According to an article  that appeared in the San Francisco Chronicle,

"In North Carolina, four men are collecting signatures for a petition that would seek national-holiday status for the Super Bowl."

This is bleepin' brilliant!

Seriously, it's news items like this that make you wonder what we've been thinking the past 40 years.

"That official day off would be observed on a Monday, in the grand American tradition of the three-day weekend -- and in recognition of the debilitating Sunday excess of unhealthy food, strong beverage, televised sporting violence, relentless commercialism and not a small amount of gambling. No need to call in sick if the office is closed."

If you are a man, and you are not in favor of this, you need to relocate your nut sack. If you are a woman, and you are not in favor of this, you need a man in your life.

To join the cause, visit SuperBowlMonday.com and sign the petition.

Tom Brady (New England) - Absolutely cements his legacy as the greatest quarterback to ever play the game. Would have won more with less offensive talent surrounding him than potentially any other quarterback in Super Bowl history; Maroney's a rookie, Dillon's old and splits carries, and not one of the receivers ever had success in the NFL until this year. In fact, the Patriots did not have 1 Pro Bowler offensively, including even Brady. He would have led the Patriots to road victories over the #1 and #3 seeds. Would join Joe Montana and Terry Bradshaw as only quarterbacks in history to win 4 Super Bowls. Would have a shot at winning his 3rd Super Bowl MVP (tying Montana for most ever).

Drew Brees (New Orleans) - Will go down as the greatest single free-agent acquisition in the history of the game. Will receive personal vindication for being let go by the Chargers. Can be an average-pretty good quarterback for the rest of his career and it won't matter; Will never have to replicate his regular season performance/statistics again. Will not be fully appreciated and understood until several years down the line. The significance of his win will greatly depend on the eventual history of the Saints franchise and how the city of New Orleans develops. Given time, Brees can go down as the biggest hero and savior that ever played in the NFL.

Peyton Manning (Indianapolis) - There is no player in the NFL that would benefit more from winning the Super Bowl than Peyton Manning. Would absolutely validate all his regular season accomplishments and gaudy statistics. No longer could his entire body of work be marred by the trepidation of never having won in the clutch. In fact, how well or poorly Manning plays is wholly insignificant ironically. Should Manning continue his playoff awfulness (1TD/5INT in 2 games) and finish with 2 TDs and 10 INTs, it would be completely ignored. All that matters is that Peyton gets the ring. The proverbial monkey will have been lifted from his back, and all doubters will have been quieted.

Rex Grossman (Chicago) - Absolutely nothing. In time, his winning a ring will be forgotten. The backup will still be the favorite quarterback in what ever city he plays for the rest of his career. He is far too inconsistent to ever be free of criticism, regardless of having a Super Bowl notch on his belt. It probably will give him 3 more years before the Bears consider drafting another quarterback. Still, he could get a ring and still hear cries that Griese should be starting in mini-camp.

As concerned with morality and integrity as I am when it comes to applying such principles to sports - and all life situations - I must say it bothers me that the greatest slugger of my generation appears to be a questionable (at best) selection to the Hall of Fame. In fact, at this point, it seems more likely that I receive fan mail from Alicia Silverstone before the man in question is inducted.

Of course I am talking about Mark McGwire who took it up the rump by the baseball writers, gaining just 23.5% of 75% necessary to be elected to the Hall. Yes, Big Mac is the epitomy of a potential roider in baseball. Yes, his comments in front of congress were utterly ignorant, idiotic, and downright incriminating. But dammit, he is one of the greatest power hitters of all-time, let alone my generation.

Let's start the laundry list of over-qualification. Tucked away in McGwire's belt are 13 All-Star appearances, a Rookie of the Year award, a Gold Glove, 3 Silver Slugger awards, 583 career bombs (7th all-time), and the omnipresent single-season home run record in 1998. Big Mac was in the top 5 of his league in home runs 9 times. 9 times, an entire decade! He was in the top 5 in the his league in OPS 6 times. He led the league in home runs per at-bat 7 times. For his career, McGwire hit home runs at a more frequent rate than any other player who ever batted in the Major Leagues.

Now that we have his qualifications out of the way, let's get into the steroids debate. I am naive as Mark Mangino is skinny. I know the chance that McGwire's career accomplishments were performance-enhancer free is smaller than the percentage of votes he receieved on the ballot. Still, his accomplishments, along with every other deserving (ceteris paribus) candidate from the "Steroid Era" needs to be recognized.

As much as I doubt the legitamacy of several Hall of Fame deserving players - Bonds, Clemens, Pujols - I am 100% certain that they must be recognized some way or another in the Baseball Hall of Fame.

Yes, under current rules, writers who have suspicion that McGwire used steroids were acting wisely when they didn't vote for Mark. In case you missed it, the Baseball Hall of Fame is different from the halls of fame of other sports.

"5. Voting - Voting shall be based upon the player's record, playing ability, integrity, sportsmanship, character, and contributions to the team(s) on which the player played."

Breaking it down in simple chat room form, if you feel a player's accomplishments were tainted by steroids, then in turn you are questioning his integrity, sportsmanship, and character. That's half the criteria to be elected! So yes, under current rules, writers are doing the right thing. That is precisely why the Baseball Hall of Fame needs to amend its voting rules - as it has the ability to do.

"9. Amendments - The Board of Directors of the National Baseball Hall of Fame and Museum, Inc. reserves the right to revoke, alter or amend these rules at any time. "

The solution is simple; the Baseball Hall of Fame must create a separate wing/exhibit (as they already do for the Negro Leagues and women in baseball) where the deserving players may be rightfully enshrined.

How to define the Steroid Era is difficult. My criteria would be anyone whose playing career ran for any ten years in between 1992-2005. '92 is my arbitrary year that is subject to change and discussion, 2005 is chosen because that's when baseball began to test for steroids.Bottom line, when skinny punks like Alex Sanchez, Mike Morse, Guillermo Mota, and many others are busted, including several pitchers - who lets be real - none of us suspected - are getting busted, it puts EVERYONE in question.

I believe the majority of players in the aforementioned years used performance-enhancers. I actually feel that players using substances was the norm for that time period. That is why I feel that the Hall of Fame needs to recognize the players who stood out in the Steroid Era, but they need to do so separately.