RotoWire Partners
RotoWire Blogs
All Sports
Baseball
Football
Basketball
Hockey
Golf
Recent Comments
Featured Bloggers
Chris Liss
Jeff Erickson
Dalton Del Don
Andre' Snellings
Erik Siegrist
Jason Thornbury
Peter Schoenke
Multi-Media
About RSS
Podcasts
More info
FANTASY LEAGUES
Baseball Commissioner
FANTASY FOOTBALL
Fantasy Football News
Fantasy Football Draft Kit
Fantasy Football Magazine
Football Draft Software
FANTASY BASEBALL
Fantasy Baseball News
Draft Kit
Magazine
Draft Software
Email Reports
Email Preferences

RotoWire.com Football Blog
Search All of RotoWire.com Blogs:

BlogsAll Sports   Baseball   Football   Basketball   Hockey   Golf  

Vikes Made Right Move
Former Eagles offensive coordinator Brad Childress has been named Vikings head coach. I don't think Vikings fans think it's a huge positive hire, but it's not clearly a bad one either. Above all it represents a change in attitude at the top and that's a good thing. It was time for Mike Tice to go. Here's the best analysis I saw of the Tice firing: http://www.startribune.com/562/story/161285.html It was time to quit making excuses for this guy. I love how some in the media said his firing was unfair because he rallied his team from a 2-5 start. Wasn't he the same guy who started the team out 2-5 even though he had a healthy No. 1 QB? Why give him more credit for turning things around when he got everyone in the hole the first place. Those were ugly losses early on that seemed less based on tactical mistakes than ones of attitude and failure to see the bigger picture (like preventing turnovers). And don't offer up the previous owner's cheapness as an excuse. Last offseason Tice got everything he wanted as far as Randy Moss, more spending on defensive players, etc. He had it the way he wanted this season and came out cold at the start of the season. Also, by even his own measure after five seasons he was a failure. He never met his primary goals: winning the super bowl or the division. Tice also had a good list of his priorities when he took the job that had me excited about him as a coach. He listed things like not turning the ball over, running the ball and preventing big plays on defense. Yet by his own criteria he was a failure since his teams didn't reflect those priorities. Lastly, the Vikings team and organization was a joke the last few years both on and off the field. The fish stinks at the head. As the article above points out, Tice is partly responsible for this. The players should have more respect to do what they did on the field (Randy Moss last year) and off the field. I'm not sure if Brad Childress will be a great coach, but the fact he wouldn't take crap from T.O. means the attitude on and off the field will change. That's a good start.

Posted by Peter Schoenke at 1/6/2006 1:40:00 PM
Comments (0)

childress is a good hiring
I totally agree that its nice to see a team hire someone new as opposed to oh.... hiring Norvus. I hope Norvus never gets an assistant coaching gig again either. Even Lloyd Carr is capable of running Norvus' famed play-action double slant play so there's really no use for Norvus anymore.

As for Childress, I don't think we know much about him as a person since he doesn't get too much pub, but he has been a great coordinator for the Eagles. The offense always put points on the board even before T.O. and all he had were good tackles, Donovan, and a bunch of 3rd wide recievers. I'll be interesting to see how the Vikes defense responds though.

Posted by Eddie at 1/6/2006 12:43:00 PM

Comments (0)

Re: Vikes Hire Childress
Philly Peeps, what's your take on Childress? And Vikes fans, is he the man you wanted?



Posted by Jason Thornbury at 1/6/2006 11:27:00 AM

Comments (0)

Vikes Hire Childress
I'm glad to see the Vikings hired Brad Childress to be their new coach. Not so much because I think Childress is the answer in Minnesota (maybe, maybe not), but because the Vikes didn't mindlessly recycle a failed former coach. Football actually seems less apt than, say, baseball to keep hiring re-treads, but it always makes me shake my head when I see failed coaches continually be given second chances (and third and fourth chances).



Posted by Jason Thornbury at 1/6/2006 10:58:00 AM

Comments (4)

ESPNews...
Is the "Dancing with Stars" clip (every 15 minutes) featuring Jerry Rice and Kenny Mayne, really necessary? Just when I was starting to recover from the "Big and Rich" commercial that they played every five minutes...

Posted by Mike D. at 1/6/2006 9:00:00 AM
Comments (0)

Brady was the MVP...
Alexander had the best individual season, so if the vote is based on that, then he's the right choice. But if it is based on which player was most indispensable to his team, it's Brady, with Manning a close second. Seems to me the MVP voters were not on the same page (in terms of criteria) based on the way the vote was split.

Posted by Mike D. at 1/6/2006 8:55:00 AM
Comments (2)

V. Young to Houston...
makes sense to me...Obviously, an overhaul is needed there...trade Carr (for a pick they can use for O line help) so he gets a fresh start and keep the solid RB corps in place. Carr could thrive in the right situation, but Young's upside in undeniably higher. Throw in the fact that he's a Longhorn and the marketing potential and the pick is a winner...

Posted by Mike D. at 1/6/2006 8:51:00 AM
Comments (2)

Alexander MVP
Shaun Alexander was named MVP. I think he was deserving, though I wouldn't have had a problem if Peyton or Tiki won.



Posted by Jason Thornbury at 1/5/2006 11:36:00 AM

Comments (2)

Young and Fouts
Young seems to have something almost as special as Bush. I've seen QBs like him before with all that scrambling ability, but then you see them throw and it's kind of like watching old people eat. His throws are nice and he even seems to maintain some accuracy even when those long arms and legs are moving all over the place. I also thought Fouts was awesome. College guys: is he always that good in his analysis? I've always liked him, and some think he's too classy for the pros and doesn't sell the things the network wants him to sell enough, so now he's doing college. The line about Bush flying around like he was playing Quiddish was beautiful.

Posted by Tim Schuler at 1/5/2006 10:00:00 AM
Comments (0)

Observation from the Big Game
Not that I know anything about college football, but when Texas had the ball around the 20 with 45 seconds left, all I could think was - they really should let them score on the next play and give Leinart enough time to work with. USC was only down three after the two-point conversion, and 40 seconds or so probably would have been ample time, given that they almost did it in 16 seconds.

Just seemed foolish to rely on the defense which got shredded all game, rather than the offense that racked up over 500 yards. I know letting Texas score would look bad, but do you want to win the game or not?

The counterargument is that Texas almost didn't make it - needing to go on fourth down, but it seemed that two of those plays - designed pass plays in the end zone were completely stupid when Young could run for seven or eight yards at will. Why not just roll him out every play and let him make up his mind on the fly? Which eventually they did, and he scored.

In any event, the "let them score" strategy when you're up by less than a score to get the ball back is taboo for obvious reasons, but there are certainly cases where it's the best chance you have to win. Today's game, you could argue either way, but if a team were up one, and their opponent had the ball at the 10 yard line, first and 10 with 2 minutes left (and no timeouts)- clearly you let them score.



Posted by Chris Liss at 1/5/2006 1:28:00 AM

Comments (5)

Poor Keith Jackson
What was with Keith Jackson Wednesday night? He was, well, less than his usual stellar self. Maybe it just got too late for him. Maybe it was past his bedtime. He's no spring chick after all. Dan Fouts carried him all night. At the end of the third quarter, Jackson thought USC had called time out. On Texas' two-point conversion, Jackson wondered allowed why the clock didn't run. Yikes.



Posted by Jason Thornbury at 1/4/2006 11:05:00 PM

Comments (0)

560 Yards vs. Big Bad Texas?
I thought the Big 12 played defense? I thought Texas was supposed to have a better defense than USC had seen all year? I thought USC's offense was supposed to wilt under the UT pressure? Even though USC lost, it proved its offensive muscle wasn't built on poor Pac-10 defenses. In fact, six of USC's opponents this year held the Trojans to less yards than Texas did in the Rose Bowl. So, stop saying the Pac 10 doesn't play defense people.



Posted by Jason Thornbury at 1/4/2006 10:59:00 PM

Comments (3)

Young v. Leinart v. Bush for #1
This is going to be a great draft but all three potential top picks have question marks. There is great depth from top to bottom in the draft, but no one besides D'brickshaw Ferguson or A.J. Hawk that come without questions.

While everyone seems to think it is a foregone conclusion that Leinart is the #1 QB, I think after workouts, the two QB's will flip flop unless the team picking just doesn't want to take a PR hit. I feel that is a big reason why the niners took Alex Smith last year who's college numbers seemed to overshadow his physical deficiencies. Leinart is the traditional quarterback and the golden boy, but he looks like Drew Bledsoe without the quick release and arm strength. His deep balls have too much air under them (although its the prettiest damn deep ball since Warren Moon and Jeff Blake were playing) and he will not have the pocket protection he had at USC. He makes good reads, excellent touch on the ball, but really, if Andrew Walters played at USC and didn't injure his shoulder last year, isn't that what we're looking at with Leinart (a statue QB with touch)? Maybe I'm exaggerating, but I don't think Leinart is in the class of Carson Palmer or Big Ben.

As for Young, his only comparison is Mike Vick and while Texas has a simplified playbook, he makes good reads at the line and seems to have a feel for blitz reads. He audibles to the draw when necessary, throws the hitch and slant well, and when all else fails, he can save a broken play. His biggest question mark is whether a team will accomodate him and play out of the shotgun more like Jax has done for Leftwich. Either way, he will have to adjust to playing under center and his delivery is sidearmed like David Carr, but it works for Young and he does a good job finding passing lanes unlike COUGH Chad Henne.

Bush also has questions, is he a RB, is he a WR, is he Desmond Howard? Alright, I definitely feel Bush will live up to the hype cause his athletic ability is tremendous, but like Young, a team will have to change its playbook. Bush is not a 1st or 2nd down running back and NFL teams should use the USC model. Play him in the slot on 1st and 2nd, then put him in the backfield on 3rd. While his body type is a bit similar to Cadillac, the Caddy is a bit stronger and compact, which allows him to take the 1st and 2nd down pounding between the tackles. Even the Cadillac, who's a bit stronger had injury problems this year. Bush would be a great fit in Houston since they already have Domanick Davis. While neither back is a hammer, Davis gets it done on 1st/2nd and the two out of a pro set or a single back formation with Bush in the slot on third would drive any defense crazy. But, I don't think he can go to any team and start at running back. He is a hybrid player and should be treated as such. If you created a position for Charles Haley, you can do it for Reggie.



Posted by Eddie Huang at 1/4/2006 10:23:00 PM

Comments (0)

They are gonna make him a Saint...
At this point, Vince Young probably has more to lose than gain by staying at Texas. He goes out on top with an impressive clutch performance. He stays in school -- maybe he gets hurt. With that style of play, it could happen. His overall game needs a bit of work, but he continues to improve as a passer and remember Leinart is not perfect either.



Posted by Mike Doria at 1/4/2006 9:55:00 PM

Comments (2)

Gov. Lynn Swann?
Lynn Swann is running for governor of Pennsylvania as a Republican. Wonder if Democrats will pelt him with Oreos like they did Michael Steele, an African American running for the Senate in Maryland.



Posted by Jason Thornbury at 1/4/2006 6:12:00 PM

Comments (2)

College Football Playoff
National Review Online has an article today by one John Tamny extolling the perceived virtues of the current non-playoff college football system. He must have drunk too many brews at his favorite bowl.

1. He begins by claiming college football's system is better than the NFL because playoff-bound NFL teams can tank meaningless games. Come on, John, you don't see the difference? In the NFL, teams qualify for playoff seedings based on division and conference finish. In a college playoff, teams would qualify based upon their BCS ranking (say, the top eight). Therefore, teams still would have to win their final games in hopes of garnering the best seeding possible. The Colts treated their last two games as exhibitions because they had large division and conference leads. Absent divisions and conferences, Week 16 against the Seahawks (12-2 at the time) would have been a crucial game for the Colts (13-1 at the time).

This is how it would be in college football, which is why, contrary to Tamny's assertion, USC would not have rested Reggie Bush in its last two games had a playoff been in place. USC still would have the incentive of earning the top seed, and two losses might knock it out of a top-eight ranking and the playoffs.

2. Tamny praises the beauty of "late-season slip-ups" dooming "championship hopes." This is actually one of College football's problems. A team can lose an early season game and crawl back atop the rankings by late November. Yet a team that wins 10 games and loses its finale inevitably plummets in the polls, knocking it out of title contention. Both are one-loss teams. Why is a loss in November any worse than a loss in September?

3. He says the bowl system is important because it gives non-contending teams something to play for. Fine. Keep the lower-tier blows for those who don't make the playoff.

4. Absurdly, he argues a playoff doesn't necessarily crown the best team, asking if anyone truly believes Villanova was college basketball’s best team in 1985. OK, do you, John, really believe that 1984 "national champion" 13-0 BYU, which played the likes of Utah State and played in a non-New Year's Day bowl against an un-ranked opponent, was better than 11-1 Washington, which defeated No. 2 Oklahoma in the Orange Bowl that year?

5. He then tries to claim the superiority of college football's system over college hoops by contrasting the limited weight of one regular-season loss in college hoops to the hefty weight of one loss in college football. But college basketball teams play 30 games, or more. College football teams play 12, at most. Of course a loss is more valuable in a 12-game season than in a 30-game season. Playoff or not, that wouldn't change.

6. Tamny ends with "college football fans are treated to a single-elimination season. Why mess with that?" But college football is NOT single elimination. Go back just a couple years. LSU won the 2003 BCS title with a 13-1 record, while the AP voted 12-1 USC No. 1. Neither was eliminated because of their sole loss. And without a playoff neither could claim the championship outright.

And that is precisely the problem. Every other sport on the planet has a playoff to definitively determine a champion. College football leaves it up to whims, luck and chance.

Perhaps National Review should stick to politics.



Posted by Jason Thornbury at 1/4/2006 5:16:00 PM

Comments (0)

M.V.Who?
Speaking of the Steelers and their MVP, the team voted and selected two co-MVPs (with coach Bill Cowher's blessings and possible finanglings). I defy anyone on these boards to name them. I'll give you a hint -- the offensive and defense both got an MVP

Posted by John Toperzer at 1/4/2006 2:43:00 PM
Comments (6)

More MVP Chatter
Interesting point, Jeff - the problem with this season is that there's no dominant player, a la LT or Ray Lewis or Deion Sanders, from another position this year. Steve Smith was pretty good, but I don't think the argument is that compelling for him. Antonio Gates was playing like an MVP for a few weeks, too, but then again so was Tomlinson on his team - which didn't make the playoffs anyway. Brian Urlacher had a good year, but as I think it was Salfino and Pianow in the Breakfast Table argued, that defense is a lot more than Urlacher. Big Ben Roethlisberger, by the way, quietly had another very good year, and talk about a team that wouldn't sniff the playoffs without its key player...

Herbie, while you make some fair points, must you make both the point that Alexander scored 28 touchdowns AND that he led the league in scoring with 168 points. Isn't that just a bit of sophistry for the mathematically challenged? And no matter how you slice up the yardage - into 100 yard games, 200 yard games, early in the year, late in the year, it is what it is. Slicing, dicing and repeating the numbers isn't really an argument. And who cares what teams were ranked high and low in yards allowed against the run - did you know that the Packers, Jets and Saints were the top three teams in yardage against vs. the pass this year? Does that mean anything? Yards per carry against is probably more important, and even then, it doesn't matter that much. The bottom line is that the Seahawks played bad teams all year, had possessions in the red zone against defenses that weren't good, ran the ball a lot in the red zone, and Alexander is a powerful runner behind a great offensive line. He's not anywhere close to the MVP, however. Not in yards from scrimmage, not in yards per carry and not in importance to his team. Put Thomas Jones, Rudi Johnson or Steven Jackson on the Seahawks, and they win 12 games minimum against that cake schedule. Put those guys on the Giants, and they don't make the playoffs.

Posted by Chris Liss at 1/4/2006 1:24:00 AM

Comments (0)

NFL MVP: Is the Award Itself a Fraud?
Herbie mentioned that running backs "... can and should be MVP candidates ..." in a previous post, and cited five recent winners. That led me to look up all the MVP winners, focusing more on the last three decades. The timeframe is somewhat arbitrary - it's pretty much the span in which I've watched football. I had a few observations.

There's no one real recognized body that "officially" presents its awards, unlike MLB or the NBA. Each year, you see the Associated Press, the Pro Football Writers Association, the Sporting News and even the Maxwell Club name their winners - and they don't all march in lockstep.

Despite that, only three different players in four seasons in the last 30 years has a non-QB or RB won the award from any of the naming organizations. Two of the players are fairly obvious, the third will surprise you (answer at the bottom).

My question is this: can a non-QB or non-RB be the MVP, without being the greatest of all time at that position (and even then, not win it unanimously from the naming organizations in their respective best seasons)? I can comprehend a little why an offensive lineman doesn't get the award - he doesn't get glamorized in the highlights, and there's a lack of tangible stats for the average fan to grasp. Still, the voters here are supposed to be sophisticated reporters/followers of the game, able to appreciate such play. I find it hard to fathom, for instance, that Ray Lewis wasn't the best player on the field week-in and week-out during one of his peak seasons.

Does baseball limit their MVP voting to shortstops and first basemen only? Does basketball limit their voting to point guards and centers only? Does this bias towards QB's and RB's make the award itself a little fraudulent?

The three non-QB/RB winners in the last 30 years:

- Lawrence Taylor (1986)
- Jerry Rice (1987, 1990)
- Mark Moseley (!) (1982)

Source: http://football.about.com/od/nflhistory/l/bl_awardsmvp.htm

Posted by Jeff Erickson at 1/3/2006 11:35:00 PM

Comments (4)

Alexander (and) the Great (debate)
Without taking away from Tiki Barber’s strong second half, or Tom Brady’s career-high passing numbers, when have 28 total touchdowns, five straight seasons with over 15 total touchdowns, a league-high 1,880 yards rushing, 11 100-yard rushing games and leading the league in scoring with 168 points, a feat normally taken by kickers, been under such scrutiny?

The first two statistics are NFL records. The second statistic is even more impressive when you consider the great running backs throughout league history. Okay, I concede the Seahawks (13-3) play in the weak NFC West, where the combined record of the Rams, Cardinals and 49ers was 15-33, but would you be surprised to know the Cardinals finished the season ranked 10th against the run and the 49ers were 18th? Obviously the Rams were way down on the food chain at 28th.

If you’re curious what Barber faced in the NFC East, the Redskins were 13th, the Cowboys 15th and Eagles 21st. Barber’s tear was exceptional, second probably only to Larry Johnson’s romp through defenses, but here’s the biggest difference between Barber and Alexander. Barber accumulated 1,005 of his 1,860 yards rushing in the last seven games aided by two 200-yard games (one of those against the Raiders, ranked 25th against the run) and four 100-yard games. Prior to his strong second half, Barber went over 200 yards once and had one 100-yard game in the previous nine games. Alexander finished the season with 11 100-yard games and was consistent from start to finish.

Debaters can go over the merits of the Seahawks’ schedule until they’re blue in the face, but voters should be concerned if Alexander didn’t come through. That scenario never unfolded for the majority of the season. Running backs can and should be MVP candidates. Consider in a 10-year span from 1991-2000, five running backs won the honor: Thurman Thomas in ’91, Emmitt Smith in ’93, Barry Sanders as co-MVP with Brett Favre in ’97, Terrell Davis in ’98 and Marshall Faulk in ’00.

This year’s MVP vote is going to be interesting as there are five legitimate candidates in Alexander, Barber, Brady, Peyton Manning and Carson Palmer. Don’t be surprised if there’s a co-MVP. Don't be surprised if Alexander is one of them or standing alone.


Posted by Herbie Teope at 1/3/2006 9:45:00 PM
Comments (0)

LJ and Father Time: Something to Think About
With noted fantasy experts deservedly heaping praise upon the monster known as Larry Johnson, it's important to remember that age is creeping up on the Chiefs' offensive line. Future Hall of Fame tackle and anchor Willie Roaf will turn 36 before the 2006 season. He's already played in the 13 NFL seasons, and missed more games in 2005 (six) than ever before. He has always been a big, big key to KC's running game. Starting guard Willie Shields will turn 35 in September of 2006. The guy has started in 207 of 208 games since coming to the Chiefs in 1993. Amazing, but how much longer can his run of good health continue? The rest of the line won't be getting carded any time soon, either, with RT John Welbourn (30 years old), C Casey Wiegmann (33), LG Brian Waters (29), and Gonzo (30). Perhaps the most important blocker, FB Tony Richardson, will turn 35 in December. With Dick Vermeil retiring and the offensive line another year closer to retirement, LJ might not be the slam dunk many fantasy footballers are already projecting.

Posted by John Toperzer at 1/3/2006 5:25:00 PM
Comments (0)

Vegas Money Lines for the Playoffs
1/7 4:30 ET At Tampa Bay -$145 Washington 1/7 8:00 ET At New England -$360 Jacksonville 1/8 1:00 ET At NY Giants -$135 Carolina 1/8 4:30 ET Pittsburgh -$160 At Cincinnati Obviously, Vegas thinks you should get a lot of Patriots and avoid Jaguars in your playoff pools. Will any of the second round games be bigger than $-360? If Pittsburgh goes to Indy, will that be -$400? If New England goes to Indy, guarantee the line won't be that big. In other words, the Pats might be the team most likely to play two games at least. What about Seattle - if the Giants go there, I don't think it would be bigger than -$360, based on what happened the first time. Cincy at Denver could be a pretty big line, though. And while NE might be most likely to play two games, Indy is probably most likely to play three. But, of course, only a team playing this week even has a chance to play four. Just something to think about when you draft your playoff fantasy teams.

Posted by Chris Liss at 1/3/2006 10:43:00 AM
Comments (1)

Barber was the Best Back in 2005
Tiki Barber finished with 2390 yards from scrimmage, the second most of all-time. He had more yards per carry than Shaun Alexander, he had a worse offensive line and played a tougher schedule. If Alexander wins the MVP over Barber because of some walk-in TDs, that would be a shame. Larry Johnson might actually have been better, but he didn't get used enough early on, and the Chiefs didn't make the playoffs. I'd be fine with Tom Brady, Peyton Manning or Carson Palmer winning the award - just don't want to see Alexander, who doesn't catch passes, and isn't known as a good blocker, to win over Barber who had a better year under tougher circumstances.

Posted by Chris Liss at 1/2/2006 1:56:00 PM
Comments (0)

Archives
11/16/2014 - 11/22/2014
11/9/2014 - 11/15/2014
11/2/2014 - 11/8/2014
10/26/2014 - 11/1/2014
10/19/2014 - 10/25/2014
10/12/2014 - 10/18/2014
10/5/2014 - 10/11/2014
9/28/2014 - 10/4/2014
9/21/2014 - 9/27/2014
9/14/2014 - 9/20/2014
9/7/2014 - 9/13/2014
8/31/2014 - 9/6/2014
8/24/2014 - 8/30/2014
8/17/2014 - 8/23/2014
8/10/2014 - 8/16/2014
8/3/2014 - 8/9/2014
7/27/2014 - 8/2/2014
7/20/2014 - 7/26/2014
7/13/2014 - 7/19/2014
7/6/2014 - 7/12/2014
6/29/2014 - 7/5/2014
6/22/2014 - 6/28/2014
6/15/2014 - 6/21/2014
6/8/2014 - 6/14/2014
6/1/2014 - 6/7/2014
5/25/2014 - 5/31/2014
5/18/2014 - 5/24/2014
5/11/2014 - 5/17/2014
5/4/2014 - 5/10/2014
4/27/2014 - 5/3/2014
4/20/2014 - 4/26/2014
4/13/2014 - 4/19/2014
4/6/2014 - 4/12/2014
3/30/2014 - 4/5/2014
3/23/2014 - 3/29/2014
3/16/2014 - 3/22/2014
3/9/2014 - 3/15/2014
3/2/2014 - 3/8/2014
2/23/2014 - 3/1/2014
2/16/2014 - 2/22/2014
2/9/2014 - 2/15/2014
2/2/2014 - 2/8/2014
1/26/2014 - 2/1/2014
1/19/2014 - 1/25/2014
1/12/2014 - 1/18/2014
1/5/2014 - 1/11/2014
12/29/2013 - 1/4/2014
12/22/2013 - 12/28/2013
12/15/2013 - 12/21/2013
12/8/2013 - 12/14/2013
12/1/2013 - 12/7/2013
11/24/2013 - 11/30/2013
11/17/2013 - 11/23/2013
11/10/2013 - 11/16/2013
11/3/2013 - 11/9/2013
10/27/2013 - 11/2/2013
10/20/2013 - 10/26/2013
10/13/2013 - 10/19/2013
10/6/2013 - 10/12/2013
9/29/2013 - 10/5/2013
9/22/2013 - 9/28/2013
9/15/2013 - 9/21/2013
9/8/2013 - 9/14/2013
9/1/2013 - 9/7/2013
8/25/2013 - 8/31/2013
8/18/2013 - 8/24/2013
8/11/2013 - 8/17/2013
8/4/2013 - 8/10/2013
7/28/2013 - 8/3/2013
7/21/2013 - 7/27/2013
7/14/2013 - 7/20/2013
7/7/2013 - 7/13/2013
6/30/2013 - 7/6/2013
6/23/2013 - 6/29/2013
6/16/2013 - 6/22/2013
6/9/2013 - 6/15/2013
6/2/2013 - 6/8/2013
5/26/2013 - 6/1/2013
5/19/2013 - 5/25/2013
5/12/2013 - 5/18/2013
5/5/2013 - 5/11/2013
4/28/2013 - 5/4/2013
4/21/2013 - 4/27/2013
4/14/2013 - 4/20/2013
4/7/2013 - 4/13/2013
3/31/2013 - 4/6/2013
3/24/2013 - 3/30/2013
3/17/2013 - 3/23/2013
3/10/2013 - 3/16/2013
3/3/2013 - 3/9/2013
2/24/2013 - 3/2/2013
2/17/2013 - 2/23/2013
2/10/2013 - 2/16/2013
2/3/2013 - 2/9/2013
1/27/2013 - 2/2/2013
1/20/2013 - 1/26/2013
1/13/2013 - 1/19/2013
1/6/2013 - 1/12/2013
12/30/2012 - 1/5/2013
12/23/2012 - 12/29/2012
12/16/2012 - 12/22/2012
12/9/2012 - 12/15/2012
12/2/2012 - 12/8/2012
11/25/2012 - 12/1/2012
11/18/2012 - 11/24/2012
11/11/2012 - 11/17/2012
11/4/2012 - 11/10/2012
10/28/2012 - 11/3/2012
10/21/2012 - 10/27/2012
10/14/2012 - 10/20/2012
10/7/2012 - 10/13/2012
9/30/2012 - 10/6/2012
9/23/2012 - 9/29/2012
9/16/2012 - 9/22/2012
9/9/2012 - 9/15/2012
9/2/2012 - 9/8/2012
8/26/2012 - 9/1/2012
8/19/2012 - 8/25/2012
8/12/2012 - 8/18/2012
8/5/2012 - 8/11/2012
7/29/2012 - 8/4/2012
7/22/2012 - 7/28/2012
7/15/2012 - 7/21/2012
7/8/2012 - 7/14/2012
7/1/2012 - 7/7/2012
6/24/2012 - 6/30/2012
6/17/2012 - 6/23/2012
6/10/2012 - 6/16/2012
6/3/2012 - 6/9/2012
5/27/2012 - 6/2/2012
5/20/2012 - 5/26/2012
5/13/2012 - 5/19/2012
5/6/2012 - 5/12/2012
4/29/2012 - 5/5/2012
4/22/2012 - 4/28/2012
4/15/2012 - 4/21/2012
4/8/2012 - 4/14/2012
4/1/2012 - 4/7/2012
3/25/2012 - 3/31/2012
3/18/2012 - 3/24/2012
3/11/2012 - 3/17/2012
3/4/2012 - 3/10/2012
2/26/2012 - 3/3/2012
2/19/2012 - 2/25/2012
2/12/2012 - 2/18/2012
2/5/2012 - 2/11/2012
1/29/2012 - 2/4/2012
1/22/2012 - 1/28/2012
1/15/2012 - 1/21/2012
1/8/2012 - 1/14/2012
1/1/2012 - 1/7/2012
12/25/2011 - 12/31/2011
12/18/2011 - 12/24/2011
12/11/2011 - 12/17/2011
12/4/2011 - 12/10/2011
11/27/2011 - 12/3/2011
11/20/2011 - 11/26/2011
11/13/2011 - 11/19/2011
11/6/2011 - 11/12/2011
10/30/2011 - 11/5/2011
10/23/2011 - 10/29/2011
10/16/2011 - 10/22/2011
10/9/2011 - 10/15/2011
10/2/2011 - 10/8/2011
9/25/2011 - 10/1/2011
9/18/2011 - 9/24/2011
9/11/2011 - 9/17/2011
9/4/2011 - 9/10/2011
8/28/2011 - 9/3/2011
8/21/2011 - 8/27/2011
8/14/2011 - 8/20/2011
8/7/2011 - 8/13/2011
7/31/2011 - 8/6/2011
7/24/2011 - 7/30/2011
7/17/2011 - 7/23/2011
7/10/2011 - 7/16/2011
7/3/2011 - 7/9/2011
6/26/2011 - 7/2/2011
6/19/2011 - 6/25/2011
6/12/2011 - 6/18/2011
6/5/2011 - 6/11/2011
5/29/2011 - 6/4/2011
5/22/2011 - 5/28/2011
5/15/2011 - 5/21/2011
5/8/2011 - 5/14/2011
5/1/2011 - 5/7/2011
4/24/2011 - 4/30/2011
4/17/2011 - 4/23/2011
4/10/2011 - 4/16/2011
4/3/2011 - 4/9/2011
3/27/2011 - 4/2/2011
3/20/2011 - 3/26/2011
3/13/2011 - 3/19/2011
3/6/2011 - 3/12/2011
2/27/2011 - 3/5/2011
2/20/2011 - 2/26/2011
2/13/2011 - 2/19/2011
2/6/2011 - 2/12/2011
1/30/2011 - 2/5/2011
1/23/2011 - 1/29/2011
1/16/2011 - 1/22/2011
1/9/2011 - 1/15/2011
1/2/2011 - 1/8/2011
12/26/2010 - 1/1/2011
12/19/2010 - 12/25/2010
12/12/2010 - 12/18/2010
12/5/2010 - 12/11/2010
11/28/2010 - 12/4/2010
11/21/2010 - 11/27/2010
11/14/2010 - 11/20/2010
11/7/2010 - 11/13/2010
10/31/2010 - 11/6/2010
10/24/2010 - 10/30/2010
10/17/2010 - 10/23/2010
10/10/2010 - 10/16/2010
10/3/2010 - 10/9/2010
9/26/2010 - 10/2/2010
9/19/2010 - 9/25/2010
9/12/2010 - 9/18/2010
9/5/2010 - 9/11/2010
8/29/2010 - 9/4/2010
8/22/2010 - 8/28/2010
8/15/2010 - 8/21/2010
8/8/2010 - 8/14/2010
8/1/2010 - 8/7/2010
7/25/2010 - 7/31/2010
7/18/2010 - 7/24/2010
7/11/2010 - 7/17/2010
7/4/2010 - 7/10/2010
6/27/2010 - 7/3/2010
6/20/2010 - 6/26/2010
6/13/2010 - 6/19/2010
6/6/2010 - 6/12/2010
5/30/2010 - 6/5/2010
5/23/2010 - 5/29/2010
5/16/2010 - 5/22/2010
5/9/2010 - 5/15/2010
5/2/2010 - 5/8/2010
4/25/2010 - 5/1/2010
4/18/2010 - 4/24/2010
4/11/2010 - 4/17/2010
4/4/2010 - 4/10/2010
3/28/2010 - 4/3/2010
3/21/2010 - 3/27/2010
3/14/2010 - 3/20/2010
3/7/2010 - 3/13/2010
2/28/2010 - 3/6/2010
2/21/2010 - 2/27/2010
2/14/2010 - 2/20/2010
2/7/2010 - 2/13/2010
1/31/2010 - 2/6/2010
1/24/2010 - 1/30/2010
1/17/2010 - 1/23/2010
1/10/2010 - 1/16/2010
1/3/2010 - 1/9/2010
12/27/2009 - 1/2/2010
12/20/2009 - 12/26/2009
12/13/2009 - 12/19/2009
12/6/2009 - 12/12/2009
11/29/2009 - 12/5/2009
11/22/2009 - 11/28/2009
11/15/2009 - 11/21/2009
11/8/2009 - 11/14/2009
11/1/2009 - 11/7/2009
10/25/2009 - 10/31/2009
10/18/2009 - 10/24/2009
10/11/2009 - 10/17/2009
10/4/2009 - 10/10/2009
9/27/2009 - 10/3/2009
9/20/2009 - 9/26/2009
9/13/2009 - 9/19/2009
9/6/2009 - 9/12/2009
8/30/2009 - 9/5/2009
8/23/2009 - 8/29/2009
8/16/2009 - 8/22/2009
8/9/2009 - 8/15/2009
8/2/2009 - 8/8/2009
7/26/2009 - 8/1/2009
7/19/2009 - 7/25/2009
7/12/2009 - 7/18/2009
7/5/2009 - 7/11/2009
6/28/2009 - 7/4/2009
6/21/2009 - 6/27/2009
6/14/2009 - 6/20/2009
6/7/2009 - 6/13/2009
5/31/2009 - 6/6/2009
5/24/2009 - 5/30/2009
5/17/2009 - 5/23/2009
5/10/2009 - 5/16/2009
5/3/2009 - 5/9/2009
4/26/2009 - 5/2/2009
4/19/2009 - 4/25/2009
4/12/2009 - 4/18/2009
4/5/2009 - 4/11/2009
3/29/2009 - 4/4/2009
3/22/2009 - 3/28/2009
3/15/2009 - 3/21/2009
3/8/2009 - 3/14/2009
3/1/2009 - 3/7/2009
2/22/2009 - 2/28/2009
2/15/2009 - 2/21/2009
2/8/2009 - 2/14/2009
2/1/2009 - 2/7/2009
1/25/2009 - 1/31/2009
1/18/2009 - 1/24/2009
1/11/2009 - 1/17/2009
1/4/2009 - 1/10/2009
12/28/2008 - 1/3/2009
12/21/2008 - 12/27/2008
12/14/2008 - 12/20/2008
12/7/2008 - 12/13/2008
11/30/2008 - 12/6/2008
11/23/2008 - 11/29/2008
11/16/2008 - 11/22/2008
11/9/2008 - 11/15/2008
11/2/2008 - 11/8/2008
10/26/2008 - 11/1/2008
10/19/2008 - 10/25/2008
10/12/2008 - 10/18/2008
10/5/2008 - 10/11/2008
9/28/2008 - 10/4/2008
9/21/2008 - 9/27/2008
9/14/2008 - 9/20/2008
9/7/2008 - 9/13/2008
8/31/2008 - 9/6/2008
8/24/2008 - 8/30/2008
8/17/2008 - 8/23/2008
8/10/2008 - 8/16/2008
8/3/2008 - 8/9/2008
7/27/2008 - 8/2/2008
7/20/2008 - 7/26/2008
7/13/2008 - 7/19/2008
7/6/2008 - 7/12/2008
6/29/2008 - 7/5/2008
6/22/2008 - 6/28/2008
6/15/2008 - 6/21/2008
6/8/2008 - 6/14/2008
6/1/2008 - 6/7/2008
5/25/2008 - 5/31/2008
5/18/2008 - 5/24/2008
5/11/2008 - 5/17/2008
5/4/2008 - 5/10/2008
4/27/2008 - 5/3/2008
4/20/2008 - 4/26/2008
4/13/2008 - 4/19/2008
4/6/2008 - 4/12/2008
3/30/2008 - 4/5/2008
3/23/2008 - 3/29/2008
3/16/2008 - 3/22/2008
3/9/2008 - 3/15/2008
3/2/2008 - 3/8/2008
2/24/2008 - 3/1/2008
2/17/2008 - 2/23/2008
2/10/2008 - 2/16/2008
2/3/2008 - 2/9/2008
1/27/2008 - 2/2/2008
1/20/2008 - 1/26/2008
1/13/2008 - 1/19/2008
1/6/2008 - 1/12/2008
12/30/2007 - 1/5/2008
12/23/2007 - 12/29/2007
12/16/2007 - 12/22/2007
12/9/2007 - 12/15/2007
12/2/2007 - 12/8/2007
11/25/2007 - 12/1/2007
11/18/2007 - 11/24/2007
11/11/2007 - 11/17/2007
11/4/2007 - 11/10/2007
10/28/2007 - 11/3/2007
10/21/2007 - 10/27/2007
10/14/2007 - 10/20/2007
10/7/2007 - 10/13/2007
9/30/2007 - 10/6/2007
9/23/2007 - 9/29/2007
9/16/2007 - 9/22/2007
9/9/2007 - 9/15/2007
9/2/2007 - 9/8/2007
8/26/2007 - 9/1/2007
8/19/2007 - 8/25/2007
8/12/2007 - 8/18/2007
8/5/2007 - 8/11/2007
7/29/2007 - 8/4/2007
7/22/2007 - 7/28/2007
7/15/2007 - 7/21/2007
7/8/2007 - 7/14/2007
7/1/2007 - 7/7/2007
6/24/2007 - 6/30/2007
6/17/2007 - 6/23/2007
6/10/2007 - 6/16/2007
6/3/2007 - 6/9/2007
5/27/2007 - 6/2/2007
5/20/2007 - 5/26/2007
5/13/2007 - 5/19/2007
5/6/2007 - 5/12/2007
4/29/2007 - 5/5/2007
4/22/2007 - 4/28/2007
4/15/2007 - 4/21/2007
4/8/2007 - 4/14/2007
4/1/2007 - 4/7/2007
3/25/2007 - 3/31/2007
3/18/2007 - 3/24/2007
3/11/2007 - 3/17/2007
3/4/2007 - 3/10/2007
2/25/2007 - 3/3/2007
2/18/2007 - 2/24/2007
2/11/2007 - 2/17/2007
2/4/2007 - 2/10/2007
1/28/2007 - 2/3/2007
1/21/2007 - 1/27/2007
1/14/2007 - 1/20/2007
1/7/2007 - 1/13/2007
12/31/2006 - 1/6/2007
12/24/2006 - 12/30/2006
12/17/2006 - 12/23/2006
12/10/2006 - 12/16/2006
12/3/2006 - 12/9/2006
11/26/2006 - 12/2/2006
11/19/2006 - 11/25/2006
11/12/2006 - 11/18/2006
11/5/2006 - 11/11/2006
10/29/2006 - 11/4/2006
10/22/2006 - 10/28/2006
10/15/2006 - 10/21/2006
10/8/2006 - 10/14/2006
10/1/2006 - 10/7/2006
9/24/2006 - 9/30/2006
9/17/2006 - 9/23/2006
9/10/2006 - 9/16/2006
9/3/2006 - 9/9/2006
8/27/2006 - 9/2/2006
8/20/2006 - 8/26/2006
8/13/2006 - 8/19/2006
8/6/2006 - 8/12/2006
7/30/2006 - 8/5/2006
7/23/2006 - 7/29/2006
7/16/2006 - 7/22/2006
7/9/2006 - 7/15/2006
7/2/2006 - 7/8/2006
6/25/2006 - 7/1/2006
6/18/2006 - 6/24/2006
6/11/2006 - 6/17/2006
6/4/2006 - 6/10/2006
5/28/2006 - 6/3/2006
5/21/2006 - 5/27/2006
5/14/2006 - 5/20/2006
5/7/2006 - 5/13/2006
4/30/2006 - 5/6/2006
4/23/2006 - 4/29/2006
4/16/2006 - 4/22/2006
4/9/2006 - 4/15/2006
4/2/2006 - 4/8/2006
3/26/2006 - 4/1/2006
3/19/2006 - 3/25/2006
3/12/2006 - 3/18/2006
3/5/2006 - 3/11/2006
2/26/2006 - 3/4/2006
2/19/2006 - 2/25/2006
2/12/2006 - 2/18/2006
2/5/2006 - 2/11/2006
1/29/2006 - 2/4/2006
1/22/2006 - 1/28/2006
1/15/2006 - 1/21/2006
1/8/2006 - 1/14/2006
1/1/2006 - 1/7/2006