM LIKES ME MAKING ANY POLITICAL COMMENTS. From Jim Fitzpatrick of Milwaukee: "Mr. King, why do smart, talented people who command an audience for a skill unrelated in any way to politics go out of their way to alienate half their audience by uttering any sort of political commentary that could possibly be portrayed as partial to one party or the other? Even if they are so self-absorbed that they actually believe people care what their political leanings are, why risk it? Given your comments about last Tuesday's election in this week's Monday Morning Quarterback, I thought you would be a good person to ask.''

Jim, I am a person who lives in the United States, and I have opinions about disparate things like coffee, TV shows, social mores, movies and political trends. When I began "Monday Morning Quarterback'' a decade ago, I was told to bring my personality into the column. I rub people the wrong way on a lot of things. That's life. And I spent nine words out of 5,600 in this week's column to make a political comment. If that makes people stop reading the column, that's the way it goes.

HOW COULD I CHOOSE RIVERS OVER MCNABB? From Ron, of San Francisco: "Can you please explain how you would choose Bulger, Palmer, Hasselbeck, Rivers and Brees over McNabb if you had to choose a QB to start a franchise? That is ludicrous. Besides Brady and Manning, he's the winningest QB of this decade; he's been to four NFC Championships. I am aghast that you wrote that.''

Lots of people were. I guess I hold the Eagles' postseason performance more against McNabb than I hold the Colts' against Manning, fair or unfair. McNabb has let the Eagles down several times in January; in the Eagles' four season-ending playoff losses with McNabb under center, his quarterback rating is 73.1, 19.3, 75.4 and 58.5. And it's probably knee-jerk based on half a season of work, but I really like the upside of Philip Rivers a lot (a 66 percent passer with a plus-10 TD-to-interception ratio). Bulger's vastly underrated. Brees is the MVP of the first half of this season. Hasselbeck's a big-armed, confident guy whose best football's ahead of him. Palmer will be OK when his knee is. That's how I'd explain it. It isn't that I don't like McNabb. He'd be the next guy on my list, probably, my eighth-rated quarterback if I were starting a franchise right now.

LAY OFF SPURRIER. From Kent Miller, of Raleigh, N.C.: "Would you criticize Jon Gruden the same way you did Steve Spurrier? Remember his Tampa Bay team in 2003 had three kicks in a game blocked by Carolina as well.''

I don't remember that, and Gruden having won a Super Bowl would mitigate me calling me calling for his head. But it's ridiculous. In Spurrier's case, my point was it's absolutely ridiculous -- and mindful of some of the head-scratching stuff we saw when he coached the Redskins -- for a big-time college team to NOT be able to figure out how to block an onrushing defensive front in a placekicking situation.