ARIZONA OFFENSE: I'm a fan of John Skelton. He was really shaky in the third quarter of Saturday's game, but really stepped up in the clutch. He has a ton of upside, and I really hope he gets a chance to be the starter next year.
As for this game, Skelton should have his way against a truly awful 49ers secondary ranked 26th against the pass in terms of YPA. San Francisco's previous opponents have all thrown for at least 273 yards - including Matt Hasselbeck and Sam Bradford.
The 49ers can't get to the quarterback - they have one sack in three of their previous four games - which is a good thing because the Cardinals won't be able to establish the run. As if Chris Wells and Tim Hightower weren't mediocre enough, they'll have to deal with the NFL's No. 2 rush defense.
SAN FRANCISCO OFFENSE: Will it be Troy Smith or Alex Smith? Mike Dingleberry couldn't decide, and that's one of the many reasons he was fired before the plane even landed in San Francisco on Sunday night.
Whichever quarterback starts has a tough matchup on paper against an improving Arizona secondary. Since Week 11, the Cardinals have surrendered a 6.02 YPA to opposing quarterbacks - which would be good for first in the NFL (Baltimore is at 6.27).
Arizona sucks against the run, but the 49ers don't exactly have the backs to exploit this weakness, with Brian Westbrook old and slow, and Anthony Dixon banged up.
RECAP: The Cardinals are my top play this week. Here are a few reasons why I like them:
1. The 49ers just fired Singletary and replaced him with some person named Tomsula. The Cowboys and Vikings had success after Wade Phillips and Brad Childress were axed, but this situation is more like Denver's; Dallas and Minnesota were good teams that had natural successors in place. The Broncos and 49ers are bad teams without a strong replacement coach.
Since 1996, teams that have fired their head coaches in the middle of the season during a non-bye week are 4-12 against the spread.
2. San Francisco stinks. The public overrated them at the beginning of the year, causing Vegas to overvalue them all season. There's no reason this spread should be any higher than 49ers -3.
3. Speaking of the line, teams that have gone 6-10 or worse since 2002 are just 19-49 against the spread when laying six or more points.
4. The 49ers, who have just been eliminated from the playoffs, will be flat. The Cardinals, conversely, will be out for revenge after getting embarrassed in the Monday night game in which Derek Anderson went off on the media.
LOCKED IN: Get this line at +6 or +6.5.
The Psychology. Edge: Cardinals.
The 49ers are coming off an emotional loss to the Rams and have also lost their head coach.
The Vegas. Edge: 49ers.
About two-thirds action on the Cardinals.
San Diego Chargers (8-7) at Denver Broncos (4-11) Line: Chargers by 3.5. Total: 47.5. Walt's Projected Line (Before Week 16): Chargers -7.5.
Walt's Projected Line (After Week 16): Chargers -6.
Sunday, Jan. 2, 4:15 ET
The Game. Edge: Chargers.
We are running our NFL Picking Contest again on our sister site, DraftDebacled.com. It's free to enter, and there are monthly prizes ($75 for the winner, $25 for second place), so click on the link to sign up.
SAN DIEGO OFFENSE: The Chargers thought they were going to walk all over the Bengals. Shame on them. San Diego's offense was out of whack all afternoon; the running game wasn't working, while Philip Rivers struggled without Antonio Gates and Malcom Floyd in the howling Cincinnati winds (though that didn't stop Carson Palmer.) How Norv Turner hasn't been fired yet is beyond me.
With Leon Hall and Johnathan Joseph in the lineup, and Carlos Dunlap emerging, the Bengals at least have a tough defense. The Broncos don't. They're weak everywhere; they rank 22nd against the run (YPC) and 30th versus the pass (YPA). They're also dead last in sacks with 18. Denver hasn't even gotten a sack since Week 13.
As long as the Chargers aren't completely flat, Rivers should have away with Denver's anemic secondary; regardless of whether Gates and Floyd play.
DENVER OFFENSE: The early returns on Tim Tebow are very promising. He still has some stuff to work on, but he has played very well in two starts. In addition to displaying very good deep accuracy, Tebow has re-energized a dying Broncos franchise. The team is pumped up and the fans are excited. You really have to wonder what teams like the Jaguars and Bills were thinking when they passed on him.
The Chargers rank fourth against the pass (YPA) on the year, but that stat is misleading because they've played so many bad quarterbacks. Hell, Carson Palmer was unstoppable throwing to Jerome Simpson and Reche Caldwell. I think Tebow will be OK, especially with his added threat of running the ball.
Speaking of which, Knowshon Moreno probably won't play. And even if he does, he won't be effective. Correll Buckhalter actually was decent last week, but Houston's defense has a habit of making even the crappiest of players look good.
RECAP: There are conflicting situational angles here, but I still like the Broncos to cover for a unit. They're playing passionate football right now, while the Chargers will undoubtedly be flat now that they've been eliminated from the playoffs.
The Psychology. Edge: Broncos.
The Chargers have been eliminated from the playoffs. You have to think they are going to be flat.
The Vegas. Edge: None.
Percentage of money on San Diego: 58% (65,000 bets)
The Trends. Edge: .
History: Chargers have won 7 of the last 9 meetings.
Philip Rivers is 18-11 ATS as a starter after Nov. 30.
Norv Turner is 9-3 ATS as a favorite after a loss as a favorite.
You can also create your own 2011 NFL Mock Draft on DraftDebacled.com, and if the write-ups are sound enough (and grammatically and factually correct), your mock could be featured in the 2011 NFL Mock Draft Database.
JACKSONVILLE OFFENSE: Maurice Jones-Drew didn't play, but there's no excuse for the Jaguars' loss to the Redskins last week. Completely flat after a loss to the Colts, Jacksonville made dumb mistakes (five penalties in the first 18 minutes), while David Garrard took four sacks and tossed two interceptions. Garrard also fumbled twice.
I'd say that playing Houston is just what the doctor ordered, but the Texans' anemic defense isn't that much worse than Washington's. Garrard figures to have a great game on paper, but he was supposed to put up monstrous numbers last week as well.
Jones-Drew's return will help. The Jaguars rushed for 112 yards on 27 attempts the last time they battled Houston.
HOUSTON OFFENSE: Like Jacksonville, the Texans were missing a key offensive weapon last week. Andre Johnson's absence was huge and probably cost Houston a meaningless victory at Denver.
Gary Kubiak, who lied through his teeth last week about Johnson's possible availability, said that his star wideout will play if he feels up to it. Whatever that means.
Regardless of whether Johnson plays or not, Houston will be able to move the ball on Jacksonville. The Jaguars also have a porous defense, ranking 26th against the run (YPC) and 31st versus the pass (YPA). Jacksonville also struggles to get to the quarterback, generating only six sacks in the past five weeks.
RECAP: The Jaguars need to win. That's why they're favored. And that's one of the reasons why I like the Texans.
As legendary handicapper Dave Cokin once said, "Teams that need to win aren't very good in the first place." To take it one step further, teams tend to choke when everything is on the line. Hence, the Aurora Snow Alert (Aurora Snow is a famous porn star for those of you who don't know.)
The Jaguars certainly aren't very good. They're also a false favorite; teams laying points on the road after two or more consecutive losses usually don't cover.
As for the Texans, they'll want revenge for that ridiculous Hail Mary victory back in Week 10. Also, they haven't covered the spread in four games; home underdogs in that situation are 18-6 against the spread since 2002.
GARRARD OUT: David Garrard is out with a broken finger, so Trent Edwards will start. A new spread will be posted soon, so I'll have an updated pick for you when that happens.
NEW LINE: With David Garrard out, the new line is Houston -3. I don't really like any side here; the Texans might lose some motivation for revenge with Jacksonville playing its backup quarterback. As for betting on the Jaguars, I don't feel like putting any money on a backfield comprised of Trent Edwards and Rashad Jennigs.
The Psychology. Edge: None.
No emotional edge found.
The Vegas. Edge: Jaguars.
No one wants to bet on Trent Edwards. Shocker.
Percentage of money on Houston: 83% (79,000 bets)
The Trends. Edge: Texans.
History: Jaguars have won the last 3 meetings.
Jack Del Rio is 1-6 ATS in Week 17 games.
Texans are 30-16 ATS after two or more consecutive losses.
Tennessee Titans (6-9) at Indianapolis Colts (9-6) Line: Colts by 10. Total: 48. Walt's Projected Line (Before Week 16): Colts -7 (starters) or Titans -3 (2nd string).
Walt's Projected Line (After Week 16): Colts -9.
Sunday, Jan. 2, 4:15 ET
The Game. Edge: Colts.
Another friendly reminder that Jerks of the Week for Dec. 27, 2010 are up, so just click the link. This week, I make fun of all the stupid Christmas car commercials.
Also, in this week's edition of Emmitt on the Brink, the Vikings' new stadium is ruined. The New England-Minnesota game will be moved to...
INDIANAPOLIS OFFENSE: Tennessee's lacking effort against Kansas City was disturbing. In fact, I refused to talk about them in my Week 16 NFL recaps and my NFL Power Rankings pages. They showed absolutely no interest in tackling. I was really disgusted.
I'll be shocked if the Titans don't put forth a better effort in this matchup. They hate the Colts and would love nothing more to knock them out of the playoffs.
Tennessee's No. 8 ranking versus the run (despite Sunday's debaclation against the Chiefs) will come in handy against the Colts, who have reestablished a solid ground attack with Dominic Rhodes and a healthy Joseph Addai. Peyton Manning won't have the luxury of leaning on Rhodes and Addai this week, so he'll have to consistently move the chains with his depleted receiving corps. Manning just hasn't been the same without Austin Collie, so Indianapolis could struggle to move the chains this week.
TENNESSEE OFFENSE: Though many expected the Jaguars and Raiders to gash the Colts on the ground, Indianapolis actually outgained those two teams in the rushing department. However, it's worth noting that while the Colts restricted Oakland to just 70 rushing yards, the Raiders ran the ball only 17 times. So it's not like Indianapolis stopped the run; Oakland simply refused to hand the ball off to Darren McFadden and Michael Bush.
The Titans just compiled 121 rushing yards on 24 attempts against Indianapolis three weeks ago. As long as the game doesn't get out of hand early, Chris Johnson should have a huge performance.
With Johnson presumably running well, Kerry Collins won't have to drunkenly toss passes into double coverage this week. Collins played fairly well against the Colts in their previous matchup (28-of-39, 244 yards, 3 TDs), so I like his chances at Indianapolis.
RECAP: Yes, the Aurora Snow Alert factors into this game as well. The Colts are decent, but they're not a very good team; Collie is out, the offensive line is shaky and the defense is still a big question mark.
That's one of the three reasons I like the Titans. The second is that this is their Super Bowl; they'd love to eliminate the Colts.
The third reason is that underdogs tend to cover in their second-consecutive road game. Jeff Fisher is 6-3 against the spread in this dynamic dating back to 2002.
The Psychology. Edge: Titans.
The Colts need to win. Aurora Snow Alert. This is Tennessee's Super Bowl.
The Vegas. Edge: Titans.
Slight lean on the Colts.
Percentage of money on Indianapolis: 60% (138,000 bets)
The Trends. Edge: Titans.
History: Colts have won 12 of the last 15 meetings (Titans 6-3 ATS since 2006).
Titans are 23-15 ATS as underdogs in the post-Steve McNair era.
New York Giants (9-6) at Washington Redskins (6-9) Line: Giants by 4. Total: 44.5. Walt's Projected Line (Before Week 16): Giants -3.5 (starters) or Redskins -2.5 (2nd string).
Walt's Projected Line (After Week 16): Giants -3.
Sunday, Jan. 2, 4:15 ET
The Game. Edge: Giants.
Some of you might be leaving this site until September since the regular season will be over in a few days. If so, here's what you'll be missing over the next four months:
Senior Bowl and NFL Draft Combine stats, news updates and stock reports
Some 2011 fantasy football articles
NBA and college basketball picks
2011 and 2012 NBA Draft updates
Jerks of the Week
The Emmitt Smith and Celebrity 2011 NFL Mock Drafts (i.e. jokes about fat coaches, drunk quarterbacks and clueless announcers)
NEW YORK OFFENSE: Six turnovers. Unbelievable. I know a couple of interceptions came late in desperation mode, but the first pair of picks and the two fumbles were absolute killers. If you told me going into the game that the Giants were going to cough up the ball six times, I would have bet my mortgage on the Packers.
Of course, I should have known this going into the game. The Giants have been killing themselves with dumb mistakes all year. The Redskins have generated 26 turnovers this season (a decent amount), so the mistakes could continue.
Otherwise, New York figures to have a decent offensive afternoon on paper. The Redskins have a horrific run defense (31st in YPC) and only a slightly better pass defense (28th in YPA), so if the Giants can avoid turnovers - a long shot - they'll be able to put up plenty of points.
WASHINGTON OFFENSE: Speaking of turnovers, I was scared half to death that Rex Grossman would launch at least one pick-six against the Jaguars. He did throw an interception in the end zone, but moron official Jerome Boger incorrectly ruled it a pick even though the Jaguars corner stepped out of bounds.
Things could get disastrous here for Grossman. In his two starts, Grossman hasn't battled a defense that has gotten consistent pressure on the quarterback this year. However, the Giants are tied for first in sacks (44), while Washington has surrendered the fourth-most sacks in the league this season (43).
The Redskins will have to keep the Giants honest by establishing Ryan Torain. Torain ran the ball well two weeks ago, but has a much tougher challenge against New York's 10th-ranked rush defense.
RECAP: There are conflicting situational angles in this game. And quite frankly, I don't want anything to do with either team. The Giants could make a half-a-dozen more mistakes, while Grossman is a disaster waiting to happen against a formidable defensive front.
With a gun to my head, I'm taking the Redskins; only because the Giants are playing so crappily that they don't deserve to be favored by more than a field goal on the road.
The Psychology. Edge: Redskins.
The Giants have to win and are favored. Aurora Snow Alert.
The Vegas. Edge: Redskins.
The Giants need a win, so people are betting on them.
Percentage of money on New York: 84% (89,000 bets)
The Trends. Edge: Giants.
History: Giants have won 8 of the last 9 meetings.
Chicago Bears (11-4) at Green Bay Packers (9-6) Line: Packers by 10. Total: 42.5. Walt's Projected Line (Before Week 16): Packers -3 (starters) or Packers -9.5 (2nd string).
Walt's Projected Line (After Week 16): Packers -10.
Sunday, Jan. 2, 4:15 ET
The Game. Edge: Packers.
It's time for Notes from NFL.com GameCenter - a list of a few stupid comments I found on NFL.com's GameCenter and my thoughts on them.
This is the final week of the regular season, so I thought it would be nice to go back to Taton, whom I introduced back in Week 14. Taton posted stuff like "Manning always got pick in the last minutes that is sux!!!!" and "Colts offense and defense not good too many pass drop could catch!!!!" Here are some more of his posts:
1. "I want Jag to lose!!!"
Just one Jag? Or all the Jags?
2. "Bears this year not bad"
I'll use this great analysis in my Chicago Bears 2011 NFL Season Preview.
3. "howmany drop passes can be catch"
Ah, the question that has had philosophers baffled for years.
GREEN BAY OFFENSE: So umm... yeah... Aaron Rodgers is back. Rodgers was unbelievable Sunday, toying with the Giants and basically doing whatever he pleased.
The Bears are supposed to have a very good defense, but we've seen them get lit up twice in the past three weeks. Both Tom Brady and Mark Sanchez torched Chicago's secondary for 638 combined passing yards on 77 attempts - which comes out to a YPA of 8.3. That's what Houston's anemic defense has been giving up all year.
I don't see any reason why the Packers would slow down. Rodgers is on top of his game, and even had his way with this defense back in a Week 3 Monday night matchup. The Bears, meanwhile, have been awful defensively against the last two real opponents they've played (Minnesota doesn't count for obvious reasons.)
CHICAGO OFFENSE: Jay Cutler has definitely exceeded expectations this year. Many people, including myself, figured he was bound to throw around 30 interceptions with the erratic Mike Martz as his offensive coordinator. But Cutler has been pretty safe since that disastrous four-interception outing against the Redskins.
The reason I have the Bears at No. 9 in my NFL Power Rankings is because Cutler could blow up at any moment. We saw a glimpse of it when he tossed a pick-six against the Jets. Give credit to Cutler for coming back from that, but his offensive line is still horrible. I just don't trust this whole operation - especially against a very good Green Bay defense that pretty much shut down the Giants aside from two big plays.
If Cutler doesn't turn the ball over, Chicago will have some success moving the chains and getting into the end zone, just as it did in that Week 3 victory. However, Green Bay has a very opportunistic defense that has the sixth-most turnovers in the league this year (30). The last time the Bears battled a team ranked in the top six in this department, it was a complete disaster. As you may remember, New England won, 36-7.
RECAP: I have no situational angles for you, but I like the Packers to cover whatever this spread may be (I'm hearing it might be -6 if the Eagles beat the Vikings.) They're the better team and they're playing with fire.
FIRST-ROUND BYE: Unless the Falcons lose to the Panthers and the Saints lose to the Buccaneers, the Bears won't have anything to play for. The only two times Chicago has had nothing to play for under Lovie Smith in Week 17:
Vikings 34, Bears 10 (2005)
Packers 26, Bears 7 (2006)
As you can tell, I still like the Packers.
The Psychology. Edge: Packers.
The Bears probably won't have anything to play for.
The Vegas. Edge: Bears.
Tons of action on the Packers late in the week.
Percentage of money on Green Bay: 71% (32,000 bets)
The Trends. Edge: Packers.
History: Home Team has won 5 of the last 6 meetings.
Bears are 8-27 ATS in December road games the previous 35 instances.
Bears are 2-16 ATS after scoring 25 points or more in 2 straight games.
Jay Cutler is 23-42 ATS.
Jay Cutler is 10-22 ATS as a favorite.
Packers are 16-10 ATS in December home games since 2000.
Dallas Cowboys (5-10) at Philadelphia Eagles (10-5) Line: Eagles by 3. Total: 43. Walt's Projected Line (Before Week 16): Eagles -9 (starters) or Eagles -3 (2nd string).
Walt's Projected Line (After Week 16): Eagles -3.
Sunday, Jan. 2, 4:15 ET
The Game. Edge: Cowboys.
More Notes from NFL.com GameCenter (These are also from Taton):
1. "P. Manning very game he play he struggle"
Taton very sentence he write he struggle
2. "Manning just sux that all"
And with this quote, Peyton Manning is no longer a first-ballot Hall of Famer.
3. "Manning you sux always choke!!!!!!!!!!!!!! bye bye no more hope for playoff!!!!!!!!!!1"
Forget Hall of Fame. Time to cut Peyton Manning!
PHILADELPHIA OFFENSE: No DeSean Jackson. No Jeremy Maclin. No LeSean McCoy. And no QB Dog Killer. Andy Reid has rested all of his starters in the past, and he told the media he plans on doing the same thing this year.
Dallas has a crappy defense, so Kevin Kolb could have some success throwing to Riley Cooper and Clay Harbor, and handing the ball off to Jerome Harrison. Just don't expect much.
DALLAS OFFENSE: Philadelphia's defensive stars won't be playing either. So don't expect to see Trent Cole, Asante Samuel and Mike Patterson on the field.
The Cowboys will be starting Stephen McGee, who looked pretty decent at times against the Cardinals. He should play well against the Eagles' second-string defense with talented players like Jason Witten, Felix Jones and Miles Austin-Jones at his disposal.
RECAP: Andy Reid doesn't take his preseason or meaningless Week 17 games seriously whatsoever. With that in mind, this could be a big play on Dallas if the Eagles are favored by enough. Check back later in the week once the spread is posted.
LINE POSTED: The Eagles are favored by a field goal. I'm taking Dallas for two units; I was hoping for a much larger spread.
The Psychology. Edge: Cowboys.
The Eagles have nothing to play for.
The Vegas. Edge: Eagles.
People know the Eagles will be resting their starters.
Percentage of money on Dallas: 68% (63,000 bets)
The Trends. Edge: Eagles.
History: Cowboys have won 3 of the last 4 meetings.
Eagles are 69-46 ATS vs. NFC opponents since 2001.
Eagles are 31-23 ATS vs. teams with losing records since 2001.
St. Louis Rams (7-8) at Seattle Seahawks (6-9) Line: Rams by 3. Total: 41.5. Walt's Projected Line (Before Week 16): Seahawks -4.
Walt's Projected Line (After Week 16): Seahawks -3 (Hasselbeck) or Pick (Whitehurst).
Sunday, Jan. 2, 8:20 ET
The Game. Edge: Rams.
The final game this week is on Sunday night. But instead of Al Michaels and Cris Collinsworth, let's pretend our announcers are Emmitt Smith, Herm Edwards, Bob Griese and former Philadelphia Eagles Television Network guy Kevin Reilly (a huge homer who called Maurice Jones-Drew "Maurice Drew-Jones" and Torry Holt "Terry Holt"):
Kevin Reilly: Welcome to Seattle, home of my favorite movie, Sleepless in Seattle! Tonight, the Rams battle the Seahawks in a virtual play-in game. Emmitt, who has the edge in this one?
Emmitt: Kasey, I must disputize somethin' you say first and foremostly. You said this is a play-in game. But if this is the opposite of a doggone playoff game, why is this not called a play-on game?
Reilly: That's a good question. Guys, why don't you answer Emmitt? Why isn't this a play-on game?
Herm: It's not a play-on game! It's a play-in game! Not play-on! Play-in! No one's playin' on! Both teams playin' in! You win, you in! You lose, you in! I mean, you lose, you out! Play-out game!
Reilly: See Emmitt, this is why you should never ask Herm such complicated questions. He's about to have a seizure.
Griese: Players with seizures should not play football games!
Reilly: Silence, Griese, no one asked you anything. Guys, I like the Rams to win this game. At the beginning of the year, I said Sam Bradford would set the rookie record for completions. I also said Tim Tebow, Colt McCoy and John Skelton would be good, and that Jimmy Clausen would suck because he's too small. This is why I'm the ultimate NFL Draft analyst.
Emmitt: Hold your horse heads. When did you say these, Karl Rilestone? You do not has a Web blog and you have not said this on the airtime.
Reilly: I never said or wrote it, Emmitt. That's what I thought the whole time. I don't need to write or say anything because I'm the best draftnik around.
Griese: Tim Tebow, Colt McCoy and John Skelton are gonna be good, and Jimmy Clausen will suck because he's too small.
Reilly: Shut up, Griese! You told me I could take credit for something you said!
Herm: Wouldn't take credit! Shouldn't take credit! Don't take credit! Won't take credit! It's not honest! It's dishonest! You didn't say it! You didn't think it! You didn't... uhh...
Reilly: Shut up, Herm! I'm the smartest person ever and you're just jealous! We'll be back after a word from our local sponsors!
SEATTLE OFFENSE: The Seahawks' season basically ended in the first quarter at Tampa Bay. Old man Matt Hasselbeck strained his back and/or hip when he waltzed into the end zone, and now he's doubtful for this game. Charlie Whitehurst will start.
Whitehurst's career numbers: 35-of-53, 315 yards, one touchdown, three interceptions, one fumble. In his only NFL start, he lost to the Giants at home, 41-7. The result of this game won't be as bad, but the Rams still have a huge matchup advantage.
St. Louis will obviously stack the line of scrimmage and force Whitehurst to beat them. With an ineffective Marshawn Lynch presumably struggling, Whitehurst could commit a couple of turnovers.
ST. LOUIS OFFENSE: Sam Bradford was in a three-game funk entering last week, but he definitely snapped out of it against the 49ers. He went 28-of-37 for 292 yards and a touchdown Sunday, and now has the luxury of battling a defense that just allowed Josh Freeman to throw for five touchdowns.
Bradford will throw all over the Seahawks, while Steven Jackson will take care of business on the ground and as a receiver out of the backfield. Seattle just surrendered 185 rushing yards to the Buccaneers. I expect a better effort out of the Seahawks this week, but Jackson compiled 124 total yards against Seattle in a Week 4 matchup.
The Seahawks have just three victories since a fluke win at Chicago on Oct. 17. Those three wins were against Jimmy Clausen, Max Hall and Derek Anderson. Bradford definitely does not belong to that dreadful pantheon.
RECAP: With Hasselbeck presumably out, I really like the Rams. The Seahawks know that Whitehurst sucks and that their chances are severely compromised with Hasselbeck injured.
Plus, St. Louis is a much better team. The only reason the Rams aren't -3 is because of Qwest Field. However, excluding a win over awful Carolina (in which the Panthers held a 14-0 lead), the Seahawks have dropped their previous three home games, 34-18, 42-24 and 41-7.
LOCKED IN: This line is going to soar. Get it as low as possible.
SURVIVOR PICK: By popular request, the survivor pick is back.
Look, you know I hate taking road teams. But there's really no one left. The Rams are my best remaining option this week.
Here are my top six in order: Falcons (used), Packers (used), Colts (used), Saints (used), Ravens (used), Rams. As always, never pick a road team (except this week). Never pick a bad team. Never pick an underdog. Never save any teams. Always choose the best option.
The Psychology. Edge: None.
Battle for the No. 4 seed in the NFC. How sad.
The Vegas. Edge: Rams.
No one wants any part of Seattle.
Percentage of money on St. Louis: 82% (88,000 bets)
The Trends. Edge: Seahawks.
History: Seahawks have won 10 of the last 11 meetings.
Rams are 28-42 ATS in road games since 2001 (9-6 since 2009).
Rams are 19-27 ATS on grass since 2001.
Seahawks are 13-4 ATS as home favorites since 2007.
Week 17 NFL Picks - Early Games Panthers at Falcons, Steelers at Browns, Vikings at Lions, Raiders at Chiefs, Dolphins at Patriots, Bengals at Ravens, Buccaneers at Saints, Bills at Jets
Prop/Teaser/Parlay Picks A list of some of my favorite team/player prop picks this week (Offense & defensive ROY picks to be counted
whenver winners are announced.) Picks carried over on a week-to-week basis will be in black.
Note: For legality purposes, this Web site does not promote or advocate gambling. This is solely for entertainment purposes only.
Last Week's NFL Picks Against The Spread (Week 21, 2016): 1-0 (+$100)
Last Week's 2-3 Unit NFL Picks (Week 21, 2016): 0-0 ($0)
Last Week's 4-5 Unit NFL Picks (Week 21, 2016): 0-0 ($0)
Last Week Over-Under (Week 21, 2016): 0-1 ($0)
Last Week's Prop/ML/Teaser/Parlay Picks (Week 21, 2016): +$720
2016 NFL Picks of the Month: 5-1, 83.3% (+$2,780)
2016 Season NFL Picks Against The Spread: 148-127-10, 53.8% (+$1,055) 2016 Season 2-3 Unit NFL Picks: 42-35-3, 54.5% (+$475) 2016 Season 4-5 Unit NFL Picks: 21-22-5, 48.8% (-$1,465) 2016 Season Over-Under: 123-141-1, 46.6% (+$95) 2016 Season Prop/ML/Teaser/Parlay Picks: -$275
1999 Season NFL Picks Against The Spread: 27-41-3 (39.7%) 2000 Season NFL Picks Against The Spread: 128-123-8 (51.0%) 2001 Season NFL Picks Against The Spread: 127-122-7 (51.0%) 2002 Season NFL Picks Against The Spread: 123-136-7 (47.5%) 2003 Season NFL Picks Against The Spread: 146-126-8 (53.7%) 2004 Season NFL Picks Against The Spread: 157-123-8 (56.1%) 2005 Season NFL Picks Against The Spread: 156-126-11 (55.3%) 2006 Season NFL Picks Against The Spread: 151-135-9 (52.8%) 2007 Season NFL Picks Against The Spread: 162-135-10, 54.5% (+$2,550) 2008 Season NFL Picks Against The Spread: 148-140-7, 51.4% (+$2,620) 2009 Season NFL Picks Against The Spread: 151-124-9, 54.9% (+$3,370) 2010 Season NFL Picks Against The Spread: 144-131-8, 52.4% (+$6,080) 2011 Season NFL Picks Against The Spread: 137-133-12, 50.7% (-$1,925) 2012 Season NFL Picks Against The Spread: 130-145-8, 47.3% (-$5,760) 2013 Season NFL Picks Against The Spread: 144-131-8, 52.4% (+$5,580) 2014 Season NFL Picks Against The Spread: 143-133-7, 51.8% (-$1,885) 2015 Season NFL Picks Against The Spread: 134-138-12, 49.3% (-$2,360)
2002 Season 2-3 Unit NFL Picks: 41-49-2 (45.6%) 2003 Season 2-3 Unit NFL Picks: 52-51-2 (50.5%) 2004 Season 2-3 Unit NFL Picks: 65-44-3 (59.6%) 2005 Season 2-3 Unit NFL Picks: 77-61-1 (55.8%) 2006 Season 2-3 Unit NFL Picks: 65-61-4 (51.6%) 2007 Season 2-3 Unit NFL Picks: 83-59-5, 58.5% (+$4,110) 2008 Season 2-3 Unit NFL Picks: 44-57-3, 43.6% (-$3,510) 2009 Season 2-3 Unit NFL Picks: 49-35-3, 58.3% (+$2,260) 2010 Season 2-3 Unit NFL Picks: 51-38-4, 57.3% (+$3,180) 2011 Season 2-3 Unit NFL Picks: 44-51-3, 46.3% (-$2,715) 2012 Season 2-3 Unit NFL Picks: 45-50-2, 47.4% (-$2,130) 2013 Season 2-3 Unit NFL Picks: 38-42, 47.5% (-$2,890) 2015 Season 2-3 Unit NFL Picks: 47-44-1, 51.6% (-$820)
2002 Season 4-5 Unit NFL Picks: 11-12 (47.8%) 2003 Season 4-5 Unit NFL Picks: 16-13-1 (55.2%) 2004 Season 4-5 Unit NFL Picks: 18-11 (62.1%) 2005 Season 4-5 Unit NFL Picks: 25-22-1 (53.2%) 2006 Season 4-5 Unit NFL Picks: 21-29-1 (42.0%) 2007 Season 4-5 Unit NFL Picks: 35-30-2, 53.8% (+$420) 2008 Season 4-5 Unit NFL Picks: 39-26-2, 60.0% (+$4,055) 2009 Season 4-5 Unit NFL Picks: 29-26, 52.7% (+$330) 2010 Season 4-5 Unit NFL Picks: 32-22, 59.3% (+$4,790) 2011 Season 4-5 Unit NFL Picks: 14-14, 50.0% (-$1,260) 2012 Season 4-5 Unit NFL Picks: 14-21, 40.0% (-$3,650) 2013 Season 4-5 Unit NFL Picks: 17-9-3, 65.4% (+$2,970) 2015 Season 4-5 Unit NFL Picks: 17-16-2, 51.5% (-$1,120)
2001 Season Over-Under: 3-2 (60.0%) 2002 Season Over-Under: 121-91-3 (57.1%) 2003 Season Over-Under: 126-132-2 (48.8%) 2004 Season Over-Under: 139-124-4 (52.9%) 2005 Season Over-Under: 117-145-4 (44.7%) 2006 Season Over-Under: 129-132-5 (49.4%) 2007 Season Over-Under: 136-145-3, 48.4% (-$1,900) 2008 Season Over-Under: 137-125-6, 52.3% (+$860) 2009 Season Over-Under: 128-135-4, 48.7% (-$3,195) 2010 Season Over-Under: 128-135-5, 48.7% (-$5) 2011 Season Over-Under: 131-131-5, 50.0% (+$135) 2012 Season Over-Under: 125-121-5, 50.8% (+$30) 2013 Season Over-Under: 132-130-5, 50.4% (-$340) 2015 Season Over-Under: 143-119-5, 54.6% ($0)
2007 Season Prop/ML/Teaser/Parlay Picks: +$1,035 2008 Season Prop/ML/Teaser/Parlay Picks: +$1,775 2009 Season Prop/ML/Teaser/Parlay Picks: +$865 2010 Season Prop/ML/Teaser/Parlay Picks: -$200 2011 Season Prop/ML/Teaser/Parlay Picks: +$590 2012 Season Prop/ML/Teaser/Parlay Picks: -$1,685 2013 Season Prop/ML/Teaser/Parlay Picks: +$2,245 2015 Season Prop/ML/Teaser/Parlay Picks: -$855
2006 NFL Picks of the Month: 3-3 (50%) 2007 NFL Picks of the Month: 3-3, 50.0% (-$400) 2008 NFL Picks of the Month: 6-1, 85.7% (+$3,720) 2009 NFL Picks of the Month: 3-2, 60.0% (+$640) 2010 NFL Picks of the Month: 2-4, 33.3% (-$1,810) 2011 NFL Picks of the Month: 5-2, 71.4% (+$1,870) 2012 NFL Picks of the Month: 3-2, 60.0% (+$560) 2013 NFL Picks of the Month: 6-0, 100% (+$3,900) 2014 NFL Picks of the Month: 2-4, 33.3% (-$1,350) 2015 NFL Picks of the Month: 3-3, 50.0% (-$100)
Career NFL Picks Against The Spread: 2,439-2,243-141, 52.1% (+$9,115) Career 2-3 Unit NFL Picks: 785-703-37 (52.8%) Career 4-5 Unit NFL Picks: 329-292-18 (53.0%) Career Over-Under: 1,945-1,903-54 (50.4%) Career Second-Half NFL Picks: 22-15-1 (61.1%) Career NFL Picks of the Month: 36-22 (62.1%)
My Team-by-Team ATS Record This section shows how well I do when picking each team this year. The purpose is to see how well I read each team. Pushes are not
displayed. Winning/losing streak in parentheses.
I'm sure it's because your "NFL Matches" section is just the usual copy/pasta from other scouting report articles, but I literally spit out my drink reading you suggest Mixon as a fit for the Ravens. Zero chance that happens lol.