First I am as sensitive to spygate stuff as everyone else and thought he was rough times but on a whole he seemed to be prepared and ask balanced questions for stories he comments on. This morning on Sirius NFL radio channel that changed. He was talking about spygate and specifically Andrea Kramers upcoming interview w/ the assistant golf pro from Hawaii, when he broke the news that according to Walsh the Pats were able to guess correctly 75% of the opponents d plays w/ the help from the tapes. Well this info sent King of on a tangent saying how much bigger this story should be because 75% is such a shocking number what an advantage no wonder the Pats win so much. He was selling it pretty hard and had myself rethinking the magnitude of this until he asked former player Randy Cross if he could imagine how well his teams would have done if they knew 75% of their opponents and Cross without hesitation said he was surprised that it was only 75% because of w/ all of the scouting 75% is barely average every team knows what the other team team is doing and most games are determined by a handful of plays, he was brilliant. What got me upset was Peter King's reaction Cross, he agreed w/ him and said that he made sense, why would that upset me you ask? The is because Peter King is supposed be a professional journalist specializing in NFL this not only should not been a revelation to him but this should have been his follow up question instead exploiting the 75% number because it sounds enormous to the uninformed, and mark my words after HBO's "REAL SPORTS" airs this will be the number that will be sensationalized w/out the benefit of Randy Cross's rebuttal.