I am fit to be tied this week. For the first time in four years, and for the first time since KD began 10-for-10 back in 2010, [insert Ray Scott voice] "We have a tie."

I have had three perfect 9-for-9s derailed by late Cowboys losses, keeping me out of KD's Hall of Fame. This weekend, I was on the road, but I was able to listen to the Cowboys on the "radio" (thanks to TuneIn for BlackBerry and at least one streaming Cowboys-network radio station that doesn't know it isn't supposed to stream Cowboys games).

I had vaguely remembered my picks that I had made three days and a thousand miles earlier. When the radio guys ran down scores, everything seemed "right". The two "surprises" were Cincinnati's beatdown of the Giants, and New Orleans' win over the previously undefeated Falcons. I had both of those in my ten picks.

I was beginning to feel pretty good. Nothing I heard jangled my nerves and caused me to think, "Bleep! I missed that one." I didn't include Houston-Chicago, and only had two "freebies" remaining - San Francisco and Pittsburgh. What could happen?

Then came the announcement - "You won't believe this, but the Rams and 49ers game, that went to overtime, is over. For the first time in four years..." Yes, the unthinkable and the unforeseen happened. How could the 49ers lose fail to win in overtime? That's going to blow a lot of 10-for-10s.

Before I go any farther, I want to give a personal shout-out, praise, and thanks to BishopWest and Travlr. While I was traveling this weekend, these two were diligent and vigilant to patrol the active pages (my previous FanPost and KD's current page). Whenever someone made an errant post, one or the other (or both) were quick to jump on and steer the poster in the right direction. When someone asked a question, one or both would quickly respond with correct information.

I need to also thank KD Drummond. He also monitored the pages more than normal (difficult with a little one and all his other responsibilities). He was the "good-guy traffic-cop" that put out stop signs (on my FanPost as soon as he posted his new page; on his page when Thursday night kicked off; and on Sunday after the early games kicked off).

I don't get many Sundays off each year from my church staff position. This was my final one for this calendar year, and is the only one during football season. I took my family up to Oklahoma for homecoming (I had not been there in ten years, and my class was having a reunion). I had my computer on at the hotel in Shawnee, but I packed it away on Saturday morning and didn't get it back out again until late Sunday night.

After driving across four state lines on Sunday (started outside Tulsa, went to southwestern Missouri, northwestern Arkansas, back into eastern Oklahoma, and crossed into Texas for my final hotel night in Sherman), I finally unpacked my computer and stayed up late to record all the entries that had come in on Saturday and Sunday.

As I read the comments that were interspersed with the entries, I knew without reading what KD's reaction would be to the tie, and I knew how it would be scored. Sure enough, someone asked, and KD answered, exactly as I expected. Since the 49ers had failed to win against the Rams, I would finish my week with nine wins, not ten. I didn't have a loss (49ers didn't lose the game), but I didn't have ten wins either.

So, how should my score be recorded this week? If the 49ers had won, I would be 10-0; if the Rams had won, I would be 9-1. Neither happened. Am I 9-0-1 this week? Or, am I 9.5-0.5 this week?

That game was one of six that were unanimous (everyone who included that game picked the 49ers; no one picked the Rams). It was also one of three that were almost unanimously played (nearly every participant included it in his picks). As I commented here, only a handful of the overall leaders didn't pick this game (seven of the top 120, and none of the top 55).

So, I am reversing course from that comment. For both individual records and for our consensus summaries, everyone who picked San Francisco is now recorded with a "loss" (the same if anyone had picked the Rams). Our consensus record is now 9-5 this week (nine wins, four losses, and this tie) - same as the FPWs.

We aren't actually predicting the outcome of the game (three outcomes - visitor wins; home wins; or tie); rather, we are picking a winner (two outcomes - your pick wins, yea; your pick doesn't win, boo).

I was also asked in a comment why I was likely to not include this week's Eagles-Redskins game. My "system" is to pick games as a Cowboys fan, looking through blue-and-silver glasses. I always pick the Cowboys to win, and I generally pick other NFC East teams to lose (or, I don't include a game). When two rivals play each other, I "pull" for the result that is of greater benefit to the Cowboys.

Now that the Cowboys are ahead of both, it is irrelevant to me who wins. Maybe, in honor of Donovan McNabb - the Eagles quarterback who famously didn't know the tie rules four years ago this week when he played in the last game to end in a tie, and who played for both teams - I'll pick that game to end in a tie this week. That would probably be the outcome that would most benefit the Cowboys.

According to Wade Phillips, the Giants are guaranteed a win this week as they enjoy their bye. I may also pick them to lose this week.

Enough of this. Here are tables and reports, and an advance look at week #11, should anyone wish to make picks early.

Participation was slightly down this week. 129 played 10-for-10, and one more got in late with just the late/night games. We also had one new player this week (still at least one every week).

I made a table earlier this year to account for our largest unanimous losses (when everyone that played a game picked the same team, and that team lost). Even though this game was a tie, it was still one of our largest unanimous "non-wins". So, I am adding it to this list.

Here's how we did in our games this week. We actually had six unanimous games and two more that were nearly so (one pick for the Jets and two for the Titans). Six of those were wins, one was a loss, and one was the tie.

Here's an update on how we pick each team. There are six teams that we have only mis-picked once each this season.

Last week, we gained a game on the Front Page writers, but we stayed even this week. In fact, our consensus was identical to theirs in all fourteen games. We got the same nine right; we got the same four wrong; and, we were both unanimous in picking San Francisco in the tie game.

Because of the tie, there are no 10-for-10s this week. I am one of six who got the other nine right this week. Last week, there was a three-way tie at the top. This week, only one of those three escaped the South Beach trap (the other two picked Miami).

Congratulations, CowboyBaby, this is your week to have sole possession of first place. Your two friends from last week are right behind you. And, don't look back too far behind you. mdlusk and I caught KD and Hawkeye101 and are only two back, tied for fourth.

Here are the top ninety-six this week and the top ninety-four in the overall leaderboard (KD will have the full leaderboard tomorrow).

You may wish to make picks for week #11 on here early. I'll take them on here until KD gets his new page up. NOTE - there is no grace this week to make picks late since the Cowboys play early. No picks will be accepted after the Cowboys kick off this Sunday. This is the final week with byes. After this, there will be sixteen games each of the final five weeks.

Here's the lineup for Week #11 (fourteen games, final four teams have byes):

Thursday--------------

Miami at BUFFALO

Sunday/Monday-----

Arizona at ATLANTA
Tampa Bay at CAROLINA

Cleveland at DALLAS (mandatory; must include)

Green Bay at DETROIT
Jacksonville at HOUSTON
Cincinnati at KANSAS CITY
New York Jets at ST. LOUIS
Philadelphia at WASHINGTON
New Orleans at OAKLAND
San Diego at DENVER
Indianapolis at NEW ENGLAND
Baltimore at PITTSBURGH
Chicago at SAN FRANCISCO