The bravery it takes to be a great owner is either celebrated or reviled. I envy the Patriots' great ownership, because Robert Kraft hired all the right people, took risks and allowed those under him to make the appropriate decisions that helped set the mold for a successful franchise.
Eric Lefton, Evanston, Ill.
While reading your story on Kraft (Kraftwork, Feb. 6) I was stunned to see the subhead that referred to the Patriots as "the NFL's model franchise." A model? Really? Are these the same Patriots who were caught cheating their way to victories via Spygate? It's funny, because since Spygate was exposed, they've lost twice in the Super Bowl.
Chris Luther, Stafford, Va.
Not Much Change
After reading your article on the early days of pro football (The First Super Bowl, Feb. 6), I couldn't help but marvel at how so much has remained the same in the culture of the sport, even after more than 100 years. Home field advantage is still a significant factor in determining wins and losses. Violence is still simultaneously desired and decried. Players continue to follow the money. And the media still maintains their role as dramatist.
Richard Butler, Evans City, Pa.
I strongly disagree with Joe Sheehan's assertion that the National League should adopt the designated hitter rule (INSIDE MLB, Feb. 6). The DH undermines the beauty and integrity of baseball, because it encourages the development of incomplete baseball players. Pitchers will never hit as well as position players due to the demands of the mound, but to excuse them from at least trying to contribute on offense only cheapens the game.
Allen Salter, Evanston, Ill.
Like Sheehan, I also believe the NL should implement the DH. But I think both leagues should use it in a way that's consistent and agreeable to all baseball fans. Each league should require the pitcher to bat for himself in the first five innings, then use the DH from the sixth inning on. This makes perfect sense, seeing as how most managers already employ a squadron of relievers after the fifth inning.
James Rygelski, St. Louis
E-mail SI at letters@SI.timeinc.com or fax SI at 212-467-2417. Letters should include the writer's full name, address and home telephone number and may be edited for clarity and space.
Customer Service and Subscriptions
For 24/7 service, go to SI.com/customerservice. Call 1-800-528-5000 or write to SI at P.O. Box 30602, Tampa, FL 33630-0602. To purchase reprints of SI covers, go to SIcovers.com.
For ad rates, an editorial calendar or a media kit, e-mail SI at SIpubqueries@timeinc.com.
Stories that generated the most mail last week.
MIKE POWELL FEB. 13
SUPER BOWL XLVI FEB. 13
POINT AFTER FEB. 13
ROBERT KRAFT FEB. 6
With the news that Peyton Manning underwent a fourth, unreported, medical procedure on his neck, do you think he should retire?
I definitely think he should retire. He doesn't have anything else to prove. He has a Super Bowl ring and is the NFL's only four-time MVP. He should just bow out gracefully.
Nathan Wade Lee
I think Manning has earned the right to do whatever he feels is best for him. If he wants to play, then he should be afforded that opportunity.
Retire? I don't believe anyone really feels that his career is done yet. Reports are saying he can already throw at 80% velocity, so he just has to get back into the rhythm of accuracy. I believe the Colts don't want to pay him, and the only teams that want to see him retire are the ones that know they have no chance at signing him and are scared he'll end up in their division.
If he injures himself more severely, we are then talking quality of life. I think he should just retire. Regardless of what he decides I believe Jim Irsay will cut him. But then the next team that signs him will still have to face the same questions and uncertainty about his neck.
TWEET OF THE WEEK
"What's more mind-boggling? Kevin Durant dropping 51 and Russell Westbrook with 40 in a game, or the fact that they needed OT to beat Denver?"
MICHAEL O'NEILL (COVER)
FOR February 6, 2012
ANDREW HANCOCK (MANNING)