Dolphins can celebrate
a singular
achievement
Send a question to Peter
King
Posted: Thu November 20, 1997
My old hometown—Enfield, Conn.—provides the top to the
mailbag this week. Adam Harrison-Friday
writes: In the wake of the Monday night celebration honoring the
1972 Dolphins, what team would you consider the best of all
time?
Adam, the best single-season team has to be the '72
Dolphins. I think that in my lifetime (I'm 40), a perfect
season is the ultimate accomplishment. While I'm not sure
that the Dolphins of that year would beat the 1975 Steelers
or the 1992 Cowboys or
the 1985 Bears, the point is, each of those teams lost at
least one game. The '72 Dolphins
didn't.
If you're ranking teams based on their performance over a
number of years, it's a different story. Using that
criteria, I once wrote that the Dolphins were the
sixth-best team of all time. That enraged Don Shula, who
thought I was dissing his
accomplishments.
(I wasn't.) But the Dolphins' mastery of a couple of seasons
does not put them on the same plane with the the 1946-55
Cleveland Browns, who were great for a decade, and with
other teams that won more games over more
years.
Now, on to the rest of the mail.
It's easy to point fingers at Pete Carroll for the
Patriots' problems. But, in your opinion, is it really
Carroll's
fault?
—Bryan Wilson, Lexington,
Mass.
My dime-store theory: The expectations for the Patriots
were raised unrealistically high when they caught a break
last year, playing Jacksonville in the
AFC Championship at home instead of having to travel to
Denver.
Because New England made the Super Bowl, fans began to
overlook the team's weaknesses. The Patriots don't have a
dominating offensive line. They could be exposed against a
strong running team. They don't have the consistent
pass-rushing threat that most
premier teams do, and their secondary is susceptible to
strong-armed
QBs.
On the mental side,
I think it's natural and very human for a team to breathe a
big sigh when a dictatorial coach leaves and a coach with a
softer hand comes in. There's no question that has played a
role in New England's struggle to make the playoffs,
but this was not going to be a gimme playoff season under
any
circumstances.
When I think of the top cornerbacks in the NFL, I think of
Deion Sanders and Kevin Smith of the Cowboys, Dale Carter
of the Chiefs and Troy Vincent of the Eagles. Each these
players has been to the Pro Bowl—except Vincent. Why not?
I think he's the best all-around corner in the
NFL.
—Andrew Kang, Charleston,
W.Va.
I have a very high regard for Vincent. I agree that it is
absurd that he hasn't made the Pro Bowl yet. I don't agree
that he's the best all-around corner in the NFL, however.
For my money right now, the best combination of run-stopper
and cover corner
would be either Aeneas Williams of Arizona or Carnell Lake of
Pittsburgh. Because the Steelers will likely play Lake at
safety in the long term, he won't get a chance to prove
what a tremendous corner he
is.
Can the Jaguars get a first-round pick for
QB Rob Johnson? I'm not sure he has played enough to warrant
that.
—Rob Freeman,
Jacksonville
Rob Johnson probably has a better professional resume than
Mark Brunell had when the Jaguars acquired Brunell in a
trade for third- and fifth-round picks in 1995. Having said
that, you're right, teams are going to question how good
Johnson is because
they just haven't seen enough of him. My guess is that
Jacksonville should expect a low first-round pick or a
second- and fourth-round pick for Johnson. I think he'd be
well worth either
deal.
In your opinion, who had the better defense: the 1985
Chicago Bears or the 1986 New York
Giants?
—John Conti, Omaha,
Neb.
The '85 Bears in a walk. No team has scared offensive
coordinators like that team did. At least not since I've
been watching
football.
Can you explain what's really wrong with the Atlanta
Falcons?
—Michael R. Hurd, Stone Mountain,
Ga.
The Falcons are paying the price for some poor high draft
picks and some relatively unproductive free
agents—DT Pierce Holt and
LB Cornelius Bennett, among others. Aside from that, they
haven't developed a quarterback to succeed Chris
Miller.
If your
QB is the injury-prone Chris Chandler, you need a healthy
running game. But Atlanta is averaging only 89 yards per
game on the ground, unheard of for a Dan Reeves
offense.
And other than Chuck Smith, who St. Louis coach Dick
Vermeil told me is as good an all-around DE as there is in
football right now, there's nobody on the front seven that
worries an offensive
coordinator.
Bottom
line: The Falcons just need to draft better and develop better
players. Sounds simple, doesn't
it?
Do you think Pittsburgh has the best group of linebackers
in the
league?
—Lee Heisler, Flushing,
Ohio
In the five-year history of free agency, Pittsburgh has lost
a ton of talent—more than any other team except Dallas.
That's why it's amazing to me that
I can even take this question seriously. But, yes, I do think
the Steelers have the best linebacking
group in the NFL. Earl Holmes and Levon Kirkland, two of
their young guys, may be the NFL's most formidable run-pass
linebacking tandem. Their presence helps offset the decline
of the formerly fearsome Greg Lloyd. With Holmes and
Kirkland coming up the
middle of the field, the Steelers scare everybody they play.
How could the Raiders defense go from 8th to 30th in one
year? This is a team built to attack, but the secondary is
playing soft and the line is reading and reacting. The
worst problem is the linebackers: They are standing around
instead of flying to the
ball.
—Brad Hess, Springfield,
Tenn.
I think the Raiders defense needs an attitude adjustment.
This group's attitude is the absolute pits. In the debacle
at Carolina a couple of weeks ago, rookie DT Darrell
Russell tried to fire up the defense in a second-half
huddle. His remarks were
intense and innocent; he didn't point the finger at anybody.
After the game, two veterans basically told him never to
pull that stuff
again.
I agree with you on the secondary. The corners and safeties
committed a cardinal sin in the Sept. 8 loss to Kansas
City, mindlessly allowing Andre Rison to get behind them in
the end
zone.
The Raiders seem to have no fear of losing or of playing
poorly. I lay that at the feet of the coach, Joe Bugel, and
the owner, Al Davis. Also, the Raiders have mishandled the
salary cap so badly that it's hard for Bugel to threaten
jobs because all
those big-ticket contracts basically mean the team has married
the player. A coach needs to be able to threaten jobs when
things are spinning out of
control.
What will happen to one of the 49ers' two overachieving
receivers when Jerry Rice returns? It seems kind of unfair
to ditch either of
them.
—Steve Evenden, Ameliasburg,
Ontario
Steve, football is a ruthless business. But the 49ers
won't be "ditching" J.J. Stokes or Terrell Owens
when Rice comes back. Stokes and Owens simply have to
accept the fact that they will have to take subservient
roles to the best receiver of our
time.
Previous
editions of Peter King's
Mailbag
Send a question to Peter
King
| 
