It's true the that NFL is a Faustian bargain overall, and I don't mean to diminish the problem the NFL has with the damage done to its players, but I might reasonably dream of having had the career of, say, Jerry Rice, or Ronnie Lott. Generally speaking, the amount of physical damage (hits, hyper-bodybuilding, drugs, etc.) sustained by players such as lineman and running backs seems to be on a different level from that of receivers and defensive backs, so let's not assume that every former player is living in agony. (I'm ignoring the damn kickers.)

Aren't these disabled ex-players getting Social Security benefits? That's one of the purposes of S.S., right? They may deserve something from the players' union or the NFL, as well, but I hope they're getting something.

This is a good illustration of why society (through government) needs to provide for people who can't work. It's not really the NFL's fault that these players got physically destroyed, just as (addressing someone else's letter) it's not really the hospital's fault that the nurses may get back and joint problems from a lifetime of work. And anyway it's inefficient and ineffective to try to get employers to provide for those who no longer work for them (except when the employer actually did wrong). That should be the responsiblity of our country as a whole. If Social Security isn't getting that job done, then we need to beef it up.

I know it's not easy to let it all hang out, but there's exactly one way to clear this up. Say this to him, and you can word it however you like:

"I like you. Will you go out with me?"

If he says no, then ask: "Out of curiosity, are you gay or straight?"

This will get you all the information you'll ever get out of him.

That's the thing with confidence. Being confident doesn't simply mean you're going to win, but you're not going to be a champion without it. I can't believe there's ever been a champion who really didn't think he/she was exceptionally good. To use somebody else's example: If the pitcher and the hitter are both really confident, then the outcome is up to other factors. But if one of them thinks "Oh, my god, that other guy is so good, I'm gonna get smoked," then he's probably gonna get smoked, no matter how talented he is.

Remember LeBron in the playoffs? His talent was a constant, but what varied was how aggressively he played, and aggressive play requires confidence. Obviously I'm only guessing, but I'd bet that the more confidence LeBron played with, the more likely the Cavs were to win.

He says about the Midwest, "We don't have ready access to fresh and affordable sea food and we don't often eat fish." I could take you to probably 20 restaurants in Cincinnati that have endangered fish on the menu every night. Then I could take you to Cleveland, St. Louis, Minneapolis, etc. and do the same. Let's not pretend that the Midwest isn't contributing to the problem.

The fact that apparently very few Salon readers are even reading this article suggests that there isn't going to be much done about it, though.

I think it's simplicity. "Take me out to the Ballgame," "God Bless America" -- they're slow, plodding and simple, and any boob can sing them because they require no vocal range. Easy songs for a big group to sing along to. Just like the "Happy Birthday" song. Oh, and "We Will Rock You" ... can it get any more simplistic than that?

P.S. I'm on board, MarkL.

... and Katie Holmes! Luke Perry! Nick Lachey! Oh, stop me ...

Seriously, what's it going to take to give Cleveland a championship team (any major sport) in my lifetime? You'd better stick around, LeBron.

... which, like Brooklyn Todd said, is poor officiating. The reason players take dives is that the officials are easily fooled, which is to say that, given the current rules and the way officials are positioned on the court, it's too damn hard for officials to tell what's a foul and what's not. It's the biggest problem the game has, and I don't know how the hell to fix it, but adding a new type of penalty would probably just make things worse. At least King acknowledged that it would be problematic (a fine understatement).

Plus, as we all know, if the floppers stopped getting the calls they'd quickly stop flopping, no penalty required.

All these soccer fans! Who actually know what they're talking about! How cool. Who knew you were here?

Stick around. You may get King more interested.

Thanks, King. As a Cavs fan who thinks they blew their chance to win the series last night, I think you nailed it.

Someone said, as someone always does: "I hate columns like this; if Donyell makes the 3 and the cavs win, Lebron made a brilliant play." That misses the point by a mile. King was careful to say that it's not about this one play in a vacuum. The problem is that this play seems to be characteristic of LeBron, it's symoblic of his play generally. Even though Jordan passed up a few shots at critical moments, nobody would look at his play overall and say he was reluctant to take over a game. We can disagree about this being a tendency for LeBron, but it makes no difference whether Marshall made that particular shot, and it's worth noting again what Magic's and Barkley's opinions are on this question.