Just two days ago, someone asked me where was the hottest place I ever had training camp.

I answered, Anderson, Indiana, where the Colts trained my rookie year. It was almost 90 degrees, with 90 percent humidity, every day.

Was it really necessary?

As a rookie, I didn't care. It took me about a month to learn about coverages, techniques, and terminology. I could have done it indoors or out, in scorching sun or freezing AC.

But does anyone really need to go through a month of hell, in the hottest place in the state?

I didn't think so then, and I certainly don't think so now. Camp just weakens your legs and sets the stage for a season's worth of nagging injuries.

And if you're unlucky, it can kill you.

A lot of guys stage a pre-training camp holdout, not so much because of the money -- they hold out because they don't want to go to training camp.

They know they don't need it. Not five weeks of two daily practices while wearing 15 pounds of equipment in conditions that are often inhuman.

What's the solution?

I think the CFL has it right. After two weeks of camp, and two exhibition games -- a total of three weeks -- they get it on.

I know what you're thinking. "That's a different brand of football. They aren't as good." You're right, they aren't.

But don't you think, operating under the same parameters, with a superior talent level, NFL players could successfully prepare for the season the same way?

I do.

The NFL is awash in tradition. Everyone copies everyone else, and everyone copies history. No one wants to get left behind. That's the way it's always been, which helps explain why, despite a few advances (like water breaks), training camp is the way it's always been.

Maybe it's time to be practical instead of traditional. Smart instead of tough.

It's too late for Korey Stringer.

But it's not too late for the next guy.

Alan Grant, a former NFL defensive back, writes football for ESPN The Magazine. E-mail him at alan.grant@espnmag.com.