Thursday, November 17

NFL Picks: Week 11

Hey, it's Andy this time. Pretty heated competition this year, with newcomer Joe holding a two-game lead over Nick, and Figgs...hey, how about that Joe and Nick?!

Anyway, I'm enjoying my season off of the competition and checking in on the fellows' picks. This week I thought I'd add some commentary to the games as well because, damnit, I'm a cofounder of this blog. I WILL LOCK YOU OUT IF YOU CROSS ME! OK, that was unnecessary.

Last Week
Joe: 8-8
Nick: 8-8
Figgs: 5-11

Figgs' $ Picks: 1-1
Nick's $ Picks: 2-3

Current Standings
Joe: 74-65-6
Nick: 71-68-6
Figgs: 62-77-6

Figgs' $ Picks: 8-14-1
Nick's $ Picks: 23-16-4

Thursday Night Football

BRONCOS (+6.5) vs Jets
Figgs: Jets. It's time for this Tebow lovefest to die down at the hands (or should I say feet?) of Rex Ryan.
Joe: Jets; I just can't imagine the Broncos will continue winning games running the option and completing 2 passes a game. Going from Brady to Tebow must be a wet dream for Rex Ryan and the Jets defense.
Nick: Jets. The Jetropolitans have always been better at stuffing the run than rushing the passer, and fortunately for them the Donks don't pass. Joe, do you think Rex Ryan wet dreams are brought on by sleeping next to his wife's feet?
Andy: Yeah, I'm here. Do they still show these Thursday things on the NFL Network? Hasn't that thing failed by now? Parks and Rec was solid tonight, as usual. I shut off the TV when The Office came on - just not into it anymore.

Sunday, 1 pm kickoff

BROWNS (-1) vs Jaguars
Figgs: BROWNS. Vegas is seriously still picking us? I can't figure out why, but count me in.
Joe: Browns; Not because of confidence, simply out of hope.
Nick: Jags. I'm not proud of this. ($)
Andy: Believe it or not, roughly five days ago, I spent $30 on a ticket to attend this game in person, and I am not Blaine Gabbert's or Colt McCoy's mother.

RAVENS (-7) vs Bengals
Figgs: Cincy. This might be the first time I've picked them all year, but Baltimore is really pissing me off.
Joe: Bengals; They disappointed me bigtime last week against the steelers, but I still like them and think this game could go either way. So if you're giving me a full TD, I'll take it.
Nick: Bengals. Too many points. ($ +9)
Andy: I hate the Ravens, in case I've never mentioned this before. I have total Ohio solidarity when it comes to the AFC North - Baltimore and Pittsburgh can jump in a lake. I mean, obviously I want the Browns to win no matter what, but I'd much rather see another Ohio team take it if Cleveland can't.

FALCONS (-6) vs Titans
Figgs: ATL. I really like this under a touchdown. Tough to win in the Dome, and the Birds need this one to boot.
Joe: Titans; For some reason, I struggled with this game more than any other. I just have a gut feeling Tennessee at least keeps this one to about a FG. (As a bonus, I believe this game got moved to 4:15, so we have another option after we watch the Browns lose.)
Nick: Falcons. The ATL really needs to bounce back to stay in the wild card hunt, and their defense is much better than Carolina's.
Andy: I'm just happy to see Figgs back picking Atlanta every week again, getting back to FCF's roots. I'm also looking forward to my annual post where I mess with the team names and call ATL the "Dirty Birds" and Tennessee the "Titties." I am 14 years old. I was just in Tennessee, less than an hour from Nashville, and no one seemed even vaguely aware that they have an NFL team. There was a bunch of michigan shit all over the place in bars and such from when GM sent people to nearby Spring Hill to launch Saturn, and now there's a bunch of unemployed michigan fans there.

DOLPHINS (-2) vs Bills
Figgs: Jills. Two weeks ago this line is Bills -7. The Fish have proved they aren't totally inept, and Buffalo has proved they're not a playoff contender, but I still think they are the better team. ($ - SU)
Joe: Dolphins; I have sold every one of my shares of Bills stock. The fish have improved every week and Matt Moore is at least serviceable, and I'd argue that he's a better option than Henne anyway (I doubt I'll get any disagreements from this panel on that one).
Nick: Bills. I've been ready to pick the Fish all week, but I'm going to give the Bills one last chance. If they lose this one their season's over.
Andy: I had this sweet Marino jersey when I was like 10, plus this small Dolphins nerf football. I also very much enjoyed Ace Ventura. On the other hand, Buffalo had Mark Kelso and his giant helmet.

VIKINGS (+1) vs Raiders
Figgs: Vikes. Tough call, but I like Minny at home. They are better than their two-win record.
Joe: Raiders; I've loved them all year (perhaps too much at times), and I see no reason to go against them here. Palmer looked great on Thurday night and I think he's found his rhythm.
Nick: Vikings. I'll take the Vikes at home and getting a point against another mediocre team.
Andy: I'm pretty sure I just saw Figgs "Like" a team at home that is currently sporting a 1-3 mark there. I'm also pretty sure I saw Joe forget everything Carson Palmer has done since 2005. Something seems unnatural about this matchup - maybe it's the notion of the Raiders in a dome.

LIONS (-7) vs Panthers
Figgs: Lions. I skipped this one and came back to it because I couldn't decide. I guess I'll take Detriot to bounce back at home.
Joe: Lions; Probably the 1st time I've gone against Cam, but I think the league has started to figure him out somewhat. Tennessee crushed them, and Detroit is better than Tennessee.
Nick: Lions. It's a bounce-back game that they need to stay in the playoff hunt.
Andy: This matchup of two big cat teams reminds me of this girl who lived next door to me in Pittsburgh who had a surprisingly clever plan to realign the NFL by genre of mascot. There would be a Big Cat division (Lions, Panthers, Bengals, Jaguars), an Adventurers division (Bucs, Raiders, Vikings, Patriots), a Birds division (Eagles, Falcons, Cardinals, Ravens), and so on. In a related note, both she and her roommate had really big breasts - I'm pretty sure objects orbited their apartment.

PACKERS (-14.5) vs Bucs
Figgs: Pack. No chance I'm picking against these guys right now, or probably for the rest of the year for that matter.
Joe: Packers; Again, they always have blowout potential, and the Bucs have been a huge disappointment this year in my opinion.
Nick: Packers. This is a ton of points, but I have faith in Green Bay's offense and Tampa Bay's generous defense.
Andy: Hey, did anyone notice that the Packers are good? You realize that they're averaging a 14.9-point win in their nine games and that the Browns are averaging 14.6 points scored a contest? Yes, the Packers' average margin of victory is higher than our total points per game.

While I'm here, every team in the AFC North has at least 100 points in point differential over us. That's rough. Only two other NFL clubs are that far back of the group (Minnesota in a ridiculously strong NFC North, and the hapless Colts). We're fourth-worst in SRS according to, topping only the Rams, Chieves, and of course Colts.

Speaking of the Colts, my goodness are they awful. Their average result is a seventeen-point defeat. AVERAGE. For comparison, the '99 expansion Browns averaged a 14-point loss every time they took the field (and beat Pittsburgh once) and the '00 Browns a 16-point loss every game (also a win over Pittsburgh). Remember those awful teams? Indy is, so far, worse.

REDSKINS (+9) vs Cowboys
Figgs: Skins. Not confident here at all, but a road team giving nine seems too high.
Joe: Redskins; Dallas should win, but they don't seem good enough to give this many points on the road.
Nick: Cowboys. The Redskins suck, and Dallas might be ready to turn a corner.
Andy: Remember when Deadspin posted a link to that article lampooning Redskin owner Dan Snyder on their site for over 200 straight days until he dropped that stupid-ass libel suit against the Washington city paper? That was awesome. I will NEVER support a team owned by that megadoucher.

Sunday, 4 pm kickoff

49ERS (-9.5) vs Cardinals
Figgs: Niners. Not too sure about this one either, but SanFran proved they were for real last week. Playing in the West, if GB has a slip up or two they could be playing the NFC Championship by the bay.
Joe:49ers; They are beyond for real. I thought the Cards might keep it close, but then I thought about Patrick Willis and company vs. John Skelton, and this decision seemed a lot easier.
Nick: Niners. SF is pretty darn good, I guess Jim Harbaugh was a solid hire.
Andy: If his name was "John Skeleton," do you think we would feel better about him? Would we maybe call him "Johnny Bones"? I would take Johnny Bones on the road getting 9.5. To steal some Nick thunder, Patrick Willis might be the league's most underrated player. Casual fans have no idea who this cat is, maybe because of his nondescript name. What if he was Patrique Willington? You'd know him then.

RAMS (-1) vs Seahawks
Figgs: Hawks. BEAST MODE BABY! ($)
Joe: Seahawks; Tavaris Jackson makes them a pretty good bad team. The Rams have been an even bigger disappointment than Tampa has this year.
Nick: Shehawks. ($ +3)
Andy: Is it weird to anyone else that the 'Hawks' only road win this year was a straight-up pasting of the division-leading Giants? I didn't correct Joe's spelling of Seattle's QB's name because I think it's better than the actual one with its superfluous first "r".

BEARS (-3.5) vs Chargers
Figgs: Chicago. SF wasn't the only team to prove they were a legit contender last week. The Monsters of the Midway are back, and I would not want to play them right now.
Joe: Bears; Until they prove otherwise, I will pick them every week. I've already stated numerous times in previous weeks how I feel about the Chargers.
Nick: Bears. My favorite game on the board. ($)
Andy: I wanted to buy Matthew Stafford a coke after that game in Chitown last week. Goodness did he look bad. Also: it's easy to forget that Chicago was one win away from the Super Bowl last year.

Sunday Night Football

GIANTS (-6) vs Eagles
Figgs: NYG. Vince Young? No thank you.
Joe: Giants; The Eagles have totally tanked this season. After losing to the Cards at home, I can see them completely going through the motions the rest of the way. The G-Men look to be for real. I was impressed with them last week in a losing effort vs. San Fran.
Nick: Giants. This should be over a TD with Vick out.
Andy: As I write this, Joe has already made his pick even though no line is posted. That, my friends, is dedication to craft. I mean, Nick sometimes doesn't even make picks even though the games have kicked off. I haven't made a pick all year, for that matter.

Monday Night Football

PATRIOTS (-14.5) vs Chiefs
Figgs: Pats. Lot of points here, but brady at home in primetime is tough to go against. (I feel like I said something very similar to this last week.)
Joe: Pats; Thought about the Chiefs since this is such a high spread, but they have been awful the past few weeks and Brady was vintage Brady last week against a much better Jets team.
Nick: Pats. Would love to take my boy Tyler Palko, but I can't justify it.
Andy: When the red sox missed the playoffs earlier this year, Boston dorkwad Dan Shaughnessy rhetorically and hysterically (and not obviously jokingly) asked, "Have there been worse days in the history of New England sports?" Fuckity fuck fuck this makes me mad. So your baseball team, which has won two World Series in the past eight seasons, missed the playoffs by one game, your football team, which has won three of the past 10 Super Bowls is leading their division, and your hockey team IS THE DEFENDING STANLEY CUP CHAMPION, and that's your all-time low point? Fuck you.

Figgs $ teaser: Jets (PK)/Falcons (PK)
Figgs $ parlay: Browns (PK)/Falcons (PK)

1 comment:

Figgs said...

"By the way, you'd look fabulous as a brunette. Ron Swanson."