Saturday, December 29, 2007

NFL 2007 - Week 17

No full column this week, just picks; sorry to disappoint. But fear not; we’ll be back in full force for the playoffs.

Patriots @ GIANTS +13.5
SEAHAWKS @ Falcons -1.5
Saints @ BEARS +2
49ers @ BROWNS -10
Lions @ PACKERS -4.5
JAGUARS @ Texans -6.5
Bengals @ DOLPHINS +2.5
BILLS @ Eagles -7.5
PANTHERS @ Buccaneers +3
STEELERS @ Ravens +3
COWBOYS @ Redskins -9
Rams @ CARDINALS -6
VIKINGS @ Broncos +3
Chargers @ RAIDERS +8.5
Chiefs @ JETS -6.5
Titans @ COLTS +6

Tuesday, December 25, 2007

Week 16 Wrap-up

Week 16: 6-10

Overall: 114-113-10

Games I Felt Good About in Week 16: 2-3

Games I've Felt Good About Overall: 35-44-1

The Smartest Thing I Said Last Week:
I can't see the Jaguars -- after their impressive win over Pittsburgh last week -- slowing down against a bad Oakland team. Not when there's still something left to play for. Or even if there wasn't, to be honest. I think they'll manhandle the Raiders.
The Dumbest Thing I Said Last Week:
I'm feeling frisky for some reason, so let's pick Houston to cover that spread.

Saturday, December 22, 2007

NFL 2007 - Week 16, Part II

COWBOYS @ Panthers +10.5

Apparently, Dallas quarterback Tony Romo has some sort of romantic relationship with a singer or something. Now, I know I'm the only person who'd ever suggest something like this, but, I think there's a possibility that the woman's presence at last week's Cowboys game may have been a distraction for Romo and contributed to his shoddy play.

Really, it's to the point where my wife this week caught a glance at "SportsCenter" when they were discussing the Romo-Jessica Simpson business and couldn't believe that they were still talking about that. I don't really think the fact that Jessica Simpson was in the stands was the reason that Tony Romo had a crappy game... I think it had more to do with the fact that he's Tony Romo!

Back in Week 11, in fact, I wrote that "Tony Romo is... capable of turning back into a toad for three hours on any given Sunday." That's the thing about the Cowboys: if he puts up one of those patented Tony Romo stinkers, anybody can beat them (well, maybe not anybody). I'm not ready to blame Jessica Simpson's presence.

Besides, didn't Cowboys safety Roy Williams used to date Kelly Rowland from Destiny's Child? She must have come to some games, and I don't remember reading any stories about him being distracted. And if this doesn't distract an NFL player, then, my brother, nothing will.

Anyway, the Cowboys still have home-field advantage in the playoffs to play for, so I think they'll take care of Carolina (who's technically still alive for the payoffs, but technically also 6-8 and not that good). Even if the spread is 10.5. Wish it was lower. All those big spreads went against me last week; most of the favorites won the games, but not by enough points, allowing the underdogs to cover the spread.

Giants @ BILLS +2.5

It seems as though the Vegas oddsmakers have decided to get into the Christmas spirit, giving gamblers everywhere the gift of the Giants being favored on the road by 2.5 during their annual Tom Coughlin late-season choke job, which began in ernest last week with what some called a "baffling" 22-10 home loss to Washington. I saw it coming, of course, and picked against New York.

Also, Buffalo's Kevin Everett will probably walk back into the stadium where, in Week 1, he was injured so badly that many thought he may never walk again. There's a pretty decent chance that might provide some sort of extra inspiration for the Bills, don't you think?

So, you've got that, coupled with the annual Tom Coughlin late-season choke job, and still the Giants are favored by 2.5. Merry Christmas, gamblers!

PACKERS @ Bears +8.5

Hmmmm... again, another really high line, another team (the Packers) still alive for home-field advantage in the playoffs; if home-field wasn't out there (and if Kyle Orton wasn't their quarterback), I might pick the Bears. Gotta take the Packers, though.

BROWNS @ Bengals +2.5

The last time these two teams got together, we got that crazy 51-45 Browns win that left everyone saying, "What? The Bengals lost to the Browns?" This time, with Cincinnati sitting at 5-9 and the upstart Browns in line for an AFC playoff berth, it would be "What? The Browns lost to the Bengals?"

CHIEFS @ Lions -4.5

Blech. I don't imagine too many sports bars will have this one on the big TV, even in Michigan or Missouri. The Lions have lost six in a row, and the Chiefs have lost seven. Let's pick the Chiefs, if only because a tie, though statistically unlikely, is the only way we could have neither of these two teams win. Which is really what ought to happen.

TEXANS @ Colts -7

You've got to feel for Texans fans; their team is bound to be the sexy playoff sleeper pick for 2008, which means they're bound to crash and burn just like sexy playoff sleeper picks always do (Exhibits A and B: the 2007 49ers and the 2006 Cardinals).

This year's Texans, though not alive for the playoffs, have a chance to finish with the franchise's first-ever winning record, and beating the Colts in Indy would be a big step not only toward that but toward building some momentum for next year in an effort to defy that sexy playoff sleeper pick curse. Probably won't happen, but, I'm feeling frisky for some reason, so let's pick Houston to cover that spread.

Raiders @ JAGUARS -13

The Jaguars can clinch a playoff berth with a win, and can also wrap up the title of "Team Nobody Wants to Face in the Playoffs" for 2008 (that's January 2008 I'm referring to. That's when the playoffs for the 2007 NFL season will be conducted).

I can't see the Jaguars -- after their impressive win over Pittsburgh last week -- slowing down against a bad Oakland team. Not when there's still something left to play for. Or even if there wasn't, to be honest. I think they'll manhandle the Raiders. In fact, if it weren't for the Colts and the Patriots, I'd think the Jaguars might be a legitimate threat to make it to the Super Bowl.

Eagles @ SAINTS -3

As a Vikings fan and an incurable pessimist (the chicken or the egg, there), I must believe that the Saints will take care of the Eagles, thereby making it impossible for the Vikings to clinch a playoff berth this weekend no matter what happens.

As for the Eagles, Brian Westbrook's non-touchdown at the end of Sunday's Eagles-Cowboys matchup bears mentioning here (even though it's been mentioned to death everywhere else). For those of you who didn't see it, Westbrook ran for a first down with about two-and-a-half minutes left and the Eagles up by four, and had a clear path to the end zone. Instead of scoring the touchdown, though, he intentionally stopped at the one yard line so that the Eagles could subsequently run out the clock and win the game (the Cowboys had no time outs left). A score would have allowed the Cowboys an opportunity to get the ball back and attempt the ol' "Score, Recover an Onside Kick, and Score Again" scenario, would have been extremely unlikely but certainly possible.

Aside from the ceaselessly amusing fantasy football implications of Westbrook's play, it was amazing to me to see him to what he did because it was exactly the sort of thing that a fan, sitting at home, wonders why more players don't do. Like, if you're trailing by just a few points at the end of the game and need a defensive stop, but the opponent runs for a first down, why not let up at that point and provide him a clear path all the way to the end zone if that's the only way you're going to get the ball back (hoping that your opponent won't pull a Westbrook and refuse to score)? If you need a touchdown on the final play of the game and you're too far away to attempt a Hail Mary, why not just keep lateralling the ball until it goes out of bounds or someone somewhere gets called for some type of penalty (this is my "How can you possibly allow yourself to get tackled?!? What on earth could be the downside of just blindly chucking the ball behind you, if you're going to lose anyway!?!" lament)?

I swear, as Westbrook was running for the end zone, I thought to myself, "he should just go down, but nobody ever does that," and, lo and behold, he did it. Great play.

Falcons @ CARDINALS -10

The Cardinals, favored by ten? Come on! What am I supposed to do with that? Sure, the Falcons are a complete mess, and the Cardinals are 4-2 at home this year, with three of those wins coming over likely playoff teams. Still, the Cardinals? By 10? How can anybody pick that? You have to, though, don't you?

Once in a while, you just have to give the Vegas oddsmakers a nice mental slow clap while saying, "You magnificent bastards."

If the Giants-Bills line was a Christmas gift, this one is a lump of coal.

BUCCANEERS @ 49ers +5.5

The Buccaneers have the NFC South title wrapped up and essentially nothing else left to play for. They should still beat the 49ers by at least a touchdown.

DOLPHINS @ Patriots -22

I'm not sure the Patriots are all that interested in running up the score to prove that they don't need to cheat to win. I think, at 14-0, they know we've all gotten the message.

Wouldn't it be fun to see the Dolphins win this one? They won't, but, as they showed last week by finally winning a game (and in dramatic overtime fashion, no less), they're still playing with some pride. I don't know if they'll keep it particularly close, but they could lose by three touchdowns and still beat a 22-point spread.

Oh, and, Tony Romo? Tom Brady spent the year ditching the hot actress he knocked up in favor of an international supermodel, and none of that has seemed to distract him at all. Something to keep in mind.

[by the way, I thoroughly enjoy this trend of pop singers, actresses and models dating athletes instead of movie and/or rock stars. I can't imagine how great it would be to be Tom Brady: "Hi, famous hot chick. I'm as good looking as Leonardo di Caprio or Matt Damon, but I actually do stuff. There aren't 1,200 waiters in the San Fernando Valley who could do what I do just as well, if not better. Plus, I'm not all artsy and crap, and I had a pretty normal childhood." Gotta love it]

RAVENS @ Seahawks -11

The Ravens have lost eight in a row, which is probably the longest current losing streak in the NFL (I don't feel like looking that up). The Seahawks have only lost one in a row, but it was a bizarre loss to a sub-par Carolina team that was starting an undrafted rookie quarterback. This line's too high for a Seattle team that, after last week, no one trusts.

JETS @ Titans -8.5

Tennessee is still sort of alive for the playoffs, in a Terry Schiavo kind of way, so they have plenty of incentive to show up and kick butt. Still, these Jets tend to play teams pretty tough, don't they? 8.5 seems awfully high.

REDSKINS @ Vikings -6.5

Misery insurance.

By the way, anybody who had quarterbacks Todd Collins and Tarvaris Jackson going at it in Week 16 with the inside track to a playoff berth on the line, raise your hands.

There, in the back? You. No? Just stretching?

Anybody else? Anybody have quarterbacks Todd Collins and Tarvaris Jackson going at it in Week 16 with the inside track to a playoff berth on the line? Yeah, I didn't really think so.

Broncos @ CHARGERS -8.5

The Chargers may be interested in a little payback from Denver's 41-3 pantsing of them back in Week 5. That's the only angle I could come up with for this dog of a Monday nighter.

The five I feel good (or, if not good, better than the others) about:

Giants @ BILLS +2.5
BROWNS @ Bengals +2.5
Raiders @ JAGUARS -13
Eagles @ SAINTS -3
DOLPHINS @ Patriots -22

Wednesday, December 19, 2007

NFL 2007 - Week 16, Part I

STEELERS @ Rams +7.5

If the Steelers really are a playoff-caliber team -- and I suspect that they are -- they'll take care of business in St. Louis and not leave the outcome in doubt.

Monday, December 17, 2007

Week 15 Wrap-up

Week 15: 9-7

Overall: 108-103-10

Games I Felt Good About in Week 15: 1-4

Games I've Felt Good About Overall: 33-41-1

The Smartest Thing I Said Last Week:
Saints game notwithstanding, and the Jaguars have actually been a little steadier, a little more solid, than the Steelers this year... Finally, there's a good chance that I will be watching this game with Beallsville, PA's own Joe Wright, so... we know what that means.
The Dumbest Thing I Said Last Week:
The Buccaneers shouldn't have much trouble, unless the Falcons decide to pull together to show that the coach was the problem all along. Which, come to think of it, is just what they might do. You know what? I'm picking the Falcons... All they have to do is avoid losing by two touchdowns; they should be able to manage that, shouldn't they?

Friday, December 14, 2007

NFL 2007 - Week 15, Part II

BENGALS @ 49ers +8

What a dog of a game to start off the weekend, huh? Other than (maybe) in Cincinnati and San Francisco, I don't foresee a lot of guys begging off weekend chores and/or Christmas shopping with the wife in order to be able to watch this one. I'd rather mow a lawn, that's for sure.

SEAHAWKS @ Panthers +7.5

What do the Seahawks have to do before people will finally believe that they're a force to be reckoned with in the NFL, huh? Well, they're favored by more than a touchdown on the road this week, so, apparently the answer to that question is "Go to the Super Bowl, then come within an overtime loss of playing in the NFC title game the following year, then, the year after that, win five in a row to go to 9-4."

Meanwhile, Carolina may start undrafted rookie QB Matt Moore, who is neither incredibly old nor looks exactly like Superman. So let's just move on from him as quickly as possible.

Bills @ BROWNS -5.5

The Bills need to win to stay alive for the playoffs, and the Browns need to win to stay in the driver's seat for the final AFC Wild Card berth. So, this is essentially a playoff game. Now, who would I take if this were an actual playoff game, which this -- as previously noted -- essentially is?

The Browns.

TITANS @ Chiefs +4

This Titans team went from awfully good to awfully likely to miss the playoffs in the space of a month, didn't they? I wouldn't pick them (especially with the Madden Curse in mind), but, the Chiefs just haven't been any good either. May as well pick the team that has something left to play for.

RAVENS @ Dolphins +3.5

You'd love to think the Dolphins could win one at some point, but I just don't see it happening this week. The Ravens still have what passes for a tough defense, and if they could get up enough to almost foil the Patriots' perfect season two weeks ago, they should be able to get up enough to avoid becoming the first team to lose to the Dolphins.

Jets @ PATRIOTS -23.5

It's getting ridiculous, this whole Jets-Patriots thing. This week comes the shocking revelation that the Jets -- who had the audacity to point out to the league that the Patriots and The Great Bill Belichick were illegally videotaping on the sidelines during the the two teams' Week 1 meeting -- were discovered, last year, videotaping the Jets-Patriots playoff game from an end-zone camera angle in accordance with league rules after receiving permission from the Patriots to do so. How dare they!

The Patriots have decided to pretend to be outraged about this, much like they decided to pretend to be outraged after Pittsburgh safety Anthony Smith guaranteed a Steeler victory last week, or after the Jets had the temerity to point out the Patriots' Week 1 cheating to league officials. I guess you've got to stay motivated somehow.

My question is: why don't I hate the Patriots more? Oh, sure, it's fun to mock The Great Bill Belichick (who, I'm sure, is a dick), and it's fun to talk about how they cheated and everything. But, really, I still kind of like them. Couldn't tell you why.

Anyway, I think the Patriots will harness their fake rage and attempt to beat the Jets 100-0 this week. In the process, I'd imagine that they'd at least cover the 23.5-point spread.

Cardinals @ SAINTS -3.5

Interesting game here. Another "playoff" game, if you will; both teams are 6-7, with the winner retaining a sliver of post-season hopes and the loser being effectively (if not mathematically) eliminated. The Saints have had a weird year, losing to all sorts of teams they shouldn't have and then, like, beating the crap out of Jacksonville (of all things. Jacksonville's really good). Losing a big game to the Cardinals would, however (for the Saints or any team), be as weird as it gets.

JAGUARS @ Steelers -3.5

Both teams are 9-4, both teams are in the fabled catbird seat as far as playoff positioning goes, but for the loser of this one things get a tiny bit hairier. Jacksonville's only losses since Week 1 have been to the Colts (understandable ) and the aforementioned weird game in which they got destroyed by New Orleans for no particular reason. I think that game threw me off, as far as evaluating the Jaguars is concerned. Even really good teams have weird hiccups now and then (see Pittsburgh's bizarre Week 11 loss to the Jets), and I think that's what the Saints game was.

So, Saints game notwithstanding, and the Jaguars have actually been a little steadier, a little more solid, than the Steelers this year. Plus, the Steelers can win their division to get in the playoffs or settle for a Wild Card berth, while the Jaguars don't have that luxury (it's highly unlikely that the Jaguars, down two to the Colts with three to play, can catch Indianapolis).

Finally, there's a good chance that I will be watching this game with Beallsville, PA's own Joe Wright, so... we know what that means.

PACKERS @ Rams +9.5

The Rams just haven't beaten a good team yet, and the Packers need to keep winning to clinch a first-round bye. It's hard to imagine the Packers losing this one, and relatively easy to imagine them winning by 10 or more.

Falcons @ BUCCANEERS -13.5

Not a particularly great week in Atlanta Falcons history; their franchise quarterback got sentenced to two years in prison and their coach bolted back to the bosom of the NCAA with his tail between his legs. The Buccaneers shouldn't have much trouble, unless the Falcons decide to pull together to show that the coach was the problem all along. Which, come to think of it, is just what they might do. You know what? I'm picking the Falcons.

FALCONS @ Buccaneers -13.5

All they have to do is avoid losing by two touchdowns; they should be able to manage that, shouldn't they?

Anyway, the whole Bobby-Petrino-bolting-back-to-college mess brings up a topic of discussion: shouldn't NFL teams have learned by now not to hire college coaches? Yes, Jimmy Johnson won two Super Bowls with the Cowboys after coming over from the University of Miami, and Oklahoma's Barry Switzer won another for Dallas with the team that Johnson and owner Jerry Jones put together. Since then?

Not so much.

I don't know why, on the list of History's Greatest Blunders, "Never hire college coaches for your NFL team" doesn't rank right behind "Never get involved in a land war in Asia" and "Never go in against a Sicilian when death is on the line." Stop doing it, NFL teams! It just doesn't work out, so stop thinking it's going to!

Really, it's like dating a stripper. When you watch them dance on the pole (i.e., coach in the NCAA), they look incredibly sexy and you think, "Man, what I wouldn't give to have her in my bedroom (i.e., coaching my NFL team). The things she (i.e., he) would do... things my wife (i.e., current coach) has probably never even heard of."

Then you get her back to your bedroom and, after a flurry of initial excitement, all she ever does is smoke pot and cry about her dad. She's depressed, you're depressed, in the end you both feel like killing yourselves, she inevitably retreats to the welcoming arms of the titty bar and you come to your senses and hire some playoff team's defensive coordinator.

COLTS @ Raiders +10.5

You think the Colts are content to sail along unnoticed (unnoticed defending champs, at 11-2! Imagine!), wrap up that first-round bye, and quietly slip into Foxboro and play the game of their lives against a tight Patriots team terrified of screwing up a perfect season with an AFC title game loss?

Could be interesting...

Eagles @ COWBOYS -10.5

They really want to make this line high enough so that you'll consider taking the Eagles, huh? They probably should have made it at least 17, then. Tony Romo has clearly made the leap past Carson Palmer and Drew Brees into the Manning/Brady/Favre category of quarterback, rolling off of one blonde pop star or another just long enough to put up three hundred yards and three touchdowns every week. My official position has always been that I hate the Cowboys, but, I don't know. I can't help rooting for Romo. Maybe it's because he had to go to junior high (in Wisconsin, to make it even worse) with the last name "Romo," and now he's a rich, famous quarterback who's beating away horny lingerie models with a stick.

Lions @ CHARGERS -10

Hm. The Lions are currently in a freefall worthy of Launchpad McQuack, and the Chargers' win over Tennessee last week was incredibly lucky and undeserved (a classier team would have refused to accept it). But I can't see the Lions going into San Diego and giving this surging Chargers team a game, no matter how badly Philip Rivers (or Billy Volek) plays.

REDSKINS @ Giants -4.5

So, the Giants are now 3-1 over the course of their annual Tom Coughlin late-season choke job, and, as annual Tom Coughlin late-season choke jobs go, this has been their most successful. I say the annual Tom Coughlin late-season choke job really picks up steam this week, as the Redskins haven't given any indication that they're ready to roll over and play dead.

BEARS @ Vikings -10

Misery insurance. I need it now more than ever. Of course I think the Vikings are going to win big. Then again, being a Vikings fan... that's when they get you. But still.

The Bears have nothing left to play for, and the Vikings control their own playoff destiny.

[by the way, if I'd lapsed into a coma back at the end of October, come to, and read the previous sentence, I would have assumed that it had to be, at minimum, the year 2013]

The five I feel good (or, if not good, better than the others) about:

SEAHAWKS @ Panthers +7.5
Jets @ PATRIOTS -23.5
COLTS @ Raiders +10.5
Eagles @ COWBOYS -10.5
Lions @ CHARGERS -10


Wednesday, December 12, 2007

NFL 2007 - Week 15, Part I

Broncos @ TEXANS pk

Both teams are still technically alive for the playoffs, I hear. Neither team has a realistic shot, but, the loser of this game is out for sure.

According to Yahoo! Sports (which is where I get the betting lines I use for this column, if you were wondering), the Texans started off favored by 1.5, and now it's a pick-'em. Which means it was bet down from 1.5 to 0, which means everyone's betting on the Broncos, which means I'm taking Houston. They should be up for this one. No team likes to be overlooked like that, particularly when you just got done beating the NFC's third-best team by two touchdowns.


Tuesday, December 11, 2007

Week 14 Wrap-up

Week 14: 11-5

Overall: 99-96-10

Games I Felt Good About in Week 14: 3-2

Games I've Felt Good About Overall: 32-37-1

The Smartest Thing I Said Last Week:

Everyone's saying this is the one that the Patriots might lose. They've been saying that for a while, even as the Patriots escaped by the skin of their teeth the last two weeks. I don't have trouble imagining the Patriots winning this one by at least two touchdowns, though.

The Dumbest Thing I Said Last Week:

[sorry; I've got to give myself a pass on this one. I picked five games wrong, but, I didn't really say anything dumb along the way. "Tampa Bay's been looking pretty good lately"? Well, they had been. "Rough week for the Redskins... I'd imagine it would all be too much"? It didn't prove to be too much as far as beating the Bears was concerned, but it's not necessarily a dumb thing to have said. I went 11-5 and climbed back over the .500 mark on the season; I'm letting myself off the hook this week]


Thursday, December 06, 2007

NFL 2007 - Week 14, Part II

Dolphins @ BILLS -7

The Dolphins are probably have enough talent to beat Buffalo (they only lost by 3 to the Bills a few weeks ago), but, Miami lost by 27 at home to a bad Jets team and hasn't won all year. I don't think you can justify picking them at this point. And when I say "I don't think you can justify picking them at this point," I mean "I don't think you can justify picking them at this point." I totally could justify it; I just don't feel like doing so.

RAMS @ Bengals -6

The Rams are on a 3-1 roll and, since the start of Week 3, have only lost to one team with a losing record. The Bengals are tough to predict, they're up one week and down the next, but they're certainly capable of stinking. And their record is only one game better than the Rams'.

COWBOYS @ Lions +10.5

The Lions were 6-2, but oh, how far they've sunk. I would blame Jon Kitna's Halloween costume, but, after all of that hullabaloo the Lions won their next game 44-7. And the other two entities I usually blame for anything that's wrong -- hippies and/or President Clinton -- really don't seem to have any culpability here, no matter how hard I try to make that argument work.

Of course, where the Lions are concerned, the traditional scapegoat over the last few years has been general manager Matt Millen, but, it's even difficult to blame Millen for a 6-2 to 6-6 freefall.

Now, the Lions are 6-6 and no longer really in the driver's seat for a playoff spot in the NFC. And they're 10.5-point underdogs, at home. Poor Lions fans. Wouldn't you rather just have your team be bad, like usual, than to tease you with a 6-2 start and then fall apart?

Raiders @ PACKERS -10

Well, congratulations to Sports Illustrated Sportsman of the Year Brett Favre. Now, even as a Vikings fan you can't really hate Brett Favre no matter how hard you try, and, certainly, one has to admit that he is currently having the third best year of any quarterback in the NFL.

The SI Sportsman of the Year award hasn't meant anything for a while, but, really might as well just go ahead and rename it the What the Hell Does Roger Federer Have To Do? Award. At this point, the magazine is just embarrassing itself.

BUCCANEERS @ Texans +3

Tampa Bay's been looking pretty good lately. And that's about all I've got for this one.

Panthers @ JAGUARS -10.5

Jacksonville's good, Carolina's not, 10.5 is pretty high but I'll take it. Also, it should be noted that Jacksonville coach Jack Del Rio kind of looks like a gigantic version of my cousin Phil.

Giants @ EAGLES -3

So, the Giants are actually 2-1 over the course of their annual Tom Coughlin late-season choke job, which I've decided actually started with that 16-10 win over the Lions (and not with their 31-20 loss to Dallas the week before). I say the slide continues this week against the Eagles, who might not quite be the disasters I'd pegged them as.

And the fact that the 8-4 Giants are underdogs at the 5-7 Eagles leads me to believe that everyone thinks that the annual Tom Coughlin late-season choke job is nigh (if not necessarily taking place as we speak).

CHARGERS @ Titans pk

I read something that some Charger said about how the team is cooking now, everybody's firing on all cylinders, and all that. That's good enough for me. Seeing as how the Titans weren't particularly dominant last week, even with Albert Haynesworth back in the lineup, I'll take San Diego.

VIKINGS @ 49ers +9

Back when I was watching Minnesota lose 34-0 at Green Bay in a game that featured Adrian Peterson going out with an injury, did I think there was much of a chance that the Vikings would be tied for a playoff spot and favored by nine points on the road any time soon?

I did not.

I said I'd pick against the Vikes every week just for misery insurance, but, they looked so good last week, and the 49ers are so bad, that I just can't stick to that. So allow me to throw up the most powerful jinx in the history of this column and pick the Vikings to continue to stay hot.

I'm sorry in advance, people of Minnesota.

Cardinals @ SEAHAWKS -7

This is essentially a must-win game for the Cardinals. So, if form holds, it looks like a big win for Seattle.

Steelers @ PATRIOTS -10.5

Everyone's saying this is the one that the Patriots might lose. They've been saying that for a while, even as the Patriots escaped by the skin of their teeth the last two weeks. I don't have trouble imagining the Patriots winning this one by at least two touchdowns, though.

Chiefs @ BRONCOS -6.5

Both these teams had points in the season where it looked like they might end up being good after all, despite their bad starts. Both these teams now appear to be pretty bad. But the Chiefs have lost five in a row and are freefalling, so, let's just pick against them, huh?

BROWNS @ Jets +3

Cleveland really, really needs this one to stay out front of the pack in the playoff hunt. They shouldn't have lost to the Cardinals last week; they can't possibly afford to lose to the Jets on Sunday.

COLTS @ Ravens +9

I'm actually going to be in Indianapolis this weekend. That has nothing whatsoever to do with this game (the Colts themselves won't even be in Indianapolis this weekend), but, it bears mentioning.

The Colts really aren't at full strength, but it's hard to imagine the Ravens won't be at least a little demoralized by the Monday Night Football loss to the Patriots.

SAINTS @ Falcons +4

Yikes. Well, the Saints still sort of have a chance to make the playoffs if they win out and get a lot of help, so, at least they've still got something to play for.

The five I feel good (or, if not good, better than the others) about:

Raiders @ PACKERS -10
BUCCANEERS @ Texans +3
Giants @ EAGLES -3
Cardinals @ SEAHAWKS -7
BROWNS @ Jets +3


Wednesday, December 05, 2007

NFL 2007 - Week 14, Part I

BEARS @ Redskins -3

Rough week for the Redskins. They find out their coach isn't particularly familiar with the rules of the NFL, they have to bury their teammate Sean Taylor, and then they have to try and get ready to play the Bears on Thursday. The Show Must Go On, I suppose. Still, I'd imagine it would all be too much.

Tuesday, December 04, 2007

Week 13 Wrap-up

Week 13: 7-9

Overall: 88-91-10

Games I Felt Good About in Week 13: 1-4

Games I've Felt Good About Overall: 29-35-1

The Smartest Thing I Said Last Week:

After sitting out three games (all Titans losses) with an injured hammy, Tennessee's beastly defensive lineman Albert Haynesworth is expected to play in this game. So are the Houston Texans. All of this leads me to believe that the Titans will cover the spread.
The Dumbest Thing I Said Last Week:

The Patriots might hit triple digits in this one.


This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?