WEEK 8: BLOWOUT BONANZA?

Okay, "Blowout Bonanza" may be a bit hyperbolic, but looking at what happened in the Thursday Night debacle and at some of the spreads this week, we're not looking at a lot of barn burners.  

Courtesy of Deadspin.com

Five of the twelve remaining games this week have spreads of nine or higher and only and only three have spreads under six. Now, a seven point win is hardly a blowout and, of course, spreads don't necessarily indicate what will happen, but they are based on whatever information is available. All in all, it looks like your own team playing or fantasy football will be driving viewership this week.

NINERS VS. JAGUARS (+15) @ LONDON- The Niners are starting to get a little swagger back and the Jags are, well, bad. Jacksonville is 0-7, but it is hard to say they have even looked close to winning a game this season. They did have their shining moment, being right with Peyton Manning and the Broncos going into the half, but as Peyton Manning and the Broncos are want to do, they pulled away in the second half. The Jaguars have lost every game this season by ten or more points.In five of the seven games they have lost by 15 or more points and another game they lost by 14. So while a spread this large in the NFL is tough to bet on, there is really nothing pointing to the Jaguars covering. But hey, the Jaguars may be just darned awful, at least they get a free trip to London, right? Niners 37-9

COWBOYS @ LIONS (-3)- Is it just me or do the Cowboys always seem to underachieve? A dash of talent a teaspoon of hype and you get one Cowboy fizzle. I have never been much of a fan of Tony Romo, possibly because he is on the Cowboys? I mean, a mid-major football program QB in the NFL? Should be my bread and butter, right? Well, this dislike certainly wasn't helped by the fact I was saddled with Romo at QB last year in fantasy football. Romo has been the borderline definition of inconsistency. Am I sure I know what the Lions are this season? No. So oddly, I am going with the Cowboys. Cowboys 31-28

GIANTS @ EAGLES (-5.5)- Hey, whaddya know, the Giants won a game! The weird thing here is, if the Giants win this game and the Cowboys manage to lose, the G-men are two games out of first in their division and will be a game back of the Eagles with half a season to go. What?! Yes, that is how bad the NFC East has been this season.It's hard to say that a win over that semblance of football team from Minnesota on Monday night is any indication of the G-men righting the ship, but maybe, just maybe that's what they need to get going? Giants 24-21

BROWNS @ CHIEVES (-7.5)- The Chieves are 7-0. That's right folks, the Kansas City Chieves are the last undefeated team in the NFL this season. However you slice it, that is an accomplishment. Now years ago my buddy Billyball and I had a spirited conversation at one of our local watering holes regarding the subject of an early season record for a certain team at the time and what it actually meant. We have since, had a running inside joke that has been spawned from this conversation where our response to any team peppered with early season hype due to a fast start is simply, "But who have they played?". This is absolutely only funny to us, but the Chieves have recently reminded me of this. The very talented Joe Posnanski lays it out pretty well, here, but the basic premise is many are still doubting the goodness of KC. If the Broncos were still undefeated, we'd be hearing about them making a run at 16-0, but not with these Chieves. Through no fault of their own, the Chieves have not really played any tough opponents and in the NFL, there are no polls to determine the playoff teams, only wins and losses. Add to the fact that the remaining schedule, outside of two games against Denver, does not look overly taxing and we may not know how good the Chieves really are, until playoff time. Chieves 20-10

BILLS @ SAINTS (-11)- I am not going to downplay the Saints, but there is just something feisty and gritty about these Bills.Now Spiller may not play, but really he hasn't been playing much, all season, so I am not sure this will affect the Bills too much. Circle the wagons, folks! Saints 23-20

DOLPHINS @ PATRIOTS (-6.5)- There's something unsettling about the Patriots this year.I would say they are, arguably, the toughest pick against the spread. Until last week, they were rocking that Pats persona of back in '01 where they just find ways to win.They have not looked good this season, on offense anyways. The defense was looking strong, but losing your three best defensive starters can turn that around quickly. Phins are, I dunno, mediocre. This could be a close one, but for some reason, my guts says the Pats squeak one out at home. Patriots 24-20  

JETS @ BENGALS (-6)- The Bengals are very similar to the Chieves, I think. The Bengals are not being mentioned in the same vein as KC, but are similarly off to a good start. I just don't see a clutchiness to Andy Dalton but I feel, much like KC, they have a reliable defense and an offense that does not make glaring mistakes. Cincy has also only won one game my more than a score. They keep things close, but know how to win, I guess. Bengals 16-9

STEELERS @ RADIERS (+2.5)- Sometimes I completely forget about the Raiders. It's easy to do, really. Steelers 21-14

REDSKINS @ BRONCOS (-12)- The Redskins surprised me last week against the Bears. The Broncos, are not the Bears, but expect another shootout. Broncos 41-31

FALCONS @ CARDINALS (-2.5)- Battle of the Birds in 'Zona! okay, so maybe that wasn't deserving of exclamation, but what can I say, I needed to pep it up a bit. hey, look, I know the Falcons have had some big injuries on offense, but I still refuse to believe this team is as bad as their record and numbers show, thus far. Plus, Steven Jackson looks to play this week. Falcons 31-20

PACKERS @ VIKINGS (+9)- Even down most of his receivers, Aaron Rodgers should still be able to shred the Vikings, especially if they continue to let Josh Freeman throw at will. Did putting emphasis on the pass for Josh Freeman's sake on Monday not make sense to anyone else? I am all for letting a new QB get acclimated to a new system, but you still need to focus on giving your team the best shot at winning and if you have Adrian Petersen, he is your best shot at winning. If the argument is that Giants were winless and they could get away with that, well, that won't really fly. I mean, don't all coaches preach not underestimating an opponent? The converse argument could be that the Vikes are throwing in the towel on the season already, but if that's the case, why bother getting Freeman in the first place? Well, whatever is happening in Minnesota, doesn't look good right now. Packers 27-10

SEAHAWKS @ RAMS (+11)- There is a small part of me that feels like this is a typical trap game for the 'Hawks, but then again I thought that when the Rams hosted the Niners on a Thursday night and how'd that turn out? Seahawks 31-13

T-H-U-R-S-D-A-Y NIGHT!

I don't think the title of this post really conveys what I am going for, unless I make it known that for full effect it should be sung by the Bay City Rollers. Really, if you're still lost, maybe this picture will help:




Wow, that was a brutal start to this post. Sorry about that. I think the weary tiredness that has encompassed me all day, may be effecting my brain. After all, I did just zone out and stare at that sweet picture for like three minutes. Although, that's probably more to do with me being a human being and less to do with me being a tired and weary human being. Sorry, sorry. I digress.




You see what happens when the I am writing on little, to no, sleep and the Thursday Night Football game features the Panthers and the Buccaneers? Now, to be fair, the Panthers are not completely unwatchable and, honestly, it will be hard to have a less titillating primetime game than what was broadcast to the nation on Monday Night. The best thing to come from that game is the new hottest seller in the Giants' gift shop...


...the Steve Weatherford cape!

PANTHERS @ BUCCANEERS (+6)- Well, Doug Martin is out, so the Bucs will have Mike and Mike leading the charge. Mike Glennon and Mike James. Yikes. Okay, okay, the thing is these guys have very little NFL experience, but in the world of the NFL anything can happen. However in the real and more accurate world, expectations are really low. I mean, they're not low enough to, say, save Greg Schiano's job or anything, but certainly low enough to have a "what do we have to lose?" philosophy. Well, for Schiano, a job, I suppose, but are you catching what I am throwing here? The point I am trying to make is, I am really tired.

Look, the Panthers are not great and the Buccaneers are, well, the Buccaneers. But hey, this is probably, arguably, the second greatest rivalry in AFC South history. If that doesn't put butts in the seats, what will?! An actual watchable football game? Yeah, okay, that would actually probably do it, I suppose. Really, can we expect that, here? Hmmm? Yeah, I think not. Game could be close, but that doesn't necessarily make it good. Well, I'll tell you what, I picked up Mike Tolbert on a fantasy team, looking for a TD, so Pmaybe I'll catch a quarter between pitches in the World Series, who knows? Panthers 24-9

Oh, hey, can't get enough of the "Bitterness" wit and sass? Try following me on Twitter, you'll get plenty! @WillieMoe

THE BUTT SHOVE HEARD 'ROUND NEW ENGLAND

A classier "Bitterness" blog post title, you may never find. Right?! Well, some day, down the road, the Patriots will play the Jets in the Meadowlands (MetLife Stadium, I guess), without a weird play/ call, indirectly involving a lineman's keester. Right?



Honestly, I am sure I am not in the minority hoping that is not any day soon. I mean who doesn't want more action involving bumping into linemen's backsides? It's okay, we're in the trust tree, you can admit your true feelings on the subject to me, even if you think you must hide this from your cohorts. Anyways, for those of you who missed the Jets-Patriots overtime, here is what happened:

The game was in overtime, which you probably figured out from the previous sentence, but I'm setting the scene here, so just go with it, will ya? The Patriots inconsistent offense already managed to not score on the opening possession which of course means all the Jets had to do was score some points, be it by touhdown, field goal or safety. So after a promising start to the Jets drive, they were stymied by the Pats defense just inside the 40, setting up a 56-yard field goal attempt for their kicker of lore, Nick Folk.

Folks' career long, according to my data is 56 yards, so conceivable under optimal conditions that he could drill home a game-winning field goal, here. Be that as it may, there are not a lot, if any, kickers you would have complete confidence in, in this situation. Al Del Greco, maybe. Point is, this is not a gimmie in any way, shape or form. Alright, you got the picture painted in your head? Good. So, continuing on. They're all lined up, ball is snapped, kick is up, and it is wide left. Patriots will take over with great field position for them to march into Stephen Gostkowski's field goal range and escape with the win, right? Wrong.

There is a flag on the play. Kicker was upright, so it was not roughing the kicker or anything in that realm. Did not appear to be a false start or offsides, so whatever could be the issue? Unsportsmanlike conduct. Unsportsmanlike conduct? I mean the players weren't hugging, singing "Kumbaya" or anything, but there was no indication of conduct that seemed in anyway unsportsmanlike. Enter the "Butt Shove" rule, otherwise known as NFL Rule 9.1.3 (b)(2). You see, Patriots rookie Chris Jones shoved the buttocks of teammate Will Svitek in order to propel (well propel may not be the most apt word) him into the Jets offensive line and you cannot do that according to the "Butt Shove" rule.



Unfamiliar with the rule? Well, here is what it says-

(b) When Team A presents a field-goal or Try Kick formation:
(2) Team B players cannot push teammates on the line of scrimmage into the offensive formation.

Interpreted and called correctly by the referee, Jets get a first down, move closer and Folk kicks a game winner from much closer.

A few things that interest me here (settle down Pats fans, your conspiracy theories are not amongst them). First off, is the fact this penalty exists. I am not insensitive to injuries, players getting hurt, etcetera, etcetera, and I fully understand the purpose of this rule being in the interest of protecting offensive lineman on kicks. However, are we going a bit far? Maybe (definitley) I am ignorant to the number of longsnappers that have been hurt because players used to be able to shove the butts of their offensive lineman all willy-nilly, but just seems like it was not that big of a problem. It's football people. Football. Not tiddlywinks. Nope, football.

Secondofly, are there any actual statistics that suggest this would actually decrease the chances of the kicker making the kick? I understand if you have a Varsity Blues scenario, where they clear the way for a Tweeter-esque player to come, more or less up the middle to block it, then sure, this would completely help you. (Yes, I am also aware that was a punt, not a field goal. Do not test my Varsity Blues knowledge!)



But there are not many special teams players in the NFL with Charlie Tweeter's skill set. Case in point, the fact that the Patriots have been doing this all season. How many kicks have they blocked? I wanna say none. Sure, it is tough to statistically say whether or not they have affected a kick, without blocking it, I suppose, but I would argue this has probably not aided in kick affecting, much. They have done this so often, that the Jets actually told officials to watch for this before Sunday's game started. So, this begs the question are the Jets the only ones aware of this rule? Or perhaps, are the Patriots the only ones breaking this rule? Could be both, but the fact is, it has not been called all season...on anyone.

It would be interesting, and by interesting I mean tedious and boring, to go through all kicks this season and see how many times it has been done. Clearly the refs were not eager to look for, or enforce, this penalty before Sunday. Perhaps the fact Rex Ryan and the Jets had earlier alerted the referees to the Patriots special teams chicanery, was what inspired him to send Folk out there to go for the win? I realize this was overtime, but 56 yards?! That's a long kick and if he missed, which for all intents and purposes he did, Patriots have great field position. I'm also curious as to whether or not the Pats did this on previous kicks in this game? The Jets certainly did.



So what made the referees all of sudden see this in overtime, on Sunday? We may never know (Rex Ryan shoves the $100 bills back in his pocket).

Seriously, the bottom line, is this was still no anti-Patriot conspiracy theory, nor can you fault the Patriots for giving it a whirl. It was the correct, somewhat obscure, call even though the Patriots and, most likely, other NFL teams have probably been shoving their linemen's butts throughout the season. As the saying goes, "It ain't cheatin', if you don't get caught." Well the Patriots got caught "cheatin'", if you will.* The Patriots did not really deserve to win that game anyways and should really learn by now that if (when?) they "cheat" they should not do it in the Meadowlands (Spygate anyone?) against the Jets.

*Cheating within the rules of the game that is. This is no more cheating than interfering with a receiver or roughing a passer, but I felt the quote really better hammered home the point.

WEEK SEVEN: THE TWEETEST THING

So, this week, gonna cater to the modern generation and low attention spans. Yep, that's right, for each game I will cover it all in 140 characters or less! Yes, you read correctly! 140 characters or less! Huzzah! I know what you want to ask, "Are you really doing this because you are lazy and or strapped for time?" Haha, okay. On with the show!

PATRIOTS @ JETS (+3.5)- Gronk'll play!!!! Well, he'll suit up & should play. Let's call him highly probable. Brady w/ fav target who can catch?! NE 24-13

CHARGERS @ JAGUARS (+7.5)- Could it happen? Could Jags cover a spread 2 weeks in a row? Well? I mean, they still haven't lost by less than 10, sooooo...SD 31-21

TEXANS @ CHIEVES (-6.5)- How'd Texans become so, well, to put it nicely, somewhat dismal? Dominated by Rams @ HOME?! Chieves are NOT the Rams. KC 23-17

BENGALS @ LIONS (-2.5)- Can anyone read the Bengals? Anyone? Anyone? Voodoo economics.lol. Lions r as as unreadable as works of Susan Sontag. am I right? CIN 21-17

BILLS @ DOLPHINS (-7.5)- Classic AFC East blood feud! I'll be donning by Bills Sam Cowart jersey Sun. Thad Lewis homecoming in Mia=trouble for Phins! BUF 21-20

BEARS @ REDSKINS (PK)- Must have missed where Skins sowed something that somehow doesn'y make 'em underdogs, here. #patheticpassdefense CHI 31-23

COWBOYS @ EAGLES (-3)- See Bears-Redskins, #patheticpassdefense. Not a believe in Dal, but they r best in NFC East for now. #skiniestkidatfatcamp DAL 35-28

RAMS @ PANTHERS (-7)- #notworthonehundredandfortycharacters CAR 24-21

BUCCANEERS @ FALCONS (-7)- The injury riddles vs. the not-as-much talent-riddled. ATL 21-10

NINERS @ TITANS (+3.5)- Jake Locker is back! Well, I can certainly sleep better. Niners scored 30+ in 3 straight & Locker won't help combat that. SF 34-21

BROWNS @ PACKERS (-10)- 1 thing hope does not do in Cle, is spring eternal. #WeedenTime And now a moment of sighing in Cle. Good. GB 27-16

RAVENS @ STEELERS (-2.5)- This'll be won in the trenches #slobberknocker I feel this should be played in a downpour. Mother Nature? Lil help? BAL 16-11

BRONCOS @ COLTS (+6.5)- A red hot Peyton Manning returning to Indy? Lookout folks! #homecomingshootout DEN 37-28

VIKINGS @ GIANTS (-3.5)- Primetime against a struggling Vikings team, at home? Say hello to win #1 for the G-Men. NYG 24-14

THURSDAY NIGHT, Y'ALL!

Before a large portion of my overly rambunctious chums venture to my domicile tonight, I'm gonna get serious. Seriously? Yes, seriously, serious. Not Yahoo Serious.



So, here we go. Earlier this week, yesterday if you want to get all specific here, I left work to board a very packed bus to head home for the evening. Like just about every human being on the planet, that is not a pickpocket or a pervert, I do not enjoy being on packed modes of public transportation. It's uncomfortable for one and secondofly if I don't get a seat, I cannot read a book or often times get to my phone for entertainment. It's just the worst and worsened (yes worsened from the worst) by the fact my stop is towards the end of the route. But back to the whole no book or phone access thing.

Now, I did have a friend to chat with for the beginning of the ride, but do to people getting on and off the bus and certain logistical difficulties, we were separated. I  know, it's a bus and I'm sure you would all expect me to still converse with a friend, over, around and through people and, rest assured, I have done this in the past, but not this time. This time, I was immediately drawn into some people watching or, more to the point, phone watching.

I was quickly drawn into the smartphone activity of the young lady in front of me. First it was run of the mill stuff. A quick scroll through the Facebook newsfeed,  click on a link to a delightful little Buzzfeed post, etcetera, etcetera. Then she clicked to a page with contacts and pulled up one that really caught my eye. Mike Bus Stop (Weird). It was listed as his home number. Now, I want to know the story. First thought is, it is a guy named Mike (not much of stretch, I feel) whom she met at a bus stop, maybe a bit weird, but also cute or possessing a certain quality? Enough so that numbers were exchanged, or he just gave her his, which, in today's society, may seem a bit weird. That has to be it, right? Or is it just a good friend who she decided needed a strange name in her phone? Or, maybe it was designed for people like me, knowing that I would be racking my brain wanting to know the story behind this, but would definitely not have the cajones to admit reading her phone and now wondering about the possible story behind this name. Now, I will never know. But wait, there's more!

The young lady proceeds to engage in a conversation of the text variety, over her phone. I didn't really hone in on the convo (sorry), but did catch one thing. I saw her type "LOL". No big deal, right? You see it all the time and don't even flinch. So what's the big deal? Well, I will tell you what the big deal is. This young lady did not laugh out loud. Not even a snicker. Not a giggle, not a shoulder jostle cause by trying to not burst out laughing on the bus. None of it. I mean, what is wrong with society?! Is "LOL" just something used to dismiss something supposedly funny? Does anyone use acronyms that are true to their situation at the time? Has LOL replaced the courteous yet, at times, ambiguous "haha"? I mean the "haha" is tough to read already, but now if LOL is losing all it's meaning and pomp, then what kind of world has this become? Even the "ha" is more firm, but the "haha" is like "clearly you think this is funny, so I am going to make it seem like I feel this way about your message so as to spare feelings".

I am at a loss, right now. Does anyone really know the reaction they are getting on the other end of a text message? An email? An instant message? A mailed letter? I don't think anyone does. I for one, picture the reaction in my head, when I receive the return message. This, has now been ruined for me by a young lady who just throws her reactionary acronyms out all willynilly, like they're candy on Halloween and her message recipients are costumed little trick-or-treaters! What an indictment of society on the whole. Sigh. Oh yeah, football.

SEAHAWKS 24-16

 

WEEK SIX: PICTURELESS

The Giants are 0-6. Can you believe that? Let me type it again...the Giants are 0-6. Now, take a minute to let that sink in...............alright, but now think about this- If the Eagles and Cowboys lose this week, the G-men are still only two games back. Are you getting the point here? The NFC East is bad.

RAIDERS @ CHIEVES (-8.5)- Alex Smith, Alex Smith, Alex Smith, Alex Smith, Alex Smith, Alex Smith, Alex Smith, Alex Smith, Alex Smith, Alex Smith, Alex Smith, Alex Smith, Alex Smith. Chieves 31-13

 EAGLES @ BUCCANEERS (+2.5)- Look, the Eagles are up and down. I don't know what to make of them. But come on Foles versus Glennon?! If you're not marking this as the game of the week, then, well, haha, you, well, you probably understand the NFL pretty well. Eagles 28-13

PACKERS @ RAVENS (+3)- Ray Rice looked a tad more like Ray Rice last week, but he has to gonna have to be full on Ray Rice this week if they hope to beat the Packers. Packers 24-14

LIONS @ BROWNS ( +2.5)- The Browns are riding high, right now. Three straight wins, tied for first in the AFC North, everything's coming up Browns. Okay, that sounds weird, and on more than one account. Let's move on. The thing is, the Lions, I think have a better offense than all three of those teams the Brownies beat, so this will be a test for Cleveland's D. I am not a believer in said "D", just yet. Let's see how they handle Detroit and then we can revisit the discussion. Lions 31-21 

PANTHERS @ VIKINGS (-2)- Cam Newton and company were handled, just handled, by the Cardinals defense last week, which to me makes this an intriguing matchup. I feel like this will be a fight to the finish, similar to the close one the Vikes played in London. Panthers 31-28
 
RAMS @ TEXANS(-7.5)- Don't you just feel like the Rams are gonna all of sudden start playing really well and pulling off some upsets? No? Well, at least not this week. Texans 31-17

STEELERS @ JETS (-1)- Hmm, here is an interesting one. The Jets are surprisingly better than awful and the Steelers have just been plain awful. I picked up the Jets defense for one of my fantasy football teams, which shows how much faith I have in the Steelers offense. However, how..ever, I just can't envision the Steelers going 0-5. Steelers 9-7 

BENGALS @ BILLS (+6.5)- It is the moment I know you have all been waiting for, the debut of Thad Lewis! I know, I know, I've never heard of him either. Super exciting, I guess? Bengals defense has been pretty good this season, so it could be tough for a new QB to jump on in and have success. On the other side of this, Bengals don't really have much to go on when facing Lewis. Nevertheless, I think everything favors Cincy. Bengals 24-10

TITANS @ SEAHAWKS (-13.5)- Okay, yeah, the Titans are gonna rely on Fitzmagic this week, but I still feel they deserve a little more respect from the spreadmakers up on high. Almost two touchdown underdogs. I am not going to go so far as to say they will beat the Seahawks, but I feel like they will give them a run for their money. Yes, I know I have been all about sticking with the Seahawks while they're hot and I did. Again, I am not saying they will lose, I'm just saying it won't be a blowout. Seahawks 21-16

JAGUARS @ BRONCOS (-27)- Wow, 27 point spread? You don't often see a spread this large in the NFL, but this is one that somehow seems like it could be covered. I don't have the official numbers in front of me, but I believe Peyton Manning is averaging approximately 700 yards and five touchdowns a game or something to that extent. The Jaguars don't have that much offense on the season...total. All of that being said, it is still tough to pick a team to cover such a monstrous spread. Especially with Henne Penny now at the quarterback spot for the Jags against that less than stellar Broncos pass D, right? Broncos 42-17

CARDINALS @ NINERS (-10.5)- The Niners seem to be clicking again and, while the Cards are feisty, I think they will fall just short of the road upset this week.The thing to watch closely is the running back job in 'Zona. "The Duke" Andre Ellington is not far from knocking Rashard Mendenhall right down the depth chart. Niners 24-20

SAINTS @ PATRIOTS (-2)- First Gronk would most assuredly be back for this game, then he is questionable, now he is borderline doubtful, by game time he may be perhapsable. Sorry, that's not a word. Perhapsible. Gronk could be the biggest factor in this game. Or rather whether or not he plays could be the biggest factor. The Patriots offense has yet to have any continuity this season and the Saints have a pretty good pass defense. Actually their defense in general is pretty good. Getting Gronk back would be huge for Tommy Brady, says Captain Obvious, but either way I think the Pats may still may be in trouble in this one. Saints 21-17

REDSKINS @ COWBOYS (-5.5)- The Redskins have not been good. Their only win came against a spotty Raiders team, albeit in the Black Hole, and that made them 1-3. Normally an 0-3 start would spell doom for a team in the NFL, but not for the Skins. They are a mere half game out of first place in the NFC East. Yup, no one in in the NFC East is even up to .500 on the season. So, hypothetically, even the winless Giants are still in the hunt. A win this week for Washington would be huge and would and next week would be the first game of the rest of their season! Yes, that is true, anyways, but you see what I am getting at here, can't you? Bad news is the 'Skins pass defense is one of the worst in the league this season and, oh yeah, Tony Romo threw for over 500 yards last week against a porous pass defense. Cowboys 35-21

COLTS @ CHARGERS (+1.5)- I am still not quite sure what to make of the Colts. They added Trent Richardson to help run Pep's power running game and I still wasn't sold. The win over Seattle last week, though, nudges me a bit in the right direction. I don't expect a defensive slugfest here and I still do not have faith in Philip Rivers. To me Rivers is the AFC's Jay Cutler. take that any way you would like. Colts 28-23

THURSDAY, THURSDAY, THURSDAY!

It's Thursday Night, y'all!




That's right, several of my overly rambunctious chums are coming to my house this evening! That was actually the original tag line for the Thursday Night Football theme song created from my mindhole, only they couldn't land Bocephus himself, Hank Williams, Jr., to put his voice to it, so they figured, what would even be the point? So they went the lame, obvious, route with a pretty feminina to blast out some lyrics that are, quite frankly, not as strong as mine.


I mean, I guess that'll work. But what are ya gonna do?

GIANTS @ BEARS (-7.5)- Can the Giants really be this bad? Is it possible? It can't be, right? It seems like every year they are mediocre, bordering on awful, to start the season when they make a late season run to make the playoffs. But the Giants are 0-5. 0 and freakin' 5! The last time the G-men were 0-5 to start a non-strike shortened season the year was 1979. I was one, ABBA was teaching the world how to love again and, and, in that year it also snowed for 30 minutes in the Sahara Desert. Probably where the saying, "it'll be a cold day in the Sahara Desert when the Giants go 0-5" came from. What's that? What saying, you ask? Well, I dunno, but there ought to be one. No? Alright.

Anyways, my point is, this is a historically bad start for the Giants. They are well on the way to covering the over on Eli Manning "Aw shucks" faces by a hefty margin and there appears to be no hope on the horizon for the G-men or their fans.




Even if they win out, they are 11-5, and winning 11 straight after losing five straight is certainly not common place in the NFL. The Giants may be bad, but there are worse teams in the NFL. Don't worry Jaguars, I am not going to name names, but the Giants have that going for them, which is nice. They won't go 0-16. They have to be able to win at some point this season. They just do, right? Sure they do! Just not tonight. Bears 31-20

WEEK 5: (INSERT SOMETHING WITTY AND FUNNY)

Seems I am slowly, but surely ( I know, don't call you Shirley), getting worse and worse picking games. What happens is I get a good batch of picks going and then I start overthinking things and pretend like I know blocking schemes, coverages, and other fancy football terms and what their impact on the final scores will be. So this week, I am getting back to basics, going with the gut, which has always worked for me throughout my life. Are you picking up my sarcasm, cause I am laying it on pretty thick. Anyways, welcome to the "Bitterness" weekly picks, now with less thinking!

CHIEVES @ TITANS (+3)- I don't think many people saw either team being exactly where they are right now, record wise. I think the Chieves are the real deal here. I am not saying they will win the Super Bowl or anything, but Alex Smith has been, for the most part, more than serviceable and no one has given up fewer point this season than KC. Special teams and defense can carry you a long way in this league and I just don't believe the Titans are as good as their record indicates. Chieves 23-10

RAVENS @ DOLPHINS (-3)- If you asked me, before the season started, to pick every game for the entire season, I would not have even hesitated to pick the Ravens in this one. Even with the new look defense and Joe Flacco at QB. Yep, still not buying Flacco as anything close to the top tier of NFL quarterbacks. In fact, let me take this moment to say how silly I think it is how much Super Bowl victories are used as the lithmus test of QBs. After a 2nd Super Bowl title every one was quick to vault Eli into the upper echelon of NFL QBs....and how's that looking? Hmm? People need to listen to me more...60% of the time I am right every time.

 
Wait, what were we talking about? Cologne? Oh, Ravens-Dolphins, right. So, another problem with the standings and records, etcetera, etcetera this early in the season, is we don't necessarily know how to judge games. Are the Ravens really this bad? Are the Dolphins really this good? I'd answer a resounding "no" on both. The thing with the Ravens is, every game depends on what Ray Rice will do (a TD would really help my fantasy team, Coach Harbaugh. So maybe, I dunno, some goal line carries for Ray?) and thus far double R has been unable to do much. I feel like (hope, for fantasy purposes) this is the week we say the double R of old. Ravens 17-13

JAGUARS @ RAMS (-11.5)- Generally speaking, most people stay away from spread this big and with good reason. They are hard to cover and anything can happen in the NFL, week to week. But the Jaguars have been playing atrociously in those nifty World League of American Football helmets they have been donning this season. That is actually insulting to WLAF helmets, they were not as bad as the monstrosities on the heads of Jags players.



Well, maybe it's toss up. I guess if you're gonna be atrocious, you should look atrocious doing it? That's an expression, right? 28-2, 19-9, 45-17, 37-3. Those are the scores to the Jaguars four losses this season. I know, we all thought the offensive unit was putting it together when they put up that whopping 17 points in week three, but last week's field goal sure ended that hype. There is the possibility the Jags only lose by ten, so it is a tough one, but I think the move is picking the Rams. Rams 37-6

PATRIOTS @ BENGALS (+1)- Austin Collie...signed. Championship. I mean, assuming the Pats can get good production out of him before the next concussion. Collie jersey, now on my wishlist. Bengals beat the Packers...then lost to the Browns, combined with having to cover the Austin Collie, now? The pick seems obvious, right? Bengals 23-17

SEAHAWKS @ COLTS (+3)- Both teams sort of had their ways with the Niners, so this is tough. The Hawks are still certainly a Super Bowl front runner and I feel like you have to keep thinking that until proven otherwise. Seahawks 27-17

LIONS @ PACKERS (-7)- A rested Aaron Rodgers and company? At Lambeau? Are you ready for Lambeau leaps a plenty? Packers 37-27

SAINTS @ BEARS (+1)- I know the Bears are at home, but kind of surprised this spread is so low. Maybe it's just because I still don't trust Jay Cutler to carry a team in big games? Whatever the case may be, I don't trust Jay Cutler to carry a team in big games. Saints 21-16

EAGLES @ GIANTS (-1.5)- This is not the NFC East of yore. Nope, no slobberknocker here, this should be a good ol' fashioned shootout! Impressive that an 0-4 team is favored against a team who has won, albeit not much. Giants fans have had little to cheer about this season, and it the same will hold true this week. The question is, how will they lose? My guess is closely, on a late special teams gaffe. Eagles 35-31

PANTHERS @ CARDINALS (+2)- I stared at this matchup for about two straight minutes and came to the conclusion that this may be the coveted game of the week that I care the least about. I may change my tune though, if turns out to be as enthralling as last week's 13-10 Cardinals win in Tampa! Panthers 16-9



BRONCOS @ DALLAS (+7.5)- The Broncos really seem unstoppable thus far, with no signs of slowing down. The Cowboys have Tony Romo. Broncos 31-14

TEXANS @ NINERS (-6)- If the Niners want people to believe in them, they may have to start beating good teams again. Doesn't that week one win over Green Bay seem so long ago? Niners 28-27

CHARGERS @ RAIDERS (+5)- Due to scheduling conflicts with the Athletics, this Oakland game will be pushed back to 8:35....Pacific time. So, now, I have a reason to not watch this game. They say this could be a good test of whether or not this could be an every week type of thing in the future. I, for one, am all for the Raiders playing all home games while I am asleep. Chargers 19-12

JETS @ FALCONS (-10)- The Jets finally showed me that they are who I thought they were.

A really bad NFL football team. Falcons 27-9

LIVE FROM CLEVELAND...IT'S THURSDAY NIGHT!

BILLS @ BROWNS (-3.5)- Well, Thursday night is upon us, once again! Tonight is the Hardscrabble Bowl as dubbed by, well, me. A game against two fine working-class cities, I think this most aptly defines these teams, fanbases and matchups. When these two team get together you can be sure that you will see some wildly epic, special teams play!

These two have a history of playing close, hard fought games.

2006- Browns win 20-17.

2007- Browns 8-0. Aptly dubbed the Snow Bowl, Browns won in blizzard-like conditions

2008- Browns 29-27. The Monday Nighter where "Captain Checkdown" Trent Edwards threw three picks in the Bills first four possessions.

2009- Browns 6-3. Not quite as exciting as the high score indicates, Browns won despite their QB Derek Anderson going 2-17 for 23 yards. You read that correctly, 2-17, for 23 yds.

2010- Bills 13-6. A big upset as the 2-10 Bills defeat the 5-7 Browns. Epic.

2012- Bills 24-24. Compared to most recent battles between these two teams this was a blowout! A two score victory, talk about a laugher!



So the Bills are on a roll, winning back to back battles, after dropping several straight to the Brownies, but can they keep it going? Well, The Bills may have one the last two Hardscrabble Bowls but the Browns are winning now, so...Browns 16-13