New York Giants (4-7) at Seattle Seahawks (8-3) Line: Seahawks by 10.5. Total: 47. Sunday, Dec. 6, 4:05 PM
The Matchup. Edge: Seahawks.
If you've followed this site for a while, you might remember that I like to respond to my spam mails. It all started seven years ago, when a man named Jon Wire from the "United Bank of Africoan" promised me an ATM card of some sort, so I responded as a man named Mister Compassion Chuck Norris, who was raised by wolves. The following season, I received e-mails from Richard Held and Loon Bruce, who told me I won a Facebook Award, which comes with a "lump sum pay out of (750,000.00 GBP)." Pretending to be Matthew Millen Kim, I sent out my application and fake money.
I've been messing around with spammers ever since, pretending to be Harvey Weinstein, Tom Brady, Ramsay Bolton and Walter White. I had plenty of Spam Mails this year, so check them out if you want to see me screw with spammers. I'll have new ones every week this year!
NEW YORK OFFENSE: There's no spread on this game because it's not yet clear if Daniel Jones will be able to play. Jones suffered a hamstring injury in the third quarter against the Bengals, forcing Colt McCoy into action. McCoy was predictably pedestrian, though he was able to hang on to the lead to give the Giants their fourth win of the year.
With Jones under center, I'd give the Giants a chance to move the chains against a Seattle defense that has improved lately, but still has some liabilities in the secondary. Jones has talented receivers at his disposal, so they'd be able to get open against the Seahawk corners.
Unfortunately for the Giants - as well as me because I have an 18/1 prop on New York to win the division - they won't have any chance with McCoy, whose pop-gun arm will betray him. New York's offense will be limited all afternoon.
SEATTLE OFFENSE: The Seahawks prevailed in Philadelphia, but left lots of points on the field, thanks to some botched fourth-down attempts, as well as countless, ineffective runs by Carlos Hyde. As someone who bet the Seahawks, it was so disheartening to see Hyde get the ball so much, as it was a wasted down every time he received a carry.
The Eagles have a great run defense, so they didn't have an issue bottling up Hyde or Chris Carson, save for the one touchdown run that caught Philadelphia by surprise. The Giants also have an excellent ground defense, so limiting Carson and Hyde won't be a problem.
Stopping Russell Wilson, on the other hand, will be much more difficult. The Giants will try to have James Bradberry smother D.K. Metcalf, but there's no stopping the monstrous receiver. I'm not a fan of New York's pass rush either, so Wilson will have plenty of time to locate Metcalf and Tyler Lockett for big gains.
RECAP: There's no spread posted on this game yet, but I can't see myself picking the Giants if McCoy is starting. Even if it's a high number, it could be a trap because of how abysmal NFC East teams have been outside of the division this year. The Giants, Redskins, Eagles and Cowboys are a combined 9-17 against the spread when battling non-NFC East foes. That can't surprise anyone.
I'll have a specific pick and unit count when a spread is released. Check back later, or follow @walterfootball for updates.
THURSDAY THOUGHTS: Some Seattle -10 lines are popping up because Daniel Jones missed practice Wednesday and Thursday. However, Jones told the media that he's feeling better. It's not the craziest thing in the world to grab the Giants at +10 and then hope Jones can end up playing. I don't think I'm going to do it, but it doesn't seem like a bad strategy.
SATURDAY NOTES: The Seahawks will be down multiple cornerbacks - Quinton Dunbar, Tre Flowers - and possibly Carlos Dunlap, so it's such a shame that Daniel Jones won't be available for the Giants to take advantage of these absences. I'd bet on the Giants with Jones, but I just can't back Colt McCoy.
SUNDAY MORNING NOTES: Daniel Jones is confirmed out, which is not a surprise. The Westgate has moved this line to -11, so if you're looking to bet the Giants, you should probably wait until right before kickoff to get the best number. That said, if you like Seattle, I would wait for a -10 to appear, even if it's unlikely.
FINAL THOUGHTS: There's some big news concerning this game, as Carlos Dunlap will play. That's a big deal, as it'll give the Seahawks a pass-rushing presence against Colt McCoy. I wouldn't mind a small bet on the Seahawks, but I'd rather spend my money elsewhere. The sharps haven't touched this game.
Los Angeles Rams (7-4) at Arizona Cardinals (6-5) Line: Rams by 3. Total: 48.5. Sunday, Dec. 6, 4:05 PM
The Matchup. Edge: None.
Video of the Week: This isn't a funny video, but I think it's awesome. If you're a fan of Super Mario 64, or someone who likes to listen to re-mixes of video game music, you'll enjoy this. This girl Michelle Heafy does an amazing job with instruments and vocals that she mixes in simulatenously. Oh, and she's super hot, too.
If you like this kind of stuff, check out her channel. She's done at least a hundred mixes of video games, all of which are terrific.
ARIZONA OFFENSE: Kyler Murray will be thrilled not to play against Bill Belichick again. Murray struggled at New England last week, as he looked hesitant to throw at times, committing plenty of mistakes in the process. Murray still almost won, and perhaps he would have prevailed in overtime if Lil'Zane Gonzalez didn't miss the field goal near the end of regulation.
Murray's matchup won't be any easier in this game, but at least he won't have to match wits with a brilliant, defensive tactician in Belichick again. Murray's greatest challenge will be avoiding the Rams' stellar defensive front, but he'll have his offensive line fully intact. That'll certainly help, as will the return of Larry Fitzgerald to serve as an important safety valve while DeAndre Hopkins is dealing with Jalen Ramsey.
Murray will, of course, pick up some first downs with his legs. The Rams have some injuries in the middle of their defense, so this is an area Murray will be able to exploit.
LOS ANGELES OFFENSE: I fully expected Jared Goff to struggle against the Buccaneers without Andrew Whitworth shielding his blind side. Instead, Goff torched Tampa mercilessly, as the Buccaneers inexplicably failed to generate a pass rush. Goff's struggles emerged just six days later, however, as the 49ers created some turnovers against him.
This should be a growing trend, as Goff's diminished pass protection will really hurt him. The Cardinals found ways to put heat on Cam Newton last week despite the Patriots having an excellent offensive line, so they should be able to rattle Goff and force him into some turnovers. I'm sure Budda Baker will be anticipating running a take-away or two back for potential scores.
Goff shouldn't have much support from his running game either. The Cardinals are solid at shutting down ground attacks, so the Rams' three backs shouldn't do much, limiting Goff's chances of using his patented play-action fakes, which is a big part of his game.
RECAP: This spread is illogical. The Cardinals were favored over both the Bills and Dolphins at home in recent weeks. Both the Bills and Dolphins are better than the Rams - both teams beat Los Angeles when Whitworth was still playing - and yet the Rams are favored by three in Arizona. How does that make any sense?
My personal spread for this game is Arizona -3. The computer model believes Los Angeles -1 is correct, but even that gives us the cover. I think Arizona +3 is an absolute gift, as the two most likely results of this game - the Cardinals and Rams winning by three - give us a win or a push at that number.
I believe the Rams' line is inflated because of two misleading results. They beat the Seahawks and Buccaneers recently, but those wins shouldn't have been very impressive because something was bothering Russell Wilson in the Seattle game, while Tampa Bay wasn't as good as people thought it was, considering that Ali Marpet and Donovan Smith were both hurt. The Rams' loss to the 49ers last week is more indicative of their standing.
This has the potential to be my November NFL Pick of the Month, which I have yet to post. I'd like some bonus good news via the injury report, so I'll have an update later in the week. Either way, I love the Cardinals enough to make this a big play.
THURSDAY THOUGHTS: Kyler Murray is still appearing on the injury report, which is far from ideal. However, he still should be much healthier this week, so I remain very high on Arizona's chances of covering. It's looking like the sharps are starting to bet the Cardinals, so I may lock this in soon.
SATURDAY NOTES: The Rams are known as having a dominant defense, but for the second week in a row, they'll be down three key defensive players: Taylor Rapp, Micah Kiser and Terrell Lewis. This is also their third game without Andrew Whitworth. This Rams squad isn't as good as people think it is, so this spread is way off. The sharps agree, as they bet this line down to +2.5 in most places, but you can still get +3 -120 at BetUS and -128 at FanDuel.
SUNDAY MORNING NOTES: All of the +3s are gone, as the sharps have pounded the Cardinals at +3 like crazy. I haven't seen any indication that they're betting +2.5.
FINAL THOUGHTS: Once again, the sharps bet the Cardinals at +3, but not at +2.5. You can still pay for a +3 at Bookmaker for -123 vig, which is worth it. If you're stuck with a +2.5, I'd make this a four-unit pick.
GREEN BAY OFFENSE: Aaron Rodgers didn't have the easiest matchup last Sunday night, but he torched the Bears mercilessly. If Chicago couldn't come up with an answer for Rodgers, how will the Eagles deal with him?
The answer is that they won't. Rodgers is playing some of his best football right now, and there are far too many liabilities in the Eagles' secondary for him to exploit. Philadelphia's only hope is to pressure him heavily, but Rodgers is protected well and should be able to release the ball quickly enough to evade the Eagles' pass rush.
The Eagles' defense is at its best when stopping the run, so Aaron Jones and Jamaal Williams won't have the same sort of success on the ground that they enjoyed against the Akiem Hicks-less Bears defense. However, given Philadelphia's weakness at linebacker, Jones, Williams and tight end Robert Tonyan figure to have plenty of success operating in the middle of the field.
PHILADELPHIA OFFENSE: Carson Wentz looks lost right now. Not only is he inaccurate, he doesn't seem to recognize when receivers are open or what the opposing defense is doing. It appears as though he has lost his passion for football. Most coaches would have benched him for now, especially after the front office spent a second-round pick on a quarterback, but all Doug Pederson appears to know hw to do is to go for two-point conversions to screw over bettors.
Wentz struggled in an easier matchup last week, so I don't see him thriving against a Packer secondary that has played very well this year. Wentz will also take plenty of sacks behind an offensive line has been ravaged by injuries.
Speaking of the Eagles' banged-up blocking unit, it may not open enough holes for Miles Sanders and Boston Scott. The Packers can be beaten via ground attacks, but not if the opposing offensive line can't win in the trenches.
RECAP: It sucks that this line moved two points, with Green Bay -7 being the advance spread. However, this is closer to what it should be, which is still shy of the estimations from me (-11) and the computer model (-10).
The Eagles are a mess. Factoring in a -5.5 spread versus the Seahawks, Philadelphia has covered just three games this year. The first was against the 49ers, who were somehow eight-point favorites with Nick Mullens starting. The second was an inexplicable back-door cover against the Ravens. And the third was the result of a lucky scoop-and-score when Ben DiNucci fumbled late in the game in Philadelphia.
As mentioned earlier, NFC East teams are 9-17 against the spread versus non-divisional foes. This makes sense because if you think about it, the Eagles aren't even a 3-7-1 team. Two of their wins were versus the Cowboys and Giants, so if they had played slightly tougher foes, they may have lost those games. If they were 1-9-1, this spread would be -14 or higher.
Long story short, I'm betting the Packers rather heavily in this game. This would be a huge play at -7, but I still like Green Bay enough at -9 over the injury-ravaged Eagles.
THURSDAY THOUGHTS: Zach Ertz is due back for the Eagles this week, but he's not going to fix Carson Wentz's problems, especially in this very difficult matchup. Two injuries to watch: Corey Linsley missed Wednesday's practice after getting hurt Sunday night, while Fletcher Cox was absent both Wednesday and Thursday with a neck issue.
SATURDAY NOTES: What a bummer! Fletcher Cox will play, while the Packers will be without Corey Linsley. Green Bay will be missing two offensive linemen, much like Philadelphia, so both quarterbacks will be under siege often. I still like Green Bay, but I won't be betting them as heavily.
SUNDAY MORNING NOTES: The sharps are betting the Eagles, perhaps because of the disappointing injury news I referenced on Saturday. I'm still on the Packers, so I'm hoping for a good opportunity to buy down to -7.
FINAL THOUGHTS: The sharps stopped betting on the Eagles once this line moved down to -8, so my dreams of buying this down to -7 are gone. The best line I see is -7.5 -115 at FanDuel, followed by -8 -114 at Bookmaker.
New England Patriots (5-6) at Los Angeles Chargers (3-8) Line: Chargers by 2. Total: 47. Sunday, Dec. 6, 4:25 PM
The Matchup. Edge: Patriots.
If you're unaware of this, you can publish your own articles on this Web site and have them promoted via Twitter, Facebook and this page! Check out our Open Rant feature, where articles get promoted all the time. Some readers' articles have gotten more than 3,000 views (one even had 100,000!), so if you want to get your opinion heard, here's a great way for you to do so!
NEW ENGLAND OFFENSE: Cam Newton apologized to Josh McDaniels when being congratulated for the win over the Cardinals. Newton played poorly, and he knew it, so it was at least nice that he acknowledged it. He won't be able to rest on his laurels despite pulling off the upset against a team with a superior record and an MVP candidate.
Newton will definitely have a chance to rebound in this matchup. The Chargers are missing several pieces on their defense, including multiple players in the secondary. New England's anemic receivers typically have issues getting open, so that may not continue to be a trend against the Chargers' banged-up defensive backfield. The Patriots also protect very well, so being able to slow down Joey Bosa a bit will be enormous in their quest to improve to .500.
The Patriots' greatest strength in this game will be their rushing attack. The Chargers are also missing linebackers, which is why they struggled so much to stop Devin Singletary and Zack Moss last week. Newton, Damien Harris and James White all figure to run well against the Charger linebacking corps.
SAN ANGELES OFFENSE: Justin Herbert has played extremely well for the most part as a rookie, but he has struggled in some games. All of those substandard performances have come recently against opponents with great, defensive-minded coaches. Both the Dolphins (Brian Flores) and Bills (Sean McDermott) have excelled in slowing down Herbert, at least before garbage time.
There's obviously no greater defensive-minded coach than Bill Belichick. The all-time great coach has a long history of frustrating young quarterbacks, doing so just last week versus Kyler Murray. The electric second-year signal-caller had one of his worst performances of the season, hesitating to throw and making uncharacteristic mistakes. If Murray had a down performance, Herbert can, too.
The Patriots match up well against Herbert's weapons anyhow. Belichick thrives at erasing tight ends, so Hunter Henry figures to struggle. Meanwhile, Stephon Gilmore is finally rounding into shape. He did a great job of limiting DeAndre Hopkins last week, so he should have similar success against Keenan Allen.
RECAP: The Patriots seem to have all the mismatches in their favor in this game. Belichick confusing Herbert seems like a given, and he should also be able to coach circles around Anthony Lynn, who might just be the worst clock-management coach in NFL history.
The Chargers always seem to find a way to lose close games, so I don't see why this contest would be any different. Unless their injury report ends up being much better than I think it will be, they'll somehow make sure they have fewer points than the Patriots by the end of the afternoon.
THURSDAY THOUGHTS: The Chargers, who were already banged up, saw Joey Bosa, Chris Harris, Casey Hayward and Denzel Perryman all miss Wednesday's practice. This will be a huge play if at least two are ruled out for this game.
SATURDAY NOTES: Of the quartet I mentioned above, Denzel Perryman is out, while Casey Hayward had just one limited practice. There's a chance Kyzir White could play, but he'll have to be actived off the minor-illness list. Either way, the Patriots have nice matchup edges in what should be a victory for them over another young quarterback.
SUNDAY MORNING NOTES: There's a bit of sharp money on the Chargers, but not very much, so this could be phantom movement to get New England +3 somehow. I'll be looking for a possibility to get it. Check back around 3:30 Eastern for my final thoughts on these late-afternoon games.
FINAL THOUGHTS: So much for getting a +3! This line has remained at +2 the entire afternoon. The best vig I see is actually at FanDuel for -106.
Denver Broncos (4-7) at Kansas City Chiefs (10-1) Line: Chiefs by 13.5. Total: 51. Sunday, Dec. 6, 8:20 PM
The Matchup. Edge: None.
Emmitt on the Brink Season 13 continues! Emmitt and his friends have an epic battle against Michigan Governor Gretchen Umbridge.
KANSAS CITY OFFENSE: When these teams met in Week 7, I liked the Broncos to cover because of the offensive line concerns the Chiefs had. They were missing multiple blockers, so I expected Patrick Mahomes to have a tougher time than usual. I ended up being right about Mahomes' potential struggles, as the MVP front-runner had his worst game of the year, going 15-of-23 for 200 yards and a touchdown.
And yet, the Chiefs still won 43-16. I'll get to why later, but the fact remains that Denver did a good job against Mahomes. The same issues persist as in Week 7, as the Chiefs continue to be down multiple offensive linemen, Mitchell Schwartz and Kelechi Osemele. The Broncos should once again be able to take advantage of this with their defensive personnel.
The Broncos also have excellent players in their secondary who can slow down Mahomes' weapons a bit. No one can fully cover Tyreek Hill and Travis Kelce, but the Denver defenders will be able to do a much better job against them compared to Tampa Bay's effort.
DENVER OFFENSE: If you've forgotten why the Broncos lost 43-16 despite limiting Mahomes to just 200 yards and a touchdown, it's because their offense and special teams both had meltdowns. Denver and Kansas City were locked up in a 10-6 affair in the second quarter when Drew Lock threw a pick-six. The Chiefs then had a kickoff returned for a touchdown to go up 24-9. The Broncos then gave the Chiefs more free points with a fumbled flea-flicker.
Naturally, this could all happen again. Lock, who will be back after missing last week's game for no reason, has been a mess this year. He's had some nice moments, like the comeback against the Chargers and the win over the Dolphins, but he's still a turnover machine. He has a nice matchup against a defense that made Derek Carr look like Joe Montana, but every pass of Lock's has the potential to be sent the other way.
As long as the Broncos don't fall into a huge deficit, they should be able to run as well. They were having success in this regard in the Week 7 blowout, but eventually had to abandon the rush because they were down so much.
RECAP: Call me stubborn, but I'm going back to my original thesis. I believe the Broncos should be able to win in the trenches when the Chiefs have the ball because of the Schwartz and Osemele absences, which will cause Mahomes to play worse than usual. Mahomes will still be able to put together some scoring drives, but the Kansas City offense won't be electric. Meanwhile, the Broncos will be able to slow the game down and control the clock with Gordon and Lindsay runs.
Whether or not the Broncos cover will depend on if they once again crush themselves with mistakes. That could certainly happen; as mentioned, Lock is a turnover risk whenever he takes a snap. Thus, I can't bet this game with any sort of confidence despite thinking the Broncos are the right side.
THURSDAY THOUGHTS: I don't have an update for this game at the moment. I don't plan on betting it, barring some unexpected injury news, which we haven't seen.
SATURDAY NOTES: Good news, bad news for the Broncos: The good news is that Shelby Harris will return to the lineup for the first time since Week 8, though he might be limited. The bad news is that Bryce Callahan is on injured reserve. This is slightly negative overall for the Broncos, so this will remain a zero-unit selection.
SUNDAY MORNING NOTES: There was some sharp action on Denver +14, but nothing at +13.5. I doubt I'll be betting this game.
FINAL THOUGHTS: There's some sharp money coming in on the Broncos, dropping this line down to +13. I still have no desire to bet this game, as you're either getting a bad number or wagering on a terrible quarterback. I think Denver's the right side, but Drew Lock could easily implode.
The Motivation. Edge: Broncos.
The Chiefs are coming off a pair of big wins and could be flat against a team they crushed earlier in the year.
Washington Redskins (4-7) at Pittsburgh Steelers (11-0) Line: Steelers by 6. Total: 43.5. Monday, Dec. 7, 5:00 PM
The Matchup. Edge: Redskins.
A reminder that Jerks of the Week for this week is up, so just click the link. This week's jerks entry is called Double Belly Button Man.
PITTSBURGH OFFENSE: The Redskins allegedly have the No. 1 pass defense in the NFL, but this is a case of stats being complete nonsense sometimes. Washington's opponents of late have been the Cowboys, Bengals (Joe Burrow got hurt), Lions (no Kenny Golladay), Giants, Cowboys and Giants again. Of course they're ranked first against the pass - they've played against offensive garbage!
The Steelers are a completely different animal. Ben Roethlisberger has so many talented threats at his disposal. He'll be able to torch the Redskins, who should continue to be down two safeties.
Pittsburgh should also be able to neutralize the strength of the Redskins, which would be their defensive line, of course. The Steelers have an excellent blocking unit, so they'll be able to keep Roethlisberger upright on most downs.
WASHINGTON OFFENSE: I've had someone ask me the following question when I was at my parents' house on Thanksgiving, "How has Alex Smith played so good lately?" My answer: "He's not playing well; he's just playing against crap!" Indeed, the teams I mentioned above can't play well defensively either. All of them, save for the Giants, struggle against the run. Coincidentally, the Redskins haven't beaten the Giants in two meetings.
The Steelers have a stellar ground defense, so they'll be able to limit Antonio Gibson and J.D. McKissic. That means Smith will have to handle more of the burden. This doesn't sound like a winning proposition, especially when considering that his offensive line has been without three left tackles in recent weeks. If that continues, the Steelers' talented edge rushers will hound Smith relentlessly, forcing him into many turnovers. We saw this against the Giants, and New York doesn't even have a great edge rush!
RECAP: We'll have to see what the injury report has to say about this game, but the Steelers should be able to win and cover if the Redskins continue to miss multiple players at several positions. This is the first team with a winning record the Redskins will have played since getting demolished by the Rams in Week 5, losing 30-10 at home.
This game figures to follow a similar trajectory. As mentioned earlier, the horrible NFC East teams have performed poorly against teams outside of their own division this year. Again, the four teams are 9-17 against the spread in non-divisional games this year, which is a very logical result. As long as the Steelers are healthy, they should be able to dispatch the vastly inferior Redskins rather easily.
THURSDAY THOUGHTS: The Steelers improved to 11-0 by beating the Ravens, albeit with allowing a nonsense back-door cover. However, they're operating on much less rest, and they just lost Bud Dupree for the season. I'll be more enthusiastic about the Steelers if they get Maurkice Pouncey back from a minor illness. If he's sidelined, it might be tough for Pittsburgh to block the Redskins' elite defensive line.
SATURDAY NOTES: It's still not clear if Maurkice Pouncey will play. We also don't know how bad Ben Roethlisberger's knee is. Roethlisberger failed to practice this week because of his knee. He'll suit up for this game, but he may not be 100 percent. I wouldn't advise betting this game for that reason.
SUNDAY MORNING NOTES: I'll be awaiting Maurkice Pouncey's injury report to determine how I'll be betting this game. The sharps bet the Redskins at +7.5 and also +7, so we may see a +6.5 soon.
FINAL THOUGHTS: Maurkice Pouncey is out, and Ben Roethlisberger is banged up. If you're wondering why the sharps have been betting the Redskins like crazy, there you go. I'd consider switching sides if this line were still +7/+7.5, but now that it has dropped to six, I'm going to stick with the Steelers. I have no confidence in this selection, however, so I'm not going to bet it.
The Motivation. Edge: Redskins.
The Steelers are coming off a big win versus their arch rival, and they have to battle the Bills next week.
Buffalo Bills (8-3) vs. San Francisco 49ers (5-6) Line: Bills by 1. Total: 47. Monday, Dec. 7, 8:15 PM
The Matchup. Edge: TBA.
This week on ESPN, we're going to have awful announcers calling the shots instead the great preseason homers like Kevin Reilly, Ron Wolfley and Don Tollefson, inept ESPN guys Emmitt, Herman Edwards, and aloof people like Dan Fouts and Jay Cutler. Here's what it would sound like if these seven dudes (and some special guests) were calling this game:
Reilly: Welcome to the city of San Francisco, home of the men who want to do sexual things to me! Tonight, the San Francisco Giants play the Buffalo Bulls. Guys, the state of San Francisco is enforcing us to wear masks during the broadcast even though we're six feet apart and separated by glass. It's a good thing because these masks will surely keep us safe. It's a good thing because I can't afford to have Mother catch Coronavirus. If she gets sick, who will give me macaroni and cheese for dinner?
Emmitt: Arbery, I cannot understanded you even if I wanted to. The mask you wear on your head block the word that come from the, uhh, hole on your head where word come from so I cannot understand what you saying.
Reilly: Emmitt, I have no idea what you said because you're wearing a mask. Something about blocks. Guys, I just came up with a great idea. What if I block Charles Davis from speaking to me? He won't quiz me at the end anymore and make me look stupid!
Tollefson: Kevin, I have no idea what you said because you're wearing a mask. Something about quizzes. Speaking of quizzes, when I imprison women I kidnap in my cellar, I quiz them all on how best to cook and clean naked for me. The best survive and even get to cook and clean naked for me as a bonus. The worst meet their maker in my guillotine.
Reilly: Tolly, I have no idea what you said because you're wearing a mask. Something about Ovaltine? Mother makes me drink four gallons of Ovaltine every day before I do my chores. If I don't, I'll be grounded, and she'll take my Nick Foles bobbleheads away from me.
Jason Witten: Hello, my name is Jason Witten and I just came out of retirement. Guys, I have no idea what you said because you're wearing a mask. That's not because you said something, but because you were wearing a mask, your sound waves were blocked by a mask. Because that's because you're wearing a mask. Because, if you're wearing a mask, then you're wearing a mask, and if you're wearing a mask, the words are blocked by the mask, but only because you're wearing a mask. But if you weren't wearing a mask, it wouldn't be a problem. Because there's no mask. Because, if there's no mask, then there is no mask.
Reilly: Shut up Jason Novacek. I have no idea what you said because you're wearing a mask anyway. Guys, we have a special guest joining us who will like to emphasize that we must wear masks. It's Nancy Pelosi, who represents San Francisco in Congress! Nancy, how are you, and I assume you are rooting for the Giants tonight?
Nancy Pelosi: I have no idea what you said because you're wearing a mask. Something about giant. Speaking of giant, I have a giant refrigerator in my house where I have lots of ice cream. I have lots of ice cream. I have vanilla ice cream. I have chocolate ice cream. I have Rocky Road ice cream. I have strawberry ice cream. I have cookie dough ice cream. I have lots more ice cream.
Fouts: Nancy, Dan Fouts here. Unlike these other morons, I can understand what you're saying. That's because I'm wearing a mask over my ears. And here's what I mean by ears. When you have ears, they're on the side of your head and they help you listen. Some people even have two ears, but the most common number of ears people have is one!
Wolfley: DAN, I THINK IT'S BIGOTED OF YOU TO POINT OUT THAT MOST PEOPLE HAVE ONE EAR, WHEN IT'S WELL KNOWN THAT MOST PEOPLE HAVE THREE EARS, AND SOMETIMES PEOPLE EVEN PUT SAUCE ON THEIR EARS TO REALLY SPICE THINGS UP!
Reilly: What are you idiots talking about? I have no idea what you said because you're wearing a mask. Nancy, it sounds like you have ice cream in your house. Did you bring any with you?
Nancy Pelosi: I have no idea what you said because you're wearing a mask. It sounded like you said something about bringing ice cream. Oh no, all the ice cream is in my giant refrigerator. You'll have to come over to see. I invite all of the young children over to my house for ice cream. I make sure they eat lots of ice cream, so they become juicy and plump, and then I throw them into the furnace and eventually eat them for dinner! Heeheheheeheheheehehe!
Reilly: I have no idea what you said because you're wearing a mask. But it sounds like I'm invited over to eat ice cream! New Daddy, can I go to Nancy's house to eat ice cream?
Cutler: Wait, aren't we in Arizona? Why is the Wicked Witch of the West Coast here?
Reilly: No, New Daddy, Nancy Pelosi has ice cream at her house, and she's going to give us some, so it doesn't matter where we are!
Alyssa Milano: Ex-ca-use me! Why is it that a woman has to provide food for the men!? That is like so sexist! Why can't it be the men who provide the food for the women!? But that means that you're just assuming genders, and it's like illegal to assume genders, and because I'm guilty of assuming genders, I'm going to call the police on myself! Hello, 9-1-1! This is an emergency! It's a hate crime! I committed a hate crime!
9-1-1 Dispatcher: Ma'am, I have no idea what you said because you're wearing a mask.
Reilly: I have no idea what Alyssa Milano said because she's wearing a mask, but it's not like I'm even allowed to talk to her anyway because Mother said I'll be grounded. But anyway, I can't wait to go to Nancy Pelosi's house to eat ice cream! Hopefully she won't lock me in the furnace with the other children!
Charles Davis: Kevin, I have no idea what you said because you're wearing a mask, Kevin, but it sounds like you were talking about Nancy Pelosi's ice cream, Kevin. Let's go over the types of ice cream Nancy Pelosi has, Kevin. Let's begin with vanilla ice cream, Kevin. Johnny ate lots of vanilla ice cream, and then he was thrown into the furnace, Kevin. How about chocolate ice cream, Kevin? Sally ate lots of chocolate ice cream and then became dinner, Kevin. Let's discuss Rocky Road ice cream, Kevin. Jamaal ate lots of Rocky Road ice cream, Kevin, and let's just say that his life's end was quite rocky, Kevin. What about a quick word on strawberry ice cream, Kevin? Jeff ate some strawberry ice cream, Kevin, and he was later served with strawberries at a grand feast, Kevin. Why not touch on cookie dough, ice cream, Kevin? Vicky ate some cookie dough ice cream, Kevin, and let's just say that she went well on the pizza that Nancy made with fresh dough, Kevin. What type of ice cream will you eat, Kevin?
Reilly: I have no idea what you said because you're wearing a mask. But it sounds like you're going to steal the ice cream Nancy Pelosi wants to give me! WELL, YOU KNOW WHAT, PAL!? I'M GOING TO EAT YOUR DAMN ICE CREAM, AND I'M GOING TO BLOCK YOU EXTRA HARD SO THERE WILL BE NO MORE QUIZZES, YOU A**HOLE! We'll be back after this!
BUFFALO OFFENSE: I bet Josh Allen wishes he got to play the 49ers earlier in the season. San Francisco has gotten some key players back from injury recently, including Richard Sherman last week. Sherman and Jason Verrett will be able to blanket opposing receivers, even those as talented as Stefon Diggs.
Perhaps Allen will target Cole Beasley, who has an easier matchup in the slot with K'Waun Williams sidelined. Going to the running backs will be difficult as well, given that the 49ers' talented linebackers defend the middle of the field very well.
The one positive aspect of this matchup for Allen is that he won't be battling a defense with a great pass rush. The 49ers got to Jared Goff this past Sunday, but with Allen should have more time because the 49ers still don't have their top two edge rushers.
SAN FRANCISCO OFFENSE: While the 49ers' defense has improved greatly recently, the same can't be said about the offense. With Jimmy Garoppolo and George Kittle still sidelined, the 49ers will never reach their full potential.
The offensive line is still a concern as well. The 49ers got back Trent Williams last week, but were still down two interior blockers - Tom Compton, Ben Garland - which led to Nick Mullens seeing ample pressure, resulting in some poor throws and sacks. The Bills, like the Rams, have an excellent defensive front that will make life difficult for Mullens.
The Bills also have some great talent in the secondary. They'll need it with Deebo Samuel and potentially Brandon Aiyuk back from injury/minor illness. Buffalo will be able to contain them, as well as Raheem Mostert.
RECAP: Remember that the 49ers aren't playing this game at home. As Cutler pointed out, they'll be in Arizona, which could be a distraction for them. It also has an impact on the spread, as this line seems like it's being priced for the 49ers playing in San Francisco.
The Bills are more than 2.5 points better than the 49ers, so this line is not correct. The 49ers are getting too much credit for beating the Rams, who are not as good as the public thinks they are. That has influenced this line shift, so I like the idea of receiving some nice line value with Buffalo. I know the advance spread was -2.5, just like the current line, but the advance number was priced as if the 49ers were at home. It would've been -4.5ish on a neutral field.
THURSDAY THOUGHTS: I looked ahead to the Week 14 slate prior to Tuesday's write-ups, but for some reason, I missed that the Bills play the Steelers next week (thanks to e-mailer Rami Y. for pointing that out.) I think there's some look-ahead potential, but because this spread is so low, and this game is on national TV, I've decided not to buy into it. Matt Milano's potential return makes me even more bullish on Buffalo.
SATURDAY NOTES: We still don't know if the Bills will activate Matt Milano, but he practiced all week. The Bills are very healthy, even more so than the 49ers, who are being celebrating for not being as injured anymore. I'm not as bullish on the Bills as I was earlier in the week because the 49ers will be getting back one of their two missing offensive linemen, meaning the Bills don't have a big advantage in the trenches anymore. I still like them to cover, but this won't be a big wager.
SUNDAY MORNING NOTES: Here's another game with another questionable player of note, as I'll be eager to see if Matt Milano plays. I still like the Bills for a couple of units.
FINAL THOUGHTS: The big injury news heading into this game is that Matt Milano will be back on the field. It's unclear how healthy he is right now, but his presence will help defend what the 49ers like to do. I still like the Bills for a small play, given the weird neutral-site situation for the 49ers. However, I'm going against the sharps, who bet on San Francisco when it was an underdog. The best line I see is +1.5 -104 at FanDuel.
Dallas Cowboys (3-8) at Baltimore Ravens (6-5) Line: Ravens by 9. Total: 45. Tuesday, Dec. 8, 8:00 PM
The Matchup. Edge: Ravens.
I'm using this section to promote cool things that the readers of this site and I either enjoy or created.
I'd like to use this space to promote the WalterFootball YouTube channel! We just eclipsed 2,000 subscribers, which is a cool milestone. I know 2,000 isn't a large number, but we're a new channel, and many don't know about us yet. Jacob and I discuss our picks in our videos, and Charlie Campbell provides some great NFL Draft insight as well!
BALTIMORE OFFENSE: There's no line on this game at the moment because the Ravens have yet to play their Week 12 contest, as of this writing. We also don't know Lamar Jackson's status. Jackson will not play versus Pittsburgh, but he has a chance to make it back to the field despite his 99.9996-percent chance of survival.
Jackson has struggled in the games leading up to his Week 12 absence, and the primary catalyst for that was the regression of the offensive line. Jackson had an MVP campaign in 2019 because he had the best blocking unit in the NFL shielding him. That has changed greatly, thanks to Marshal Yanda's retirement and Ronnie Stanley's injury. Stanley won't be returning this year, so it's difficult to imagine Jackson improving very much.
That said, the Cowboys have a soft defense that couldn't stop Alex Smith and Antonio Gibson, so Jackson will have a chance for a rare, positive performance. I also like J.K. Dobbins to pick up where he left off the last time he played.
DALLAS OFFENSE: I was expecting the Cowboys to rally at the end of the season. I bet against them aggressively earlier in the year, thanks to the number of injuries they sustained, especially to the offensive line. With some players returning, it seemed like Dallas finally figured out its issues by moving All-Pro guard Zack Martin to tackle.
That went out the window on Thanksgiving when Martin suffered an injury in the opening quarter. Unsurprisingly, the Cowboys struggled to both run block and pass protect, resulting in many failed drives against the Redskins. With a limited skill set, Andy Dalton couldn't make up for this, especially when his best player, Ezekiel Elliott, continued to sabotage the win with more turnovers.
With that in mind, the Ravens should be able to handle the Cowboys. There's a good chance they'll get at least one of Brandon Williams or Calais Campbell back from injury/minor illness. If so, Baltimore will be able to control the line of scrimmage, while its talented defensive backs limit Dallas' receivers.
RECAP: There's no line on this game at the moment because we don't know Jackson's status just yet. I'm going to pencil in the Ravens for now, but when a spread is posted, check back here or follow me @walterfootball for updates.
THURSDAY THOUGHTS: We won't be able to handicap this game until Lamar Jackson's status is known. There's no line posted yet, so check back during the weekend.
SATURDAY NOTES: It sounds like Lamar Jackson will be back. If so, I love the Ravens at the projected line of -9.5. The Cowboys can't block with Zack Martin out of the lineup, so the Ravens will dominate the trenches with Calais Campbell and Brandon Williams back from their minor illnesses. We also know the Ravens won't overlook the Cowboys because if they fall to 6-6, their playoff hopes will be crushed.
SUNDAY MORNING NOTES: Reports indicate that Lamar Jackson will start this game. I'm curious about some of the other Ravens. This pick could be as high as four units.
FINAL THOUGHTS: The Ravens will have Calais Campbell and Brandon Williams on the field in this game, which is exactly what I wanted to see. With Lamar Jackson and the two defensive linemen back, Baltimore should be able to win this game easily. I'm betting four units on the Ravens, with the best line being at Bookmaker (-8.5 -108). There's not any sharp movement to mention.
week 13 NFL Picks - Early Games
Saints at Falcons, Lions at Bears, Browns at Titans, Bengals at Dolphins, Jaguars at Vikings, Raiders at Jets, Colts at Texans
A list of some of my favorite team/player prop picks this week (Offense & defensive ROY picks to be counted
whenever 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, 2020): 1-0 (+$560)
Last Week's 2-3 Unit NFL Picks (Week 21, 2020): 0-0 ($0)
Last Week's 4-5 Unit NFL Picks (Week 21, 2020): 0-0 ($0)
Last Week Over-Under (Week 21, 2020): 1-0 ($0)
Last Week's Prop/ML/Teaser/Parlay Picks (Week 21, 2020 plus 2020 props): +$4,735
2020 NFL Picks of the Month: 3-2, 60.0% (+$665)
2020 Season NFL Picks Against The Spread: 138-124-7, 52.7% (+$9,350) 2020 Season 2-3 Unit NFL Picks: 47-43-3, 52.2% (-$1,965) 2020 Season 4-5 Unit NFL Picks: 37-22-1, 62.7% (+$5,515) 2020 Season Over-Under: 141-122-6, 53.6% ($0) 2020 Season Prop/ML/Teaser/Parlay Picks: +$4,975
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% (+$3,585) 2008 Season NFL Picks Against The Spread: 148-140-7, 51.4% (+$6,105) 2009 Season NFL Picks Against The Spread: 151-124-9, 54.9% (+$4,235) 2010 Season NFL Picks Against The Spread: 144-131-8, 52.4% (+$5,880) 2011 Season NFL Picks Against The Spread: 137-133-12, 50.7% (-$1,335) 2012 Season NFL Picks Against The Spread: 130-145-8, 47.3% (-$7,445) 2013 Season NFL Picks Against The Spread: 144-131-8, 52.4% (+$7,825) 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% (-$3,215) 2016 Season NFL Picks Against The Spread: 148-127-10, 53.8% (+$780) 2017 Season NFL Picks Against The Spread: 137-140-8, 49.5% (-$4,300) 2018 Season NFL Picks Against The Spread: 140-134-14, 51.3% (+$845) 2019 Season NFL Picks Against The Spread: 149-128-9, 53.6% (+$1,200)
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) 2016 Season 2-3 Unit NFL Picks: 42-35-3, 54.5% (+$475) 2017 Season 2-3 Unit NFL Picks: 32-40-3, 43.8% (-$2,395) 2018 Season 2-3 Unit NFL Picks: 52-41-2, 55.9% (+$2,670) 2019 Season 2-3 Unit NFL Picks: 44-36-2, 55.0% (+$655)
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) 2016 Season 4-5 Unit NFL Picks: 21-22-5, 48.8% (-$1,465) 2017 Season 4-5 Unit NFL Picks: 20-22-1, 47.6% (-$1,595) 2018 Season 4-5 Unit NFL Picks: 27-32-1, 45.8% (-$4,735) 2019 Season 4-5 Unit NFL Picks: 37-27-2, 57.8% (+$2,185)
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) 2016 Season Over-Under: 123-141-1, 46.6% (+$95) 2017 Season Over-Under: 136-139-2, 49.5% (+$640) 2018 Season Over-Under: 118-128-3, 48.0% (-$225) 2019 Season Over-Under: 126-133-4, 48.6% (-$50)
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 2016 Season Prop/ML/Teaser/Parlay Picks: -$275 2017 Season Prop/ML/Teaser/Parlay Picks: -$510 2018 Season Prop/ML/Teaser/Parlay Picks: +$1,495 2019 Season Prop/ML/Teaser/Parlay Picks: -$1,715
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) 2016 NFL Picks of the Month: 5-1, 83.3% (+$2,780) 2017 NFL Picks of the Month: 4-2, 66.7% (+$1,040) 2018 NFL Picks of the Month: 4-3, 57.1% (-$640) 2019 NFL Picks of the Month: 3-3-1, 50.0% (-$625)
Career NFL Picks Against The Spread: 2,995-2,761-179, 52.0% (+$19,655) Career 2-3 Unit NFL Picks: 957-859-49 (52.7%) Career 4-5 Unit NFL Picks: 452-396-23 (53.3%) Career Over-Under: 2,463-2,416-66 (50.5%) Career Second-Half NFL Picks: 22-15-1 (61.1%) Career NFL Picks of the Month: 45-29-1 (60.8%)
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.