Thanks for all the typo heads upses. The Seahawks are 13-3, of course, not 11-5. Just a typo. I don't think I'm expressing some hidden bias. I did call them the best team in the NFC, after all. And hey, no NFC jokes. It's better this year.

And despite the heartwarming defense, "semifinal" is, sadly, just a typo. I meant quarterfinal. All that's being fixed.

I too am surprised by the big line on the Seattle-Washington game. Washington plays everybody close. And while Buster may in fact beat me on the Panthers and Bears, I think that one has a better chance of being not close.

Thanks for the catch, folks. I don't know when or why I got it in my head that three road teams won.

have any unexpressed thoughts?

Just kidding, but part of my job is reading these letters to pick "editors choices," and y'all are killing me. When I started reading, there were 6 pages of letters. By the time I got to Page 6, there were 7 pages. By the time I got to Page 7, there were 8.

I want to watch some TV before I pick up the kids! What about my needs?

OK, some replies etc:

jackburden: I agree on the pass interference call. It was offensive interference. But as for Champ Baily fumbling, I don't know. I wanted it to be a touchback, because the announcers were going on in such tiresome fashion about how he was just tired, not showboating, when he was CLEARLY Cadillacking the last 10 yards. But I couldn't find any solid visual evidence from any of the angles that the ball passed to the right of the pilon. It was hard to tell, but I think it really was a fumble out of bounds at the 1.

Baron Kimball: You forgot the funniest part of the whole measuring for a first down process. Yeah, the arbitrary spot of the ball and all. But how about this: After carefully using the 10-yard chain to measure within a millimeter whether the ball reached the first-down "line to gain," what do the stick guys do if it's a first down? They trot back to the sidelines and ... eyeball it to set the sticks for the next first down! So they're measuring EXACTLY 10 yards from APPROXIMATELY where the previous first down was. I love that.

SteveK writes: "The only rule worse than the possession rule is the touchdown rule."

Yeah, I keep meaning to write about this. I don't know if this is what you mean, but I hate the "break the plane" rule. It's called a TOUCH DOWN. You should have to touch the ball or some part of your body onto the ground in the end zone for it to count. Break the plane with the ball without ever setting foot in the end zone. Give me a break.

I agree with Boggle that the intentional grounding "exception" for being outside the pocket makes no sense. I presume it was instituted as an injury-prevention measure, but I don't know. It doesn't make sense as that. QB's need extra protection when they're in the pocket because they're standing still, with guys running at them. Once they take off on the run, they're just like any other player, it seems to me.

Having said that, and I don't remember now who said the "quarterback slide" rule is ridiculous, but the quarterback slide rule is fine. I don't think it's a quarterback-specific rule. I think anybody can do it. You're giving yourself up. It's the same as taking a knee. It's just taking a knee on the run. That's been a legal play for as long as there's been football.

To get to the big argument, I agree with dsholt that the touchback call on a ball fumbled out of bounds in the end zone makes sense and isn't complicated. The argument seems to be, "Why shouldn't it go back to the fumbling team at the spot of the fumble?" But it doesn't do that anywhere else on the field. With some exceptions because of the holy-roller rule, if you fumble on your own 30 and it bounces out of bounds at the 35, you get the ball on the 35. If you fumble on the opposing 5 and it goes out of bounds at the 1, you get it at the 1. If you fumble it at the 5 and it goes into the end zone and out of bounds, well, I can't think of why it shouldn't be a touchback. Every other situation in which you send the ball out of bounds in the opposing end zone, except an incomplete pass, is a touchback.

So JoeBlow says "i'm still not convinced that a fumble at the goal line should be treated any differently than a fumble at any other part of the field" while asserting that a fumble at the goal line should be treated differently than a fumble at any other part of the field.

Baron Kimball again: "1. A stiff arm to the face mask should be a facemask penalty."

I'm pretty sure this is incorrect. You can stiff arm to the facemask. You just can't grab.

Dan, amen to the idea of two levels of pass interference.

Boggle and terricon, I don't mean this as an insult, but I don't know where you've been. Most fans didn't know about the touchback rule? I can't imagine any player, never mind anyone who's watched more than a couple of football games, doesn't know that a fumble into the opposing end zone that's either recovered by the other team or goes out of bounds is a touchback. That's a basic, basic rule. As DavidWilliam says, it comes up all the time. If you watch a game a week, you'd be hard-pressed to go two years without seeing it. Without that rule, you'd just "fumble the ball" into the end zone and send a bunch of guys to either recover it or bat it out of bounds.