Plankton

Some more stats: -Clinton Portis leads in rushing yards (995), with the person many people projected at #2, Adrian Peterson, a pretty decent distance behind him (823). Meanwhile, the popularly projected #1, LT, is ranked #12 (551), although he has been playing through a toe injury. His former back-up, Michael Turner, is ranked #3 (794). -Portis also has the most rushing attempts (200), which is 24 more than Adrian Peterson and Michael Turner. -Rookies Chris Johnson (715) and Matt Forte (641) are #3 and #7. Darren McFadden (341) is #31, although he has been dealing with injuries. -The Ravens' three-headed rushing machine consisting of Willis McGahee (351), Le'Ron McClain (347), and Ray Rice (339) rank #28, #30, and #32. They combine for 1,037 rushing yards. -The Bengals and Colts are the only teams to not have a RB crack the top 41 in rushing yards, although Cedric Benson (241), Chris Perry (253), Joseph Addai (248), and Dominc Rhodes (262) are all close. Addai, who was out a few games due to an injury, and Benson, who first played briefly during week 5, are on pace to top #41 Fred Jackson (278), who has been getting less attempts lately. -Six players tie for most interceptions (4). Two of them play for the Packers (Nick Collins and Charles Woodson) and two others play for the Titans (Cortland Finnegan and Michael Griffin). Collins and Woodson have two TDs. Finnegan has one. -Glenn Holt (Cinci) has the most returning yards (860). He ties with Brandon Middleton (DET) for second most attempts (34). -The Steelers have 32 sacks, the most in the NFL. The Chiefs only have 4, the lowest. -Green Bay dominates when it comes to interception yards. They have 446 yards and 5 TDs to go along with them. The Browns are a distant #2 with 227 yards and 1 TD. -Thanks to a handful of monster games, Andre Johnson leads in receiving yards (834). He is second in receptions (60--Houshmandzadeh is first with 61). They both tie with 3 TDs. -Anquan Boldin has 8 receiving TDs, the most in the NFL. Calvin Johnson and TO trail with 6 apiece. However, Calvin Johnson has more receiving yards of the three: 682, compared to Boldin's 514 and TO's 467. Boldin and Johnson's YPG are almost identical (85.7 and 85.3), while TO trails with 30 yards less. They've all fumbled and lost the ball once. -Jason Witten still leads in TE receiving yards (549), but Chris Cooley (529) and Owen Daniels (528) are closing in. -2007 MVP candidate Randy Moss ranks #19 in receiving yards, barely above tight ends Cooley and Daniels. -Kurt Warner has the second best QB rating (104.2--right behind Rivers' 107.8), the third most yards (2,431--behind Brees' 2,563 and Cutler's 2616), and the third most TDs (16--behind Cutler's 18 and Rivers' 19). -Brett Favre leads in interceptions, with a total of 12. That nearly doubles recently benched Derek Anderson's 7. Favre, however, beats Anderson in yardage (1,812 compared to Anderson's 1,454) and TDs (15 to 9). -Jay Cutler has by far the most attempts (342). Brees is at a distant second (304). However, Cutler has played one more game than Brees. -Of the QBs who have been active for almost the entire season so far, JaMarcus Russell has the least yards: 1,289. He also has the worst passer completion percentage in the entire NFL (48.6). -Speaking of passer completion, the only quarterbacks who have completed less of their passes than Kerry Collins are Russell, Matt Hasselbeck, Derek Anderson, Tyler Thigpen, and Dan Orlovsky. Jon Kitna is right ahead of him. However, he's tied for second with Jeff Garcia for least interceptions (2). Jason Campbell is #1, who threw his first two of the season last week. -Dallas has committed the most penalties (71), creating the biggest gap between any two teams (Cleveland is #2 with 63). New England has the least (24). Green Bay, however, has the most penalty yards (575), and Houston has the least (209). -The Jets, Cowboys, and Seahawks have made all but one of their fourth down attempts. The Steelers, Chiefs, and Eagles have only made one of theirs (Pittsburgh has the most attempts of the three: 7). -Tampa Bay has found themselves in the most third down situations (132). The 49ers are last with 91. However, they lead in fumbles along with Dallas and Cinci (13) and are in a three-way tie for second most interceptions (11, with Denver and Dallas). -The Titans have the best giveaway difference (+10). Denver has the worst (-11).

Hey, when you beat a team at this point who is .500 or below, it's nothing to brag too much about. You're in pretty good company. That being said, based on a ranking system like that, the Titans aren't going to look great no matter what. There aren't too many games in their schedule where a win would look really impressive. I suppose individual arguments could be made for the Texans, Browns, Bears, Jets, and Colts, but that's all contingent on the rest of the season for those teams. The only definite big challenge left is the Steelers. Which also means that when they do most likely lose to a non-Steelers team, people are going to rag on them like crazy. They're not going to have an opportunity to gain any legitimate respect until the playoffs.

Granted, I didn't watch the game, but Collins' completion percentage was the lowest its been for a single game so far this season (48%) and he had no TDs. Judging by ESPN's play-by-play description, I wouldn't say he played pretty fucking well. With only completing 48% of his passes, it's a stretch to even call him consistent. But with no INTs, he's not throwing the game away for his team. I'm not trying to rag on the Titans. I think they're legitimately one of the best teams right now, but it's certainly not because of Collins. Even with zero INTs, it's hard to say an 18/37 game is efficient or "mistake-free," so there aren't a lot of compliments to throw around for Collins. But their defense is playing well, their rushing game is good, their offensive line gives very few opportunities for sacks, and Collins rarely throws the ball away. So while I wouldn't agree that he's playing all that well, the rest of the team is. Ok, wait .... so which is it ? I mean yeah, 48% isn't wonderful by any stretch. But uh, zero INT's and not throwing the ball away, and not making stupid throws makes up for some of that lack of completion %. As you said, he literally isn't throwing the game away for his team. As I've stated before, all he's asked to do is not pull an Eli and fuck it up. Again today he didn't. He was throwing especially well in the 4th qt when he was 4-5 for 48 yds in driving the Titans into game winning field goal range. You know, when they needed him and the passing game and judging by earlier conversations in this thread, I guess Chicago and Tampa Bay aren't all that wonderful either considering their play against as woeful of teams as they played Don't get me wrong; I think the Titans are very good. But it's not because of Collins. I don't think he so much as adds to the team, but he just doesn't subtract. That makes him better than QBs like Rex Grossman (on one of his usual bad days), but not as affective as someone like Eli Manning (on one of his good days). But really, we have the same general opinion; we're just arguing semantics at this point.

Apparently it "doesn't look good," according to ESPN. I remember hearing during the halftime show that they were going to do a test tomorrow to evaluate how serious it is, so we'll find out for sure then.

Granted, I didn't watch the game, but Collins' completion percentage was the lowest its been for a single game so far this season (48%) and he had no TDs. Judging by ESPN's play-by-play description, I wouldn't say he played pretty fucking well. With only completing 48% of his passes, it's a stretch to even call him consistent. But with no INTs, he's not throwing the game away for his team. I'm not trying to rag on the Titans. I think they're legitimately one of the best teams right now, but it's certainly not because of Collins. Even with zero INTs, it's hard to say an 18/37 game is efficient or "mistake-free," so there aren't a lot of compliments to throw around for Collins. But their defense is playing well, their rushing game is good, their offensive line gives very few opportunities for sacks, and Collins rarely throws the ball away. So while I wouldn't agree that he's playing all that well, the rest of the team is.

ESPN Fantasy has Warner ranked #1 and Orton #5. So far this season Warner has more yards and more TDs. He also plays on a pass-first team. Add that to the fact that you don't want your game to complete hinge on the Bears' offense, and it seems that Warner is the logical start, although it could easily work against you. But Warner is the safer way to go since I wouldn't be surprised if the Bears had Forte run all over the Lions' defense. Warner is almost guaranteed to get more attempts to throw, so that's what I would do.

Different things motivate different people. I think if you enjoy the games and are playing on a regular schedule because of that, you can be motivated by the fact that it keeps track of how you are doing at reaching your goal. Some people just need to see their progress charted and displayed in a more interactive fashion. Others may not though. But for some people, I have seen it work as a decent motivating tool. But I do agree that if you're completely unmotivated going in, it's not going to get you out of that funk. Then again, what piece of exercise equipment would? You need some motivation to begin with.

I got it for the wifey on our anniversary and have played it several times. You probably wouldn't lose a ton of weight real quickly. I read a review at AV Club that said it would be more accurate to call it Wii Posture. The main emphasis is on stretching and straightening your body. There are some aerobics games that are okay. One of them consists of sticking the remote in your pocket and running in place. It's not exactly the most fun you'll have playing a video game. But like most Wii games that encourage a lot of movement, you'll get out of it what you put into it. If you're looking for motivation, it could be helpful. It keeps track of your weight with charts and it will keep track of how far along you are to reaching your goal in the time that you want to reach it. Since it keeps track of your scores for certain games, you can also be motivated to beat your push-up record or whatever. It's not like you couldn't keep track of that stuff yourself, but it's a nice feature. I would say it's a good companion to a normal exercise routine and healthy eating. Playing Wii Fit alone probably won't provide enough exercise to solve your weight problems. If you have the cash, I'd suggest buying the game and something like an elliptical machine since going out isn't a convenient option. Also, don't count out bundling up and going for a jog (as long as it's not too snowy). Once you get moving, you'll be pretty warm. And if you're like me and get a little self-conscious about running in public when you're not in good shape, it's nice to have the extra clothing on. And good luck. I'm in a similar boat as you. I had some medical problems and gained some weight that I'm working at putting off before all my clothes stop fitting comfortably. We're looking into an elliptical since I want to lose weight and my wife will want to after she has the baby. When we lived in the BG/Toledo area we frequented a gym, but we almost exclusively used the elliptical machines, so we figured it would be cheaper in the long-run just to buy one. Anyways, I hope you find something that works for you.

Some fun stats leading into week 9:

The first 10 seasons of The Simpsons is some of the greatest television ever produced. It's had its ups and downs since then, and to be honest, I could never get into enough to be an every-week viewer since season 10. My Tivo records some of the newer episodes as suggestions once in a while and they range from okay to good. I like the first three seasons of Family Guy, with season 3 being its peak. Seasons 4 and on have been really hit and miss. And even when it hits, the episodes aren't nearly as rewatchable as The Simpsons in its prime. If we're talking overall, The Simpsons beats Family Guy easily. If we're comparing current seasons, I could go either way. Family Guy probably makes me laugh harder, but The Simpsons is more consistently funny.

Every team has injuries, and every team has to work around those injuries. You can't judge a team based on how good they would or should be doing. You have to base it on how they are doing. If Parker comes back and their rushing productivity increases, then it increases. I said earlier that the analysis of stats can be subjective, so it's fair for everyone to have their own spin on them. But you can't just take away an injury to say one team is better than the other. NFL teams aren't played with 100% of their roster healthy. A lot of times a team's greatness is defined by their ability to work around their injuries and weakness. Even when Parker comes back, I'm not convinced their running game will be enormously improved. Parker has had a total of 66 attempts this season. Mewelde Moore has had 65. Their longest runs? Both have recorded 32 yards. Number of rushing TDs? Both have three (Parker only managed to score on the Texans, and Moore has an additional receiving TD). Total rushing yards: Parker has 263 and Moore has 322. Moore averages one yard more than Parker. Parker has started in three games (Texans, Browns, Eagles); Moore has started in three as well (Jaguars, Bengals, Giants), and had 8 attempts vs. the Ravens. Moore has started against the 7th best team in rush defense (NY Giants--he recorded 94 total yards). Parker started against the ninth (Philly--he had a total of 20 yards). All of the other teams ranked in the bottom half. Like I said, stats are facts, their analysis is subjective. But I'm not sure if there's much there among the facts to support a claim that Parker is going to bail out that horrible o-line to raise them among the rushing elite with the Titans (or that they'd be much higher is he had played). You could easily say that Parker is great and he'll do amazing, but there's nothing there to back that claim up. I'll gladly admit that I'm wrong if Parker comes back and makes the running game competitive with the Titans', but for now, there's no evidence that their terrible o-line won't hold him back from doing so.

With that thinking every game this year could be different. Saying " they were a penalty away" is dumb, because that could possibly happen in any game. Exactly. That is 100% homer logic, which we have all been guilty of at some point or another and probably all will be again. I did this once all throughout one of the Bengals' 8-8 seasons where after every loss I picked one big play the defense let happen, or one dumb penalty, or one dropped pass that "shouldn't" have happened and said that they should have won. I told myself that they were the better team and should have one more win in their record. At the end of the 8-8 season, I pretty much had them calculated somewhere around 14-2. It's terrible logic, because they did commit that penalty, or let that big play happen, or drop the pass. The NFL is a very competitive league and sometimes it comes down to a play or two, but the better teams are the ones that don't make those few crucial mistakes. I actually had this exact same thought when I was defending the Titans earlier. Look at the stats: The Titans are 28th in passing. The Steelers are 24th. The Titans are 4th in rushing. The Steelers are 20th. The Titans are 4th in overall defense. The Steelers are 1st. I think the main difference is that the Titans have a mediocre QB and a great o-line, while Pittsburgh has a good QB and a terrible o-line. Health conditions or not, it doesn't change their production. It's very similar, and actually leans more in the favor of the Titans. Statistics are completely objective, but the analysis of them is not. However, I'm not sure how you can twist these around to say that Pittsburgh is a better or much different team other than saying that the Titans have an easier schedule. Considering their next two opponents (Packers and Bears), we may have a better idea in two weeks. Record wise, yes they're the best team in the NFL. You can cling to that all you want. I find it hard to put them at the top of the list when they've not played a 5- or 6-win team, though. They're probably the best team in the AFC right now but I think there's three, four, maybe even five NFC teams better than them. I was going to drop CHFF's Quality Standings because we got into a bit of a riff over it, but you brought this up, so here are some stats to back you up. Of Tennessee's 7 wins, only one of their victories has come against a team with a record higher than .500 (which was the Ravens). Of course this could fluctuate depending on how well the Vikings, Colts, Jaguars, and Texans do in the next two months. But six of their seven wins have come against teams struggling to have a winning record at this point. They have Green Bay and Chicago coming up though (both are 4-3). More interesting (as you pointed out, AD) is that they have lost to zero opponents with a winning record, which signifies that they are largely untested against the elite of the NFL this year (but really, at this point who the hell really knows who that is anyways). To put it into perspective, teams that have beaten at least three other teams with a +.500 record are Washington, Dallas, Tampa Bay, and Carolina. All of whom, like you guessed, were NFC teams. I think the Titans are a good team, and in a traditional ranking system, you have to put them at #1. You play with the schedule you've been given, and there's not a whole lot else they can do but be 7-0 at this point. But if you're ranking teams based on how good they actually are--schedule be damned--it's hard to put them over some of the teams in the NFC who are performing very well. In that scenario, your schedule can work against you, and you'll just have to prove yourself in the playoffs. But so what? The Titans are pretty much guaranteed to make the playoffs, and if they really are the best, then they'll advance all the way through; then Titans fans can gloat. But until then, it's hard for them to prove themselves against the NFL's "elite" when they don't have them on their schedule.

It will be interesting to see what they do with the QB situation if they lock up a playoff spot as soon as November. On one hand, it may be a good idea to see how the team performs with Vince Young, on the other hand, if things are still working out well with Collins, it would be stupid to switch things up just for the sake of curiosity. I assume he'll get put out there for a halftime or two before the regular season closes though. But yeah, despite the good things that the Titans have been doing, I have a hard time seeing them in the Superbowl with Collins leading the way. With QBs like the Eli, Peyton, Rivers, Brees, Romo, McNabb, etc. out there, it would just look weird. It has been the Bizarro NFL year though. Maybe if the Cowboys make it to the Superbowl and Romo gets injured again, we could be treated to a Collins vs. Johnson QB duel.

I'm pretty much neutral with the Titans, and I do think once we hit to post-season things will get much more difficult for them, but their passing game isn't terrible. Consider this, which I read here: They may not be putting up Brees-like numbers when passing, but they aren't making many mistakes. Their defense is great, they have a solid running game, and they make few mistakes when passing. Do I think they're straight-up the best team in the NFL or that they'll make the Superbowl? Not exactly. But calling them one-dimensional is a tough sell as long as Collins and their defense continues to make few mistakes and their running game continues to be productive. EDIT: In all fairness, here's a blurb from the same article: Plus, the Titans have only beaten one team who currently stands as having a record that is over .500. I still wouldn't call the one-dimensional because they aren't the best in every aspect of the game.

A personal favorite of mine: http://ca.youtube.com/watch?v=HyophYBP_w4 EDIT: As opposed to being someone else's favorite... of mine.

Alright, alright. So the stat didn't doesn't quite reflect the Cowboys' standing. At least we can agree to disagree on the ranking system without passive aggressively taking digs at each other every week. (Y) This is all coming secondhand, so take it for what it is. But I live in the Akron area, which is pretty much Little Cleveland when it comes to sports, and I've heard from plenty of Browns fans that Brady gets a lot more money if he plays for something like 1/4 of the season, so it's unlikely they'd pull the trigger on him too early unless there's no other choice. EDIT: Here are some interesting stats ripped from here:

Sam: Come on Mr. Frodo. I can't carry it for you, but I can carry you! And who can forget http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y9KyBdPeKHg.

Another interesting stat I just read: St. Louis has outscored the Redskins and Cowboys 53-31. Also: Aaron Rodgers boasts more passing yards than Brett Favre (1,668 to 1,321), a higher YPA average (7.5 to 6.8), a better passer rating (98.8 to 92.3) and more wins (4 to 3). And one more: In less than six full games, Cassel has been sacked 25 times – four more times than Tom Brady was sacked in the entire 2007 regular season. All three of these were shamelessly stolen from here.

Some stats I found/heard that, while pretty cookie cutter, I thought were interesting: -Drew Brees is dominating all other QBs in terms of yardage, beating out Jay Cutler (2 overall) by close to 400 yards. However, he ties for 5th when it comes to TDs (Kurt Warner and Aaron Rodgers share 5th with him). -The Titans have allowed only one passing touchdown so far. -Jason Campbell is the only starting QB who has not thrown a single INT. JaMarcus Russell, Trent Edwards, Marc Bulger, and Jeff Garcia share the #2 slot with 2 INTs each. JT O'Sullivan is at the bottom of the list with 10. -Brett Favre is right behind O'Sullivan with 8 INTs, although he is tied for third place with Cutler when it comes to TDs (he has 13). -Dan Orlovsky has the longest pass at 96 yards. As for QBs who have started every game so far, David Garrard is at the bottom; his longest is 33 yards. -Kurt Warner's PCT is still high, at 70, but Philip Rivers boasts the best Passer Rating at 108.5. Warner's is 102.8. -Clinton Portis has the most rushing yards: 818. The second highest is Adrian Peterson, who has 684. Portis is also the only RB who breaks the 100 YPG mark (116.9), but Michael Turner is close behind, averaging 99.5. -LenDale White only has 314 yards, but has the most rushing TDs (8). He also has the longest run of the season: 80 yards. -Devery Henderson is averaging the most yards per catch: 31. He only has 15 receptions though. -For WRs, there is no clear standout when it comes to TDs. Larry Fitzgerald, Terrell Owens, Hines Ward, Anquan Boldin, and Chris Chambers are all in first place with 5 TDs each. Two of those, however, are Cardinals (Fitzgerald and Boldin). And Chambers did not play in weeks 6 and 7.

Yeah, when you look at the bottom of the NFL, some teams deserve to be there (Chiefs, Lions, Seahawks due to injuries), but the Rams always struck me as a team who wasn't playing as well as they actually were. They definitely don't look like a playoff team, but they've shown their true colors the past two weeks; they aren't capable of being champions, but they are capable of being competitive with the top tier. Their defense will hold them back from doing anything significant in terms of a post-season, but they have a good offense to build on, and people shouldn't be shocked when they score a lot. Although it's really hard to blame anyone after several dismal games. I certainly didn't give them a vote of confidence early, but that had more to do with me expecting more from the Cowboys than I should have. >_<

Maybe the logic is legit. Kansas City beat Denver, so I guess they should be defeating the Chargers in week 10. This really is turning out to be a weird season.

They would, which is why CHFF's Quality Rankings are typically very accurate. As the season progresses, the rankings begin to look very, very accurate, and eliminates so-so teams with very easy schedules ranked higher than great teams with difficult schedules. Like I said, Cowboys fans should be patient, because in the longrun they're going to look much better in the Quality Rankings and normal rankings (which they already look good in). Which is why anybody who uses the Quality Rankings to judge teams during the season is a complete retard. They're not even accurate until the end of the season, so they're useless until the new year basically. My experiences with this system is that it begins to become relevant at about the halfway point, which is what we're getting very close to. I think certain teams' situations can make them less accurate at this point (and you could certainly argue that for the Cowboys), but referencing a second ranking system in general isn't exactly completely retarded.

They would, which is why CHFF's Quality Rankings are typically very accurate. As the season progresses, the rankings begin to look very, very accurate, and eliminates so-so teams with very easy schedules ranked higher than great teams with difficult schedules. Like I said, Cowboys fans should be patient, because in the longrun they're going to look much better in the Quality Rankings and normal rankings (which they already look good in).

Agreed. That kind of logic leaves way too much room to make any argument you want. The Rams beat the Redskins, and the Redskins beat the Cowboys, but the Rams aren't better than the Cowboys. No one would make that argument, but you could make it going by that logic. And really, at the end of the season, you could make a positive argument for any team with that logic. I do think that people are hopping aboard the Cowboys Hate Bandwagon too eagerly, but the "A beat B, and B beat C" rationale doesn't hold up. The Cowboys are good, but haven't been playing as well as it seemed like they would. Their fans should be patient and wait for them to have one or two dominating games and then they'll get to boast their record without using gimmicky logic.

Here's an interesting article I read over at CHFF. It's a good read.