This isn't for your game winning 53 yarder. Though thank you for that, too.

This is for missing the 49 yarder. It might have helped give us the win just as much as your 53 yarder.

Let me explain. Nick Harper is bad. Very bad. Our safeties were leaving people wide open all day. Had you made that field goal, they would have had to drive for a touchdown. With the way our pass defense was playing, i'm not so sure that the Texans wouldn't have gotten a TD. So on behalf of myself, like minded Titans fans, and Nick Harper/our safeties, i thank you for missing that field goal.

P.S. Heimerdinger, never give up on running to the outside with CJ. That was infuriating.

Stop it. We don't need your fanposts about Vince Young (all 30 of them) and we don't need your comments. Honestly, half the people now calling for VY to start have ONLY commented on here after a loss. Where were you during the offseason? Preseason? Why do you only want to talk when you have something negative to say? I know Kerry Collins has been terrible. I know the defense has been terrible. I know special teams has been terrible. I'm not denying it. What I am denying is your claim to be a titans fan, when you only come out of the woodworks to say something negative. Nobody needs you if you don't have something productive to say, and ESPECIALLY if you can't say it coherently and calmly.

Good Day.

Why doesn't a teams success dictate prime time scheduling?

I've often asked myself this while watching dallas or oakland on sunday/monday night. Is it really good prime time to shun teams that play genuinely good football, while putting in teams that are perennial jokes? Is the pregame talk about their "storylines" really more juicy to the fan than a good, close, hard hitting football game?

I'd be inclined to say no, but that's just me as a football fan. And by the way, i'm not arguing for more Titans prime time games. We have 4, which means we have some recognition. It's more the undeserving teams that have me mad.

Here are some undeserving recipients of way too many prime time games.

1. Baltimore - 3. Nobody wants to see that unibrow throw 12 passes a game and be heralded as a star rookie. (Had to get the hate out of the way early).

2. Dallas - 6. 6 prime time games. For the 9-7 team that lost 44-6 in their last game. What's worse is that of the 6, there are 2 in November and 2 in December. Really, guys? The whole "Romo can't perform late in the season" thing has been beaten to death, and i can just as easily hear about him not performing while watching a better game.

3. Chicago - 5. Oh i get it. Cutler means they will be a far better team that didn't have an average run game and an aging defense. Right? That story will get worn out on their first Sunday nighter against Green Bay. Maybe they can sign Favre too! (Don't get me wrong. Forte is a stud. But their running game wasn't stellar even with him.)

4. San Diego - 4. This is a terrible slew of games featuring 2 where they will blow out their opposition (Oakland, Denver) and two where they will get blown out (Pittsburgh, Tennessee). The only entertaining one will be the Christmas game.

5. Oakland - 2. Sure it's only 2 games, but it's also Oakland. Id rather see Cincinatti (who has 0 prime time games) play and see what injury Carson Palmer gets next. Why can't we just ban them from prime time until they pass the LIONS in wins for the decade?

Suprisingly, i have no problem with the Thanksgiving day game for the Lions. I don't need compelling football on Thanksgiving, i have too much food in me to get excited.

Agree/Disagree? Think i'm crazy and angry and bored?

Who would they be? Since there is always a need for lively discussion i thought i would make this post. The rules are that you can have 1 player for offense and 1 player for defense. I guess if you really want you could pick a special teams playerWhich players would make our team so much better that we would instantly win the Superbowl?

My pick for defense: Nnamdi Asomugha. Imagine having the absolute best shutdown corner in the game on one side, and then Nnamdi on the other! (Just kidding.) This would make for the absolute best cornerback tandem in the league, and along with our super Hope-Griffin combo, and our always undervalued linebackers, our secondary would be absolutely dominant. Also, this could happen if we just tell Al Davis that one of our rookie corners ran a 4.1 40 yard dash.

Offense is a bit trickier. The clear choice is to either take an awesome reciever or quarterback. I am of the opinion that our recievers can be a solid group this year, so i'll go with a quarterback. The obvious choice would be taking someone like Manning (Never going to happen) or Brady (see hate filled PBQ post) but i want a young quarterback that we could keep for a long time. So i'm going with Matt Ryan. Everyone worries about a sophomore slump, but i think he is going to be a great quarterback in the league and will certainly finish ahead of the one he's destined to be compared to, Joe "Look at my enormous unibrow" Flacco. He would give us a solid QB for years to come, while our recievers develop and Chris Johnson does all those things he's talkin about.

So who would you take?

Edit: Sorry i mean for the long haul

This is just something thats been eating at me for a long time, and since i am new to Music City Miracles i thought maybe i should make a post about something. Just as a warning, it's probably going to be a lot of rambling.

The problem of the pretty boy quarterback (PBQ) is something that is often overlooked by people that complain of media bias, but to some is clearly evident. (And by the way, this isn't about Brett Favre. While he may be a diva, he isn't exactly the PBQ type i'm talking about.)

The mother of all PBQs is obviously Tom Brady. Every year the patriots are picked for the super bowl. Much was made of their 16-0 record breaking season. Here is an example of the PBQ bias. Everyone knows the Titans went 13-3, with a great 10-0 start. What did we hear during it all? Easy schedule. Clearly their easy schedule. If only Kerry Collins was a bit prettier. Would someone kindly remind the media that Brady went 16-0 in a division with the 1-15 dolphins, the 4-12 jets, and the always 7-9 bills? He ran up the score agsint division opponents for those passing records. However, because Tom Brady is at the helm, and not random quarterback guy, it's clearly his quarterbacking prowess. Also, some of you may know they instituted a new rule where defenders can't dive at the legs of a quarterback after being blocked to the ground. Let's see if they make that rule if Tyler Thigpen goes down instead of Tom Brady. I won't even bring up the fumble that wasn't in the superbowl against the Raiders.

There are plenty of other quarterbacks that are beginning to be PBQs. Philip Rivers is clearly the #2, and Jay Cutler has been enhancing his PBQ status as of late. And every year it's the Chargers that are ready to take that superbowl step and now suddenly Chicago is a strong contender. And yet, somehow the team that manhandled the superbowl champions and only lost 1 player of importance is going to fall out of the playoffs? Really? I would almost guaruntee that if we had a media favorite PBQ that we would be preseason superbowl picks every time.

Now this has been pretty much a rant against them so far, but i do have points. These PBQs are ruining the game by denying the fans of non PBQ teams the fair and balanced coverage their team deserves. (See: Any power rankings made up by media writers. Also pre and post game shows have a tendency to talk more about the PBQ team). And the fact that a PBQ can change the game (have a rule/call made) because they are a PBQ completely undermines the integrity of the game.

This is a topic i have a very high hatred for, so if you find me crazy from this post, note that i am not this crazy on all things.