The big bad Wolf

Ex-Packer GM is the man to rebuild a franchise

Interesting question to start from Joe, up in Hamilton, Ontario. He asks, "With the resurgence of the Pack in Green Bay and the superfast rebuilding job done in San Francisco, who would you choose if you had to rebuild a team, Bill Walsh or Ron Wolf?"

That's sort of like asking if I want a grande eggnog latte this morning or a grande hazelnut latte. Both basically are in retirement, though both stick close to the game. The short answer is that I'd pick Wolf, because he's been out on the road more recently and would know the existing NFL free-agent class better than would Walsh. Wolf knows the breadth of recent college draft classes and the depths of NFL rosters better than Walsh. But Walsh has hit on so many draft picks recently that I'd have to really think about it before picking Wolf. I was at the 49ers draft in 2000 when they selected all those defensive players and their performance has given me a newfound respect for Walsh's talent at picking players. So I'd pick Wolf, but with some regrets -- not over choosing him, but over passing on Walsh.

How do you think the Cowboys should handle the upcoming draft? I would trade a high first-round pick and maybe a second-round pick for two middle-of-the-pack picks and draft Roy Williams of Oklahoma (as the safety of the future) and a stud defensive end. Then I would take a look at a big possession receiver and tight end through free agency. The Cowboys should have plenty of cap room to achieve these things. What do you think?
--Anthony, San Antonio

Anthony, those are excellent thoughts. I might go for a tackle early and I might make signing Flozell Adams a priority more than you would. The safety idea is excellent, especially with Darren Woodson and George Teague getting so long in the tooth. Everyone's looking for the stud pass-rusher, and because I don't know the draft pool all that well yet, I can't tell you if a good one would be there at, say, 18. The receiver is a must, a Joe Jurevicius- type. I agree there.

Next time you're in Minneapolis, why don't you try Dunn Brothers Coffee? There are a few shops in Minneapolis and St. Paul, all serving coffee that's fresh roasted daily. It's mighty good stuff. Now a question: Do you think that Michael Bennett will come around and be able to carry the Vikings' running game in the future?
--Ted Harwood, Minneapolis

Sorry I missed Dunn Brothers. Where is it sold? I picked Bennett as my offensive rookie of the year before the season and I haven't changed my thoughts about him. He is like James Jackson in Cleveland -- you can't run if you have no holes.

A quick non-sports comment and a couple of questions. First, I blame you for my newly found caffeine addiction, specifically turning me on to the Starbucks hazelnut latte -- pure evil. Now to football. When do you think the Bucs are going to give up on the Warrick Dunn/Mike Alstott tandem? While both are very good players, doesn't it seem that Tampa Bay would be better served by having a more complete back? Any possibility they'll look for a back in this year's draft? My second question: Which of the "bad" teams this year do you think has a chance of pulling off a "St. Louis in '99" or a "Chicago this year" turnaround in 2002? Maybe the Cardinals? They have the makings of a very good offensive line, a very young defense that could easily improve with a good draft. By the way, MMQB is the only reason to come to work on Mondays.
--Luis Noriega, Plano, Texas

Oh my Lord. I am a pusher!

Thanks for your nice words. First, on Tampa Bay. Dunn is going to be a free agent after the season and Alstott gets beat up more and more each year. Plus, I don't know who's going to be coaching the Bucs next year, so it's hard to say who their running back or backs will be next year. I feel like they'll draft one fairly high. As for next year, I think the Chargers and Cardinals are excellent candidates for early surprise teams of 2002. My guess is that Drew Brees and Jake Plummer will have those teams close to, or over, .500 next year.

The Broncos gave Brian Griese a $12.6 million dollar signing bonus. Big mistake. He is not the answer; he can't create when the play breaks down, has little mobility, no creativity, no escapability. His numbers last year were gaudy, but he only played 11 games. Gloomy Gus Frerrote led them to the playoffs (not that he's the guy). You have to watch Griese every game to see his deficiencies. Mike Shanahan really screwed up here and when you spend that kind of money, your decision dies hard. Your informed thoughts?
--Mike , Lakewood, Co.

Brian Griese needs to be protected, and, like most quarterbacks, needs a running game to take the pressure off him. Unfortunately for him, both of those areas have been spotty in Denver this year. What Griese has going for him is he's accurate, very accurate, and I feel sure that Shanahan will figure a way to get the line to play better next year. I can't help but think, though I haven't been there, that they miss the everyday influence of Alex Gibbs, and that line is hurt by the increased scrutiny it's gotten from the NFL. I know you bleed Broncos orange, and you are extreme in your doubts about Griese. But I say give him a mulligan. The guy's a good player, and he'll prove it again next year.

As I look at the final weeks of the season and project into the playoffs, I'm startled to see that a pretty strong case could be made for the Patriots as the team with the least amount of questions entering the stretch. Oakland can't stop the run, Baltimore is inconsistent on offense, Miami is a power team that can't run, and the Jets can't or won't throw. Pittsburgh runs and defends well, but with Kordell as the quarterback, there's always a question. Is this just me looking through Pats-colored glasses, or does this team have a legitimate chance to make big noise in the postseason?
--Don Carter, Haverhill, Mass.

Don, you underestimate Kordell Stewart. And let me just say you don't want to play at Oakland or Pittsburgh in the playoffs. But having said that, the Patriots have put together a good team on both sides of the ball, with renewed vigor from old players and unexpected play from talented young ones. The key is the continued ability of Antowain Smith to run at 3.8 to 4.0 yards a clip to take the pressure off Tom Brady and to run the clock. My sense is like yours -- there's no part of the game the Pats are bad at right now.

Who is the real George Seifert? The one who coached San Francisco or the one currently groping in the dark with the Carolina Panthers? Is his head likely on the block after the season? Personally, I always felt he was overrated, handed a Super Bowl-caliber team (that we now learn was kept together by circumventing the salary cap). I was concerned when he was hired by Carolina, depressed by his personnel moves the first couple of seasons, incredulous when he released Steve Beuerlein and now disgusted with his failure to close a game. I figure at least half of our losses this season resulted from poor clock management, soft defensive calls late in the game or failure to properly utilize Wesley Walls in the red zone. I hope he's gone after this season!
--John King, Charlotte, N.C.

I agree. Seifert has meddled too much with the offense -- just ask Steve Beuerlein -- and has put together a defense that too often folds against bad offense late in games. No excuse for that. I hear he wants to come back and owner Jerry Richardson wants him back, but God knows why. This is a team that desperately needs to start fresh.

Sports Illustrated senior writer Peter King covers the NFL for the magazine and appears each Sunday on CNN's NFL Preview. To send a question to his mailbag, which will next appear on Dec. 27, click here.

Related information
Multimedia
Visit Video Plus for the latest audio and video
Search our site	Watch CNN/SI 24 hours a day
	Sports Illustrated and CNN have combined to form a 24 hour sports news and information channel. To receive CNN/SI at your home call your cable operator or DirecTV.