E-Mailing It In

Will Roger Goodell suspend Plaxico Burress, and if so, for how long? Stephen Dunn/Getty Images

Each week, Dan Rubenstein, Ty Hildenbrandt and Jacob Osterhout will jump on e-mail and riff about various subjects in the news offered up by SI.com's Jimmy Traina.

Traina: What should Roger Goodell do about Plaxico Burress and Michael Vick? Should they both be allowed to play in 2009?

Hildenbrandt: Well, Goodell has taken a hard-line approach ever since becoming commissioner a few years ago, and until this point, his most notable decisions surrounding personal conduct have involved Pacman Jones. In other words, it hasn't exactly been rocket science. So, while I do believe in second chances, I also think he needs to stick to his guns and hand down additional punishment to Burress and Vick, if only to avoid looking like a hypocrite.

Rubenstein: If they're both completely cleared by Johnny Law, they should both be given some sort of probationary shot at playing, most likely after a suspension. From a purely football standpoint, how Vick's season plays out is infinitely more interesting than anything happening inside Brett Favre's shoulder. As for Burress, I'm not sure I want to be a fan of a league without at least one guy named "Plaxico." If nothing else, please think of the team name opportunities in fantasy leagues everywhere.

Osterhout: Nobody ruffles my feathers like Kaiser Roger Goodell. When did the NFL commissioner become God's right-hand man? Michael Vick has already been punished, and punished harshly by the American justice system. He's paid his price. He's done his time. Suspending him from the NFL serves no further purpose other than provide a cheap show of power. Does Goodell believe he understands justice better than U.S. judges? And how can he even determine an appropriate punishment for Burress when his trial hasn't even occurred? It seems to me Goodell piling on more punishment for a quarterback who already spent 23 months in the slammer and a wide receiver who is so dumb he shot himself in the leg is gratuitous and self-serving.

Hildenbrandt: Jacob, the issue of whether Roger Goodell should have "kaiser" credentials is an entirely separate ball of wax. Whether it's piling on is almost irrelevant: he's in charge of the league and seems determined to nip any potential image problems in the bud. Right now, I'm looking at this like I do a bad MLB umpire -- as long as he's consistent for everyone, I'm content. In reality, there's a better question we should be asking: Who will have jurisdiction to reprimand Goodell if he decides to send our precious Super Bowl overseas at some point in the future?

Osterhout: Listen, I understand Goodell is in charge of the league's image, and as long as the NFL is raking in money, we shouldn't question his judgment. But the law of Goodell must not supersede the law of the United States. As of now, Plaxico is innocent and Goodell would be wise to let the courts weigh in before he re-mounts his high horse.

Rubenstein: It's a new era in the NFL, and Goodell's at the helm, like it or not. The league is its own universe, and the sooner players and fans realize this, the better. As long as the league is making money and growing, it's difficult to criticize the moral direction the commissioner is taking the league in. Aside from Ty's fear of Bulgaria getting a team (most likely in Sofia or Plovdiv), players are getting their shots, even if they have to be on their very best behavior. Vick and Burress simply need to play the game to play the game, if that makes any sense.

Hildenbrandt: Make no mistake, if Bulgaria got a team, the NFL would be dead to me. That is, of course, if it were a team other than the Lions.

Rubenstein: Please, you wouldn't read Chris Cooley's blog if the Redskins were sent overseas? I'm fine with a little less Daniel Snyder in my life, actually.

Gorging on hot dogs -- entertaining, dumb or both? Stan Honda/Getty Images

Traina: Very inspired debate. I say if Leonard Little can be in the league, anyone can be in the league. Moving on... the hot-dog eating contest is this weekend. Personally, I find the event ridiculous, and I'm fascinated mainstream media covers it strictly because it's on ESPN. The bottom line is that I wouldn't watch it if it took place in my backyard. (I stole that line from Mike and the Mad Dog). Anyway, am I being too hard on the event? Is it just a fun, harmless thing? Will you watch? How many hot dogs can you eat in one sitting?

Hildenbrandt: Of course it's a ridiculous event, but that's why it's so fascinating. And I'd be willing to bet that if Kobayashi and Joey Chestnut's shark teeth showed up in your backyard and started pounding hot dogs, you'd be mildly amused. My only problem with the contest is that it occurs in such close proximity to lunch time on the on the East Coast. You absolutely, positively CANNOT watch this event before eating lunch, and I don't care if you've got a cast-iron stomach for all things potentially nauseating. But otherwise, I'm a huge fan of putting ridiculous competitions on television. Poker? Darts? Rock-paper-scissors? Why not! And on a personal note, my record is six hot dogs in one sitting at Yocco's Hot Dogs in Allentown, Pa.

Rubenstein: Is it weird that I set my alarm on the Fourth (I'm on the West Coast) to be up in time to watch borderline social outcasts devour dozens of hot dogs? Actually, you don't need to answer that, it was rhetorical. I watch it every year, and I'm not even sure why. I entered an eating contest for an SI.com video and the people running these competitions are so comically serious about overeating, it's almost charming. The best part about the July 4 contest isn't the actual consumption, but rather the personalities and their introductory résumés.

Osterhout: I think ESPN shows the hot-dog eating contest simply because nothing else is on TV. This time of year, we've got baseball and bass fishing, that's it. Not even fat people watch the hot-dog eating competition. It's just not that much fun to witness grown men shoving hot dogs down their gullets. Although, it's a good subject to read about. The drama is there. This rivalry between Joey Chestnut and Takeru Kobayashi is reminiscent of Larry and Magic -- if Magic had been a 5-foot-8, 128-pound Japanese man.

Rubenstein: To me, what hurts the integrity of the Nathan's contest is that Kobayashi has a weird stomach disorder that's actually an unfair advantage. I was watching a special about him (possibly on MTV) and they said that his stomach rests lower in his body than it should, which allows food to stack up in his gut more than it would in a normal person's. Somewhere, Skip Bayless is outraged.

Hildenbrandt: Dan mentions an MTV special... aren't there limitless reality TV possibilities for competitive eaters? How has this not been pursued? Wouldn't it be fun to disguise Kobayashi and Chestnut and turn them loose at the Bellagio buffet, or even at a cheap Old Country buffet in a Philly suburb? Someone get Jeff Probst on the phone, let's make this happen.

Rubenstein: I believe it was True Life: I'm a Competitive Eater, which I'd happily watch again if given the choice between that and any summer network programming. I don't think I Can Dance (I know it). Also, to answer Jimmy's last question, I haven't pushed myself with hot dogs, but since I'm not a huge guy, I figure I could push my gut to five or six dogs if eaten at a normal pace, possibly eight or nine at a competitive pace.

Osterhout: I've heard that Kobayashi weird stomach-disorder story before. Some might call it an unfair advantage, but remember, Pete Maravich had gumby ankles that allowed him to basically run with his shins parallel to the floor, and nobody was crying that he had an unfair advantage. Of course, Maravich hid his ankles under those droopy socks so maybe Kobayashi needs to change up his wardrobe.

Hildenbrandt: As long as Kobayashi wasn't surgically altered, Six-Million Dollar Man-style, I say it's all fair. More power to him for finding his calling as the world's foremost authority on eating an obscene amount of hot dogs in a relatively short period of time. Godspeed.

Traina: I'd still never watch. Next subject: A 13-year-old has committed to play football at Tennessee. Is this disturbing? Should there be an age restriction on when someone can commit?

Rubenstein: Well, verbal commitments are non-binding (going both ways), so it's probably not nearly as big a deal as some people are making it out to be. If the kid turns out to be great, then Lane Kiffin in turn looks great, if not, oh well. Really, offering kids this early seems like it would affect the 8th-9th-10th grader more than it ever would a college team or its coach. It's kind of sad, but ultimately harmless to college sports.

Osterhout: It would be disturbing if this sort of thing didn't happen in college basketball all the time. Truth be told, this sort of commitment doesn't actually mean much. I'd be willing to bet that the 13-year-old does not actually end up playing football at Tennessee. Too many things can happen in the next five years to break this commitment.

Hildenbrandt: Actually, Jacob, it'd only be disturbing if it occurred somewhere other than a program run by Lane Kiffin. At this point, you'd have to think he's just doing things for shock value -- literally anything is possible. Hell, if he's doing things like this in front of the media, what's he doing to impress the players he already has? Bonging goldfish? Bench-pressing trucks? It's like that scene in Seven, when Morgan Freeman informs Brad Pitt that he wouldn't be surprised if Kevin Spacey's head split open and a UFO were to fly out.

Osterhout: By his own admittance, this 13-year-old recruit, Evan Berry, has no idea what's going on in his universe. "It's the only college I know right now and it seems the best for me," Berry told Rivals.com. Chances are you don't marry your middle school girlfriend. Chances are, Berry explores more options in the future. And I agree, Lane Kiffin is living in some alternative universe where making the headlines is the ultimate sign of success. I think a little bit of Al Davis rubbed off on him. Ask anyone who has played with Terrell Owens: crazy is contagious.

Hildenbrandt: If the NCAA isn't going to create some sort of age restriction, then I vote that this capability be immediately added to NCAA 2010 before it arrives in stores next month. While it would be somewhat creepy to scout junior high schools for potential talent, it'd be another selling point other than the addition of Erin Andrews.

Rubenstein: Basically, if Evan Berry turns out to be as good as his brother was in high school, Lane Kiffin gets to say "Hey, I saw it and believed in you before anyone else," in two or three years, when other coaches start coming around. This is all so Kiffin gets the credit in four years when somebody else is winning with his players. Basically a Ty Willingham situation at Rocky Top.

Osterhout: How exactly do you go about recruiting a 13-year-old without seeming like a creepy old man? You can't really bring him to campus to party because he's in middle school. You can't even take him to an R-rated movie. Instead of co-eds and kegs, I guess you ply him with video games and lemonade.

Hildenbrandt: For sure, all recruiting activities would need to be cleared by a "Creepy Old Man" Czar. I nominate Chris Hansen. Also, since most 13-year olds are jobless and without income, what would constitute "illegal benefits"? Would it be legal for coaches to pay for visits to Chuck E. Cheese's?

Rubenstein: It would be fantastic to read the transcripts of an NCAA hearing in which Kiffin was accused of secretly supplying Yu-Gi-Oh! cards to eighth and ninth grade football players. Honestly, if I were 13 and somehow a transcendent athlete, I think all it would take for me to commit would be pizza, a two-liter bottle of soda, and maybe a couple of Playboys. For the articles. To really get a good writing foundation for high school English. Oh, and some sort of season laser-tagging pass. I miss laser tag.

Hildenbrandt: And pogs. Don't forget pogs.

Everyone loved Macaulay Culkin's portryal of Kevin in 'Home Alone.' Courtesy of 20th Century Fox.

Traina: Here's the real reason I brought up the 13 year old: Who is your all-time favorite child actor?

Osterhout: Hands down, no contest, my favorite child actor is Jeff Cohen, better known as Chunk from The Goonies. I can't tell you how many times I've done the truffle shuffle or yelled, "Hey, you guys!" As a kid, I related to his ability to cry on command to get what he wanted -- mostly food. Now I just like the fact that he made friends with Sloth. I've got a friend who looks like Sloth and approaching him took some nerve. Unfortunately, this is what Cohen looks like now. What happened to the baby fat?

Rubenstein: Great question. Way back when, Keisha Knight Pulliam was great as Rudy Huxtable. Right now, Bobb'e J. Thompson has been on a roll (in spite of an absurd apostrophe). For me, it may be hard to top Jonathan Lipnicki's cinematic star turn in Jerry Maguire, though any of the three ninjas (Rocky, Colt, or Tum Tum) could stake a claim.

Hildenbrandt: I'll always be partial to Macaulay Culkin for his fine work in The Good Son... er... Home Alone. But, in general, I like to think of favorite child actor moments as opposed to their actual body of work. So, for example: Jonathan Lipnicki's comment in Jerry Maguire ("The human head weighs eight pounds"), anyone on the dreaded "Oreo Line" in The Mighty Ducks, the time Billy Heywood getting caught watching porn in Little Big League, Squints weaseling out a kiss in The Sandlot, the kid who got the bread maker from Will Ferrell in Old School, and the entire performance of that snarky daughter in Remember The Titans. Pretty much anything and everything not involving Miley Cyrus.

Osterhout: Dan's mention of Bobb'e J. Thompson reminded me of a YouTube video I saw the other day entitled "Bro Mitzvah Rap". Apparently, a Bro-Mitzvah is a Bar-Mitzvah for African Americans. In the video, Bobb'e pretty much brings down the house.

Osterhout: If Miley Cyrus could tackle, would Lane Kiffin be recruiting her?

Rubenstein: Too old.

Dan Rubenstein hosts and produces the SI Tour Guy video series for SI.com and co-hosts The Solid Verbal podcast. He can be reached at sitourguy@gmail.com. Ty Hildenbrandt writes for SI.com and co-hosts The Solid Verbal podcast. He can be reached at tyhildenbrandt@gmail.com or on Twitter. Jacob E. Osterhout is a features reporter for the New York Daily News and a former writer for Sports Illustrated On Campus. His work can also be found at the College Sports Examiner.