NFC West: Jim Rome
Posted by ESPN.com's Mike Sando
Drew from Buffalo writes: Hey Sando, hope you are enjoying yourself in Tampa. I, unfortunately, cannot make it down, other upcoming vacations are taking precedence over my vacation time from work and money. Anyway, I was listening to Rome today and he said that he cannot find anyone "who matters" down there giving the Cardinals a chance to win. Is that just Rome being Rome or is that statement true?
If so, HOW IS THAT POSSIBLE?!?! Maybe I'm biased because I'm a Cardinals fan but it is baffling to me that these "experts" still aren't giving the Cardinals a chance. The Cards have only been held under 20 points 3 times this season. 2 of them were in the last 3 weeks. The Cardinals are going to score. I'm not so sure the Steelers offense is going to be able to keep up. What is the consensus reason for giving the Cardinals no shot? As always, keep up the good work. Thank you and GO CARDS GO! GO CARDS GO!
Mike Sando: I think Rome is on the money with that one. People see no way for the Cardinals to win this game, which means -- of course -- that they must be missing something. I've learned my lesson on that one. The Giants had no chance last season, right? There are no great teams in the NFL. The Cardinals have the potential to beat anyone in the league, particularly in warmer conditions.
Hopper from parts unknown writes: did u see this? best bulletin boardd stuff yet
Mike Sando: If Ken Whisenhunt wasn't a Slate reader prior to this anti-Cardinals screed, he should be. It plays into what Drew from Buffalo is talking about. You have to stay true to what you know and not let the prevailing opinion sway you. The Steelers might very well win this game. But to suggest the Cardinals have no chance is to deny what they've proven during their three playoff victories.
Gabe from St. Louis writes: Here's a question for you. Without giving away what I think, my friend suggested the Rams should sign Michael Vick for obvious reasons concerning his ability to avoid pressure. This would be ruined of course if, say, Vick is still in prison in August (Is he?) What are your thoughts on this?
Mike Sando: Society awards second chances, but NFL teams aren't required to take such blatant risks. I just see no advantage in taking a chance on a career 53.8 percent passer who will be pushing 30 years old if and when the NFL reinstates him. The Rams have enough credibility problems without becoming a halfway house for the NFL's disgraced.