Steinberg occupies a position that is very dear to those of us who've held it over the years: sports columnist at The Post. If all he wants to do is be popular--and I think Dan is better than that--then the readers of The Washington Post sports section won't be very well served. Telling readers how great they are as sports fans was never one of my priorities. The only thing worse than people who can't stand to hear an unpopular or unflattering opinion is those that are too afraid to state one.

If I have any attribute that serves me well, it's I don't have a long-range plan in life. I have no idea. I just don't look ahead, I really don't. You know when people get out of college and they're talking about their five-year plan. Five-year plan? I got a plan to get to Friday.

Nothing is a violent as football and I bet you like. Just say you don't like it, or can't identify, don't come up with excuses like "It's too violent" while you wear some team's NFL jersey.

I'm 52 years old, which means I'm of an age where my reading habits are more or less set. I read plenty of stuff on line but I rely on pretty traditional sources. I'm a newspaper reader, whether in hand or on my iPad.

I don't want to sound like some grumpy old man telling you to get off my lawn.

Football can stand parity better than any of the other sports, I think. Baseball, basketball and hockey need a defining team, in essence to frame the season. Football? Not so much.

Chats are so new to newspapers, historically. But they're so incredibly valuable because editors/reporters/columnists get to find out what's on the minds of our readers, what you think we should be writing about, what ticks you off, what makes you happy. Sometimes it can confirm what you think readers are interested in; sometimes it can turn you around 180 degrees.