San Diego Chargers vs. Kansas City Chiefs
San Diego -14.5
O/U 44.5
We all know about the issues with Kansas City at this point. The line here says it all to me. If you thought that maybe KC was going to be competitive here - don't. Charging you 14 and still feeling the need to hook you means this one is going to get out of hand in all likelihood, but to bet on that you're going to have to lay heavy lumber and always run the risk of leaving the backdoor open.
Overall, I don't see anything much worth noting here, to me it's like cleavage on a heavy set girl - you take a glance and move on...
Oakland Raiders vs. New York Jets
Jets -3.5
O/U 41
I'm having a real hard time figuring out the Jets. Admittedly, I was sipping the kool-aid far too heavy in week 1 when laying far too many against a talented Dallas team. Not only was I on the wrong side, but it just felt like the Jets looked average. Sanchez didn't look special at QB. The offensive line was surprisingly overwhelmed by the Dallas front-seven. The defense shut down the run but offered very little by way of pass rush and even the secondary seemed vulnerable. While I didn't catch any of week 2, the fact that they couldn't get Shonne Green going on the ground against Jacksonville was alarming to say the least. The Jets are a solid team no doubt. You know my opinion of the Raiders. If this game were on the East Coast I'd have no problem laying 3 and would consider 3.5, but in Oakland? Not only does it seem square, but it just doesn't seem all that smart. Oakland came to the East Coast and was game as you like in Buffalo....to expect the Jets to go out and beat them by double-digits here just doesn't feel sharp.
In terms of backing Oakland I have little to say other than I would never do it. I don't like this team at all and I'm still probably going to look for a spot to fade them. Just because you think a team is a fade you don't have to fade them week-in, week-out. And just because they're playing a good team at a reasonable spread doesn't mean you are obliged to take your stand there, not when the situation is as sketchy as this one.
Bottom line is this - I think Dallas has a better front-seven than Oakland, but I'm not so sure the Oakland front-seven in Oakland can't be just as effective as the Dallas front-seven managed to be in New York. Make sense? While Sanchez has the receiving weapons to exploit the Oakland secondary, it is unclear if he has either the running game or the offensive line to do so.
Stay away at all costs in my opinion.
St. Louis Rams vs. Baltimore Ravens
Ravens -3.5
O/U 42.5
If Baltimore doesn't feel square to you I don't know what to say. Everyone and their brother was looking for their line thinking to maybe catch some bounceback value after seemingly everyone in the entire public took a bath on them last week. While I refuse to believe that their blowout win over Pittsburgh was anything more than snowballing at its finest, I also refuse to believe that Baltimore is as bad as they showed last week...and hell, I liked the Titans there.
I think the truth about this Ravens team lies somewhere in between their first two weeks. And you know what? To me that puts the line in this game, on the road, right around 4. The Rams really haven't done anything egregious enough to make them much of a home dog against a 1-1 team. They lost to one of the NFL's most talented teams in the Eagles week 1. They followed that up with a performance in New York during primetime that was a true mixed bag - they showed some complex blitz packages, drove the ball with relative ease and yet continuously shot themselves in the foot. How much do you want the Rams to get here? 7? They have hardly done enough wrong to deserve that. I wouldn't have been surprised to see something like 4.5...but I would've had slight interest in the Rams there. At 7 I'd be all over them. At 3, it's yet another boring recommendation of passing onto the next.
Tampa Bay Buccaneers vs. Atlanta Falcons
Bucs -2.5
O/U 45.5
Here we have a good matchup that should be fairly close. Both games between these two came down to the wire last year. Matty Ice and co. managed to sweep the series, but it's hard to look at the stats and feel that either team dominated by any stretch. In fact, the Bucs seemed to have their home game wrapped up before 4th quarter/late game heroics by Ice.
I know no one wants to like this Bucs team and to an extent you can count me in on that float. With that said, is there that much wrong with losing to the Lions in a one score game (though only due to a late TD) and then beating Minnesota on the road?
On the other hand the Falcons were trounced by a Bears team that came back and was uncompetitive against the Saints and were fortunate winners in a shootout against the Eagles. Not exactly enough evidence to send them to the electric chair but also nothing that gets my juices flowing about winning a road game against a decent divisional opponent.
If we like the Bucs, what are we relying on? Well, one of the issues is that Matt Ryan is pretty good at taking what you give him. Tampa will play bend don't break defense and Ryan will likely get his yards. The big key will be whether they can keep him, White, Gonzo and Turner out of the endzone. If they can, then you have to like the Bucs chances on offense of putting up some points. Let's face it, Atlanta's defense has been downright atrocious so far this year and I don't really see any reason for Tampa to buck that trend. In fact, this game looks prime for Freeman to get this Tampa offense untracked. Blount had a much better week 2 than week 1 and Mike Williams looks more and more like a powder keg ready to explode by the day. Throw in the development of Arrelious Benn and I just don't quite get why Tampa's offense isn't clicking a bit better so far.
This one deserves more thought, but the idea of laying less than a FG at home is quite appealing to me here. The difference between these two teams last year very well may have been greater and by all means the Bucs should've beaten them during their home game. Unless you really are wearing the Lil' John stunner shades and think that this Atlanta team is much better than their two recent efforts suggest, don't you have to like Tampa here?
Seattle Seahawks vs. Arizona Cardinals
Cardinals -3.5
O/U 43
As much as I do consider myself resident Cardinals hater from day 1....and as much as I do think Seattle's homefield is still a major advantage, how on Earth do you back Seattle right now? They are purely pathetic. I feel like I've been talking about what a joke it is for Tavaris Jackson to be a starting QB for like 10 years now. Seriously folks, this guy couldn't complete over 50% of his passes against Alcorn St., Southern & co. He's not good. This isn't college, you can't just have enough speed to scramble every play and be effective as a QB. You actually have to be able to dissect defense and make big throws. At running back Marshawn Lynch isn't much different. No points are awarded for broken tackles. There are no extra yards walked off for breaking four tackles behind the line of scrimmage. The fact is, Marshawn Lynch is the nastiest player of Queer in the NFL currently and it's probably not close. He's also one of the absolutely least effective running backs in it.
But much like how I simply refuse to back the Raiders, I cannot back the Cardinals. Especially on the road in a tough atmosphere. I still have seen nothing out of Kevin Kolb that makes me afraid of fading this team. If you put a gun to my head I'd probably take Seattle for these reasons. But since I don't currently see any steel pointed in my direction I think I'll do the wise thing here and just move on.
Chicago Bears vs. Green Bay Packers
Packers -3.5
O/U 46
So clearly every road team in the NFL is a 3.5 point favorite, particularly all of those playing at 4. You have to think some win, some lose...figuring out which are which is a substantially harder task though. To me what we see here is a bit tricky. On the one hand the Packers are clearly a public favorite. After all, who doesn't feel good about backing Aaron Rodgers? On the other hand, is it somehow sharp to not like Aaron Rodgers? Let's face it, even the staunchest of Bears fans can easily see him Drew Brees-ing that defense apart. And while the Packers defense has been highly scrutinized, highly vulnerable and highly ineffective - we all pretty much know it's better than what it has showed so far right? What better opportunity to break out in a big way than against a shaky o-line, a QB that holds the ball far too long and a receiving corps that is pretty lifeless other than the running back.
To me, anyone thinking of backing the Bears here is being a bit cute. I understand that these games tend to be low-scoring slugfests. I am well aware of all the success that the Bears defense has seemingly had in slowing down Rodgers. But I also don't see a whole lot of reasons that Rodgers can't rip them to bits this weekend. And again, if you think, like me, that the Packers defense has every right to get it going this weekend, then 3.5 really doesn't look like the worst price to pay to get to back Rodgers. Usually when I see 3.5 I look for reasons to like the dog. It's nice to be able to trail by 10 points and still have the backdoor open. Especially against a defense that has been giving up as many points as Green Bay's has. But again, the Bears offered little resistance against the Saints last week and even at home I think they are facing a taller task here.
With all that said the Packers are now without Nick Collins. Chuck Woodson and Clay Matthews did not practice last I checked. Chad Clifton, Tramon Williams and Ryan Pickett were all limited. Not sure yet of the official status of these players but it is a major concern, especially against a physical team like the Bears.
No comments:
Post a Comment