Build, verb - To form by combining materials or parts; construct

Answers.com defines the word "build" as seen above.  Everyone is trying to build something.  Whether it be a happy home, strong relationships, a better self, or creating a new idea or new product at your job, we all try to build things.  For many, these tasks are ones that could never be completed.  However, in the sports world, the end of every season marks that some group, program, organization, etc. has done what they set out to do.  They have built a champion. 

Fans always think that they know their teams the best.  We feel like we know the leagues our teams play in.  We feel like, if just given that chance, we could build a champion.  When building a house, the foundation is key.  The age-old sports question is now being posed to you.  Who would you build a team around?  Remember, you aren't selecting the best player in the league.  You are choosing the building block for your franchise.

The rule is simply this, the player must be active.  Please give a rationale as to why you would make this person the cornerstone of your franchise, so we, the blogosphere, can argue with you.  In a loving way of course!  This particular blog is about the NFL.  Next will be the MLB, followed by NBA, and concluded with a less conventional NASCAR post.  Get your thoughts and your hammer ready.  Let's build.

Impact Positions

The NFL may be the easiest of the pro sports league to build a winner quickly, because of free agency and the salary cap.  However, it may be the hardest to select one player to start building around because football is the ultimate team game.  Peyton Manning can't take a football and go "Game 5 Lebron" on the Patriots.  He must have blocking, receiving, a running game, and a defense in order to allow him to use his skills and be successful.  With this in mind, the positions that the NFL scouts value the most are QB, LT, and DE.  When starting a franchise, it's difficult to get a fan base excited about a left tackle or a defensive end.  Ask the Texan fans if you don't believe me.  Their first ever pick in the expansion draft was LT Tony Boselli, who was injured shortly after that and never played a down for the Texans.  As far as D-end goes, two words, Mario Williams.  He may be a great player someday, but fans will never forget the two "skill" guys who they passed on.  Therefore, I'm taking a QB.

Age

We've learned in the last 10 years that NFL teams can go from rags to riches in an extremely short period of time.  It's easy to think that instant NFL success should happen when one watches the number of teams who do improve quickly.  Both the Jacksonville Jaguars and Carolina Panthers were playing in their Conference's championship game in year two of their existance.  However, most expansion teams, like the Texans and every expansion team before them save the two mentioned earlier, take a much longer road.  With that in mind, players like Donovan McNabb (turns 31 this year), Peyton Manning (31), and Tom Brady (turns 30 in August) are too old to be my cornerstones.  I want the QB that will get me to and win my franchises first Super Bowl.  Carson Palmer turns 28 in December, and he's on the my "fringe" of guys that may be too old.  If it takes five years, which historically is around when teams make the playoffs for the first time, he'd then be 33.  How much longer would he have, especially with his health risks?  I have to pass on Palmer as well.

Intangables

I want a great, young, impact player who is a leader.  I want my cornerstone to be fun to watch.  I want him to be under center.  I want the players, coaches, and fans to KNOW who will get it done in crunch time.  I want a winner.  I want a model citizen.  I don't want the young people in my stadium to ask my season ticket holders what the word "felony" means.  I want a face.  I want an active member of our community.  I want a throwback.  I want a tough guy who will never let his team down in the effort department.  Most of all, I want a winner.

Ladies and Gentlemen, to start the NFL's newest franchise, more than any other player, I want the 2006 NFL Rookie of the Year.  I want Vince Young!

 Who do you want?

Are we now to the point in college football where the player legitimizes the Heisman more than the Heisman legitimizes the player? You don't understand the question? Well, Reggie Bush won last year's Heisman trophy, and Matt Leinart before him. So right now the American sports fan is pretty pleased with the Heisman. Leinert looks as good as a rookie QB can, in Arizona anyway, and no one questions the talent of Reggie Bush. Therefore the public sentiment is that the Heisman truly is a legimate award. My question is, why does NFL success, a.k.a. the player, dictate the legitimacy of the Heisman?

The list is long and distinguished of Heisman winners who did not live up to their previous standard of success in the NFL. Heisman-lovers who double as NFL fans tremble when they hear names like Danny Wuerfful, Gino Torretta, Rashan Salaam, Andre Ware, Eric Crouch, etc. They seem to feel as if they must have made the wrong decision or cast the wrong vote because of their lack of success in future endeavors. This is what we do with politicians isn't it? So why doesn't it work with football players?

The reason is that future data doesn't answer a previous question. For example, we all remember that 12 year old baseball player who all of the other parents swore was 16 during the all-star tournaments. This 5'10, 175 lbs. monster of a child was hitting home runs and no-hitting kids on a Ruthian pace. All of the sudden, five years later, that same kid is 5'11, 185 lbs. and warming the varsity bench while the same parents don't even recognize him. Circumstances change, level of competition changes, and most importantly, the context in which the athlete performs changes.

We all believe in system players. This explains why some poor loser drafted Mike Bell in your fantasy draft this year. "He's a Denver runner so he's automatically better than Frank Gore!" this guru proudly exclaimed.  This phenomenon is the standard in college football.  Texas Tech's QB is the prime example, and would explain many of the above listed "bust" winners (Nebraska QB in the option era, Spurrier QB, Miami QB in the glory years, etc.).  Unfortunately for us as college football fans, the Heisman voters are tired of having their selection criticized for being "illegitimate" or a "Heisman bust". So what do they do now? I truly believe that they, on occasion, take NFL projection into consideration. How else could Carson Palmer have beaten out Larry Johnson, who despite NFL success, was not as highly touted as he is now. Why else would Oklahoma's Adrian Peterson be considered. His stats weren't nearly as impressive as many other backs in the country before his injury.

In this election year, I'd like to ask the Heisman voters to take their vote seriously. The Heisman is an award for one year of excellence. It's not a lifetime achievement award. If you think Troy Smith is the best player in college football, then please vote for him. However, if you truly believe that the best player plays for a small school like, I don't know, Northern Illinois, then don't hold his schedule against him. If you think the best player is a defensive player or offensive lineman, then please, don't let their positions hold them back. The best is the best. This trophy doesn't have to go to the best player on a great team. It's supposed to go to the best player. Regardless of team, position, ranking, competition, etc. Please, vote for the best college football player period!