Dan Gross

Hmmmm, the Chargers have the same number of road wins over 8-8 or better teams over the same period, yet they are a "class organization...." There's a fine line between stupid and clever, I guess...

He had previously been diagnosed with a heart condition. I've known of blows to the chest (hockey, baseball) causing heart attacks (hitting the chest at the wrong point in the heart beat...)... http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2005/hock...ex.html?cnn=yes

I'd like to see the quote in context of what was asked before I sling stones ("Why did your D allow that late TD with the backup RB in?" perhaps...), but I'm weird that way....

I see you're still sulking over the lack of 100 replies to your own thread...

Happy NG's Birthday, Guff!

Named after the late great Mr. Tahou? Congrats, Uncle Sh-t.

Said "great regular season coach" is 9-18 (through the end of 2004, "even up" so far this year at 3-3 considering current records...) against teams with 8-8 or better record with the Chargers...

I know you aren't the one bringing up the Chargers, but since everyone seems to point at San Diego as a model for how this organization should be run, it's worth pointing out that the Chargers are 11-25 from 2001-2004 under the same criteria. Even "as good as they are now" they can't win against "playoff calibre" teams outside their own division. Many of those wins came in their own division (much like ours, I know). They are "looking so much better" because they have faced 36 8-8 or better teams over that timeframe, versus the 43 that we have faced. This with 4 of the 5 years being with "proven genius" Schottenheimer at the helm. They have also had the "benefit" of 3 top 5 picks in the last 5 years. How many of those did they spend on offensive linemen? 0 (Picks: Manning, traded for Rivers (who's sitting the pine), Jammer and Tomlinson). How many first day picks have they spent on offensive linemen over that time? 3. How many of those are currently on the team? 1. I can't see what way you cut up that organization, especially the way they "lucked" into their QB scenario (who knows what they'd be looking like if Rivers hadn't held out...probably still pretty damn good because they had Tomlinson already on a roll...). Shall we also cover the other "class organization" Bengals? They are almost even in 2003-2004 in W-L against 8-8 or better teams under Lewis (again, most wins coming in the division), being 7-8 in that category (includes a victory against the "resting" Eagles in the last game of last season...yes, I know, something we couldn't do against the "resting" Steelers). The Bills, under "loser" Mularkey, managed the same number of wins against 8-8 or better teams last year as Cincinnati, under "winner" Lewis (4, with the Bills gathering 6 losses to Cincinnati's 5). This is a team with 5 top 10 picks in the last 7 years, you'd think they'd eventually build that into something....

Oh, I'm sure NG has it tucked away somewhere, "his precious...."

I didn't know we had 9 different receivers. I saw Euhus and Aiken get catches at the end...

At what point do we say it's the coaching? A good return includes not only good blocking, but a return man who picks his north-south lane and runs it. The undisciplined runner will do lots of east-west running thinking he can make something happen somewhere, rather than trusting that the holes will open up when he gets there. It's the blocking and the returner working as a unit, and in the particular case of the "open field" play that is a kick-return, you have to give coaching credit. However you add it up, wherever you place credit, it's a plus to take away from today.

And all things considered he looked better than the start of the season...at least I thought so. Still some stupid mistakes, but I'd say better. No gadget plays either. LT didn't get the record.

Killian's tonight.

Tonight's menu was an orange/gorgonzola salad, followed by blackened chicken, fettucini alfredo, bruschetta, Killian's to drink with Ozark Pudding a la mode for dessert. We hosted the family for my bro-in-law's birthday...

Bright sides? 1.) Lindell: 53 yarder baby! 2.) Parrish looked good on kick returns. 3.) Nate Clements just became easier to re-sign once that film gets around the league.

Here's hoping your favorite NFL team gives you the birthday present your favorite college team couldn't...

No, no, no, I ran into him Wednesday night at BTI while he was eating a bucket of 500 wings. I said "Mike, why are you not playing well?" Mike looked me straight in the eye and said "I'll tell you the same thing I told my good friends Dawgg, e-dog and DeeRay: I suck and I don't care. I'm just looking for a paycheck and will do as little as possible to get it. I pretended like my ankle was hurt, even faked the tests to make it look good, and tried to sit my ass on the bench for the rest of the year. But the coaches thought they'd put me in at guard. So I purposefully stunk at that so that they'd bench me. Don't listen to the 'injury' spin, don't listen to the pre-season talk I gave about being motivated, about how I showed up at off-season workouts in the best shape of my career. I'm a fat, lazy slob who laughs all the way to the bank every week. Now be useful and pass me the Red Hot. I don't feel like reaching all the way across the table, and all this talking has winded me."

All Kool Aid, all the time until the Bills win it in Detroit at the end of the season!

What?! All you need to do is win every game....what's so tough about that?

The bottom line for the Pats in the last few years is that if you want to beat them you'd better be up by more than a score with 5 minutes remaining in the game, or they will beat you. I think the Pats have been beaten by less than a TD two or three times in the past four years...The fortunate thing for the Bills this week is that they are playing the Anti-Patriots. If you can manage to stay within a score of the Chargers at 5 minutes left in the game, you should win.

It's pretty much the same story with Denver and Plummer, it just so happens that Plummer's having a career year this year...

Each week the Saints' fate pretty much rests in the hands of Aaron Brooks. When he has one of his "lucid moments" and manages to have a mistake free (no INTs) game, they win. When he doesn't (much more often than not), they lose....It's pretty much that simple.

Oh, sure, seagull us. Playing or watching?

Geez, you live in Florida and you're asking him to send you fish?

Thus is the life of people in the spotlight. Had he reacted negatively to being moved to guard you would be calling him a "cry baby," "selfish" and "not a team player" right now. Because he accepted the move as a way to try to produce on 1 1/2 ankles (rather than sitting on the bench), he's "lazy" and "unmotivated."