Now that I'm sure that the title of this piece has garnered your attention, let's sit down and discuss the remainder of 2010.

The post mortem on Rafael Nadal's career has been by many tennis fans. While the past 12 months have certainly been trying in more ways than one for the young Spaniard, it seems rather foolish to write the final chapter of a young man's career at age 23.

Yes, 23.

My favorite NFL team, the Philadelphia Eagles, recently released one of their all-time greatest players, running back Brian Westbrook. In recent years, Westbrook had suffered a myriad of injuries and had clearly lost a step. At age 30, he was past his prime and had to be released.

So, I understand all too well that sometimes great players get injured and at some point teams and fans have to cut their losses.

But Westbrook was 30, past his physical prime; Rafael Nadal is 23, still two or three years away from his tennis prime. Without having suffered a serious tear of a major ligament, or some other freak injury which required an extensive surgical procedure and an iffy prognosis, I laugh at the attempts of the renegade who wish to begin eulogizing Nadal's brilliant career while he's still smack in the middle of it.

I am here to make a bold prediction: Rafael Nadal will end 2010 as the number one ranked male tennis player in the world.

Yes, I said it.

Yes, I believe it.

No, I'm not bluffing. Here's why:

First of all, do not think that Nadal is not aware of the growing number of critics who critique his game and predict his demise. Nadal is the single greatest competitor of his generation, bar none. In the very history of men's tennis, only Pete Sampras can rival Nadal's will.

Nadal will approach the clay court season like a hungry lion, eager for success. When Nadal gets his rhythm on the dirt, he doesn't lose. He'll find his game on it this year.

His most recent knee injury was a minor tear, a minor setback, but a blessing in disguise. Since July of last year, Nadal has played non-stop hard court tennis. Even though he was injured for much of the time, struggling with a lack of confidence that goes hand in hand with a lack of trust that his body would perform exactly the way he wanted it to.

This recent setback has kept him from competing in other meaningless post-Australian Open hard court events.

Nadal lost in the fourth round of Roland Garros last year. He missed Wimbledon all together. Yet he still finished the year at number two in the world.

Nadal's absence cleared a path for Roger Federer to do what he failed to do in 2008: Win Roland Garros and Wimbledon back-to-back. At the time things worked out perfectly for Federer.

But right now, the chickens are about to come home to roost. Federer, the current world number one, has a ridiculous amount of points to defend. Between May and the end of August, he needs to win two Grand Slams and two Master's 1000 events.

While I am aware that Roger's followers believe that he wears a cape and shoots laser beams from his eyes, deep down inside we all know that even as great a player as he is, Roger is still human.

I would never expect any player to make that sort of run. I didn't expect Nadal to do it in 2008, and if you'd asked me at this time last year I wouldn't have believed Federer could do it. It's really a one in ten thousand kind of shot. Things have to line up perfectly; they did last year, but the odds of this happening two years in a row are slim to none.

The pressure of having to win basically every important event from May until the U.S. Open will be a lot for Roger to handle.

Nadal will regain his confidence on his beloved clay. If he's fit and focused there isn't anyone who can beat him in a best of five sets match on clay.

Juan Carlos Ferrero may be around to challenge, but he would need Nadal to be a level off his game to win a best of five setter against him.

Roger could be around in the finals, or possibly meet Nadal in the semifinals. Either way, Nadal will be loading up on points, and the best Federer can hope for is to defend all his points. The gap will steadily close.

The young guys continue to demonstrate a lack of maturity. Juan Martin del Potro made a splash last year getting through to the semifinals in Paris and winning in New York.

Since then, he's been spotty at best. He's well into his sophomore slump. Clay and grass are much weaker surfaces for the giant Argentine than his beloved hard court. He hits a flat ball, which are both high risk and less effective on clay. Nadal would be favored against del Potro on anything except a hard court.

As for Djokovic, he doesn't appear to be ready to add to his Grand Slam title. Besides, it's highly doubtful that he could beat Nadal in a Grand Slam event.

Has he ever? I don't believe so.

Andy Murray has been a fashionable pick for the past few seasons, but he has yet to truly deliver. Like the rest of the top players who have had some success against Nadal recently, this success extends only to hard courts; grass and clay are Nadal's surfaces.

As for the likes of Novak Djokovic, these days I rarely include him in conversations about potential number ones. He needs to do an awful lot of growing up to convince critics otherwise.

If Nadal wins Roland Garros (and I believe he will), he will head into Wimbledon with a full head of steam. If you think that he will not remember that he wasn't even able to show up to defend his title last year, then you are mistaken.

To say that the man is hungry is an understatement. Fully expect Roger to cut through his side of the field and meet Nadal in the finals. He and Nadal are really a two man show. When these two play each other on the grass, it basically a pick'em.

But remember, these points will be 100 percent bonus for Nadal, who picked up no points at all during that time last season. Considering that the last time Federer defeated Nadal in a Grand Slam was in 2007, Nadal has to get the benefit of the doubt.

Considering the amount of points Nadal can pick up at the two middle Slams, he doesn't need to win the U.S. Open—in all likelihood he will not.

Still, look for him to put in a decent showing, perhaps to the quarters or semifinals.  The fast hard courts of New York are very dangerous to navigate. The Tsongas, del Potros, and Djokovics, not to mention the Murrays and Cilics, have all shown themselves to be primarily hard court specialists. Any of those guys have the game to win the U.S. Open.

Depending on form, Federer will most likely be the prohibited favorite. However, it's not completely out of the realm of possibility for Roger to get upset by one of those younger guys. I wouldn't bet on it, but it's not impossible.

So you could have two players each with two Slams.

Nadal has constantly proven his critics wrong. First it was said that he'd never be able to win Wimbledon with his long, spin heavy strokes or weak serve.

Then, it was said that he'd never be able to bounce back from a five hour semifinal in time to win a final against a much fresher, hungrier player.

Many times Nadal has been written off; as a six-time Slam winner at age 23, there is no reason not to give him the benefit of the doubt.

After all, who would have thought that Kim Clijsters could win a major after giving birth?

Or that Andre Agassi could come back from number 141 in the world to number one?

Great champions are extraordinary; one can never count them out. So why would we count Nadal out?