Tony Williams was the latest victim of Denver's questionable blocking tactics. AP

OK, let's get right into it. Denver and the chop blocks. Which aren't really the same as cutting. I was on a Denver radio show Thursday. That's all the, uh, hosts, wanted to talk about. Even the Denver writers were taking shots at the kind of football the Broncos practice, in the wake of RT George Foster's shot to the side of the leg of Bengals DT Tony Williams. Broken and dislocated ankle. Out for the year. Business as usual for the Broncos.

So that's what these radio guys, wanted to discuss, and I felt like quoting from that old chain-gang song, "Another man done gone." Yep, another notch on the belt. Earlier this season it was Jacksonville DE Paul Spicer. Broken leg, thanks to LT Matt Lepsis' block after he had been propped up. Out for the year. Two years ago San Diego DT Jamal Williams was lost for the season after Denver guard Steve Herndon came down on the back of his ankle and dislocated it.

The league office decided this one was illegal and Herndon was docked a game check, which came out to $17,000 and change. I seem to remember RG Dan Neil getting involved in a similar incident a few years ago, but I can't pinpoint it. What did I tell the Denver radio guys? That it was filthy football and it makes me sick. I've written this a million times.

Then they told me that Broncos coach Mike Shanahan gathered the media into the film room and showed them highlights of other similar blocks around the league. I said I thought that was just swell, but the Broncos are still the filthiest team in the NFL, and if the league's ruling forces didn't have their heads up their you know whats, something would have been done about it long ago.

So they mumbled some other stuff about Foster's block being technically legal because it didn't draw a flag, and a lot more blah blah, and the Flaming Redhead could see my look of gathering fury, and she said, "Don't say it. Choke it down," which I did because to have let fly with the collection of profanities that was gathering would've meant I'd never be invited back to the show, or similar ones, at the usual honorarium rate of zero.

The e-mails Jimmy sent through ... no, that's not a typo ... Jimmy is back from his brief stint on the crocodile wrestling circuit, while Andrew recovers from a case of swollen eyeballs, having to wade through the thousands of e-mails per week ... anyway the four that he sent through on the topic come from Hans of Washington, Brandon of Norfolk, Va., Alistair of Oakville, Ont., and Jon of Irving, Texas. Fellas, hold on, I'm not finished with this thing yet.

I would advise you gentlemen, and anyone else who cares, to send your opinions to the NFL Office, addressed to the Commissioner Tagliabue or Joe Browne, the VP of Communications, or Mike Pereira, the Director of Officials. They're all at the league office, and you can find contact information here. If you want to get even more serious about this, you could write to Rich McKay, the GM of the Atlanta Falcons, who's the Chairman of the Competition Committee, but it wouldn't exactly be fair to do it while the season is going on. Better wait until afterward.

They keep modifying the chop-block rules by itty-bitty steps, and I'm sure that each referee has his own way of calling it, but the bottom line is, players are getting crippled by what is technically legal. Or if the block is deemed illegal, then the penalty isn't stiff enough, considering that a player was totaled for the season, and his career threatened. I've been Johnny One Note at the Competition Committee press briefings for years. "Simple rule, no cutting unless you're face up...simple rule, no cutting unless you're face up..." And Tex Schramm, the Committee's co-chairman used to groan and say, "There he goes again...is there a parrot loose in the room?" And Don Shula, the other co-chairman, pulled me aside after one of the sessions and said, "What do you want to do, get all our quarterbacks killed? We've got to slow those guys down." "Simple rule," I answered, "no cutting unless you're face up...simple rule, no cutting unless you're face up."

The league wants to help the offense, which crippling the pass rushers certainly accomplishes. But it's also into image, and the image of all these guys getting broken legs via Denver's patented "bastard block" (which was what we used to call it), isn't very attractive. You can believe that it is image, not the desire to promote player safety, that might get this thing dealt with correctly.

Whew, now I'm worn out. E-mailer Of the Week is a ripper. Might as well deal with all the tough stuff at once. Dave C. of Calgary (and I'm sorry you didn't include your last name, Dave, because it goes with the EMOTW award, but I guess you figured you'd never get the prize, huh?) mentions my whine about the Vikings adding machine games boring me silly, and then, when they finish a nice, kosher, 20-3 victory, I moan about Daunte Culpepper being choked off and throwing underneath. "My question is" he writes, "what on God's green earth will make you happy enough to give this team some credit?"

I read his question to the Flaming Redhead. Her comment to Dave was as follows: "You're asking for logic from the strangest person I've ever known. I never know which way he's gonna go."

OK, Dave (and I often wonder why the best e-mails come from Canada), I'll tell you what'll make me happy. If the plumber who's just charged me $310 actually fixes the stuff he's supposed to. If the E-Z Pass system stops sending me letters asking for $25 every time the overhead toll sensor on the Garden State Parkway fails to record my 35-cent payment. If the gas company and Medco Health call back when they say they will ... if, if, if ... I went through all that prior to writing my complaint about Culpepper's throwing under the radar against the Titans.

I was, how can I put this? ... in an ugly, combative mood when it came time to write the column. You're right, it wasn't logical. And here's a warning. If a certain thing happens on election day that I'm afraid might happen, then the rankings column, which gets written late Tuesday night, will be something mothers will have to shield their children's eyes from. The brass here might not even run it at all, just a black border enclosing a statement -- Sorry readers, but the rankings are so rank that you will be spared this week.

And besides, Mr. Calgary, I moved the Vikings from seventh to third last week, which I guess would qualify as giving credit, wouldn't you think?

Aw, c'mon now. Why so glum, chum? It's a beautiful night. Full moon. Wolves howling. Denville wives revving up their broomsticks. Let's turn that frown upside down.

"Dr. Z, if this were England, you'd be knighted."

Who's that come from? It comes from me. Weak attempt to put all parties in a better mood. OK, here's an envelope that smells of perfume. Leave it to Jimmy to approve all fe-mail. It's from Janet B. from Valley Village? Or maybe it's Villey Vallage. No state listed. Hmmm, wonder where it could be? Linda, where's Valley Village? "Next to Santa's Village," she says. I should have known better. OK, Janet, what's on your mind?

"Normally, I send you only praise and enjoy the Redhead's input as well. This must sadly change." Oy! It's that San Diego thing, isn't it? I knew it.

My major rips this week come from the fact that the Chargers are ranked below two teams they beat, Houston and Jacksonville. Check the board. All over the place you will find similar situations. It's impossible to avoid at this stage of the season. Still not convinced? No, not at all. OK, OK, that was lame, I admit it.

Last week the Chargers were 14th, which I thought was a bit high for a 3-3 club that had just lost. Meanwhile Houston beat Tennessee by 10, at Tennessee, and we didn't fully know how bad the Titans were at that point. I felt that the achievement should be rewarded, so I moved them two spots ahead of the Chargers who had beaten them in Week 1. We all know that everything changes during a long period such as that.

Last weekend San Diego beat severely crippled Carolina. Houston was idle. Did that justify the Chargers jumping ahead of the Texans? It did not, I felt. As for Jacksonville, the Jags jumped ahead of San Diego and a lot of other teams after their victory over Indianapolis. Thus the Chargers are still perched at No. 14. Not a bad place, really. Clean, well lighted. In the morning you can hear the birds singing.

Tell you what I'll do. If they beat Oakland Sunday and give me a winner for my handicapping column (I went against Coach T.J, the genius West coach forecaster who said the Raiders are due for a big win), they'll get a much heftier boost than such an achievement normally would merit. But God help them if they lose.

Others have weighed in on the side of the Chargers, none of them as politely as our Valley girl, Janet, did. From Matthew of Toledo, Ohio, "Grass City, USA, Home of the World Famous Mud Packs and Tony Henno's"..."I know you're a fan of the fruit of the vine, but exactly how much do you imbibe while you're coming up with your rankings?" Exactly one litre, but I do absolutely no driving. From Marty of San Diego. "How much of a shill are you for Dick Vermeil and the Kansas City Chiefs?" This much. And here's another one. "Doc...you seem to be making a noise that sounds more like a duck...QUACK QUACK." Now who the hell....oh, it's the rest of the Janet e-mail. Brother. Folks, and this goes for you, too, Billy W. of Yuma whom I failed to mention -- I explained my love affair with the Chiefs. They are a different team than the one that looked so sorry early on. They're an offensive powerhouse. No one can stand up to their might. Just watch what they do from here on in. Kindly remember, you heard it here first.

Hey, what's with all the rips this week? Oh, I forgot. Jimmy's back. OK, let's get to the Hall of Fame. Avi of Washington asks a very shrewd question. Do I ever, in an attempt to push a borderline candidate, withhold a vote from someone who doesn't need it because he's a lock, anyway? Ooh, this is a touchy one. The Hall is very clear in its instructions to selectors that this type of sandbagging will not be permitted. It's dishonest, immoral and un-American. Yes, I've done it. (Now why the hell did I tell him?). I've done it when I was passionate about someone I feared would have only a remote chance. But that was only in the early, preliminary voting, never when we got into the room for the final selections.

Part two of Avi's e-mail is good, too. "Aren't sacks over-rated as a statistic? If someone averages a sack a game, he'll make All Pro." Here's my feeling -- 16 sacks are 16 good plays, no more, no less. That's the way I score it, anyway. More important, I feel, is the standard of performance for a full game. I used to get into this argument all the time about John Randle, whom I never picked on my all-pro team because he was so unsound against the run.

First down, they run at Randle and gain 10 yards because he has gone so far out of his lane that he's knocked off the guy playing next to him. Next play they run at him and gain five. Next play he sacks the quarterback for minus five. Wow, the announcers are going crazy. What a game Randle's having. But on my chart he's minus 10 on the day.

Hey, Avi asks good questions. Should have been my e-mailer of the week, instead of that guy from Calgary. Jimmy, is it too late to change the choice? It is? Sorry, Avi, and if you'd have listed your last name I'd have run it and let the world know what good, solid, serious e-mailers are like. From Patrick of NYC: Why did I call Steve Young a chalk pick and slight Plunkett and Simms? I didn't mean to slight them, I just didn't have the space to get into a discussion of every candidate. Young, I feel, was ahead of your two guys in two respects ... accuracy and scrambling ability.

How could Steve Largent go into the Hall on the first ballot and Art Monk, whose numbers were pretty close, not get a sniff? That's from Josh of Gaithersburg, Md. Largent was a force downfield, Monk wasn't. Largent averaged 16 yards per reception, Monk 13.5. Largent had 819 catches for 100 TDs. Average one TD per 8.19 receptions. Monk's numbers were 940 for 68, average one TD per 13.8 catches. J.P. from New Orleans makes an impassioned plea for OLB/rush specialist Rickey Jackson of the Saints. The trouble is that he's coming up against a mob of sackers, primarily Kevin Greene, the No. 3 man of all time, Chris Doleman, the No .4, and Richard Dent, the No. 5. Jackson is at No. 9, and although I share your feeling that he was a decent run-stopper as well, it will be the sacks by which he'll be measured.

Mark of Banner Elk, N.C., can't believe I'm neglecting the double-hog bit, Russ Grimm and Joe Jacoby. I like Big Joe. I just like the guys I named better. Part two -- do we really need those halftime interviews with NFL coaches? They'd be OK, if an interesting question or two would be asked, such as "Why didn't you call time out and give yourself enough time to get on the board before the half?" Instead, it's all blah blah. I actually heard a coach tell CBS' Armen Keteyan, when he asked him what he has to do in the second half, "Well, we have to keep 'em off the board and score more ourselves," and Armen, who once was a fine investigative reporter for Sports Illustrated, nodded and said, "Uh huh, uh huh, thanks, coach."

One halftime interview I really liked, though was when Lou Holtz was coaching Arkansas and the Razors were down at halftime to Texas, featuring Johnny Lam Jones, and Ham Jones and Bam Jones or something. "Well," Holtz told the sideline reporter, "it's all a matter of keeping up with the Joneses." From Chris of Halifax, Nova Scotia -- If I were a GM, would I want Terrell Owens on my team? No, the guy's a cancer. But ... but ...l ook at all the long passes he's caught for the Eagles. Right, he's a cancer that catches long passes.

Nate of Saratoga Spings, N.Y., wants to know why so many offensive linemen get down on a two-point stance, even a half crouch sometimes, thereby tipping the defense that a pass is coming. On third-and-long the defense knows it's a pass, anyway,which is why I laugh when I see a quarterback going through with his run fake on, say, third-and-15. Another reason is that it's more tiring for these big fat linemen to go all the way down in their stance.

Chris of Brooklyn notices that John Madden has improved this year. "He seems to be actually watching the games lately." Chris, do you realize how funny that sounds? But I know what you mean. Yeah, he's come back to life, more or less, with Al Michaels, after noticeably flattening out in his last years with Pat Summerall. I guess that has to do with the fact that they don't do the Thanksgiving games, and we don't have to wade through all that Turducken crap that drives my wife absolutely bonkers. John is privy to information many others announcers don't get because people know him and want to feed him stuff. Not that he uses all of it, but when he does, it's usually right on. My argument with that show is that Al and John have a short attention span and you never know when they're gonna just bag the game and start talking about the Competition Committee or something.

	MAILBAG Dr. Z will answer select user questions each week in his NFL mailbag. Your name: Your e-mail address: Your home town: Enter your question:

But, the things that you get told when you're wearing that network blazer are positively astounding. It happened to me in my brief stint with NBC. Players I hardly knew came up to me and started feeding me inside stuff. Yeah, network announcers know quite a bit, if they've worked the locker room, but it doesn't seem that much of it ever gets on the air. Or if they intended it to, it usually gets shortstopped by some idiot director constantly reminding them to work the story line, promote Moss, promote Culpepper, hype the stars, and so forth.

Troy of Durant, Iowa, would like my evaluations of the Lions-Giants game, particularly the play of Shaun Rogers. Wait, let me get my chart. OK, here it is. He stayed on the field longer than he usually does, except for the time he missed after he limped off. He didn't seem to tire, the way he had in the past. Officially he got credit for a sack, but it was James Hall who did the work, forcing Warner to scramble into Rogers' gunsights. Hall, incidentally, got one of my game balls for the job he did on Luke Petitgout, but it was a revenge game for him. Petitgout's nasty chopper took him out of action four years ago, when he was a rookie.

Rogers looked functional to me, not great. The team, in general, showed a lot of courage, taking the punches in the first half, and then coming back and out-toughing New York, basically with a bunch of no-names. Harrington looked very competent and professional. Very few mistakes. The Lions look like a team that can beat someone of the same talent level, on toughness, but could get blown out by someone with superior talent, playing hard.

Hey, I just remembered something. The guy who asked me, a couple of weeks ago, about Billy Cowher's record of 83-1-1 in games in which he led, at any time, by 11 or more points. Is it an all-time best, and how does it compare with similar numbers of other coaches? Stats, Inc., looked it up for me. Since 1970, No. 1 in that department is Jim Haslett, 23-0-0 (1.000), second is Don McCafferty of the old Colts, 21-0-0 (1.000), Cowher is No. 3 with a 98.2 percentage, Brian Billick is fourth, 37-1 (97.4) and Jim Fassel is fifth, 35-1 (97.2).

Michael H. of San Francisco says he read in USA Today that Houston punter Chad Stanley was named The Eraser because he erases punt returns. He has the lowest percentage of punts returned (34) and is this a good way to evaluate punters? What usually happens when people who don't understand statistics try to work out their own is that they screw them up. This statistic is only meaningful if you first subtract touchbacks from the total punts, and then work your percentage. Why give credit for a non-returned punt that's in the middle of the end zone? The paper also screwed up the numbers themselves. Stanley's percentage, counting touchbacks, was 35. Subtract the TB's and it's 38, third behind San Diego's Mike Scifres (29) and Dallas' Matt McBriar (36). Yes, it's a good method, if you get the numbers right. I use it myself, when it's all-pro time.

Dave of Brooklyn sees the same thing in Jake Plummer that I do. Questionable accuracy. Nice to have someone agreeing with me for a change.

OK, I'm in a softer mood now. Matthew, a previous ripper from Toledo adds a PS. He wishes I would have responded to his previous question about the Broncos' blocking techniques. I didn't respond because I didn't get it. Out of the ... let's see, how many letters was it last week, Jimmy? I see. Out of the 49,386 letters we got last week, only 25 or so reached me and I answered them all. But I think I covered the topic this week.

Hey, just kidding, can't you take a joke? Yeah, I got 49,000 letters if each person sent 100 copies. And finally, my E-mailer of the Week from Calgary must have felt bad about nailing me so convincingly and getting Linda to say all that nasty stuff because he puts a very complimentary PS at the end (Not at the beginning? Boy, I'm getting tired) . And for this I am thankful.

Sports Illustrated senior writer Paul Zimmerman covers the NFL for the magazine and SI.com. His Power Rankings, "Inside Football" column and Mailbag appear weekly on SI.com.