And just like that, BadNFL is showing signs of life. My week 7 pick turned out quite nicely, and overall I'm feeling cautiously more in tune with the games. We'll see if it continues, but in the meantime, your week 7 Upon Further Review is here.
Don't be fooled by the final score; this game was too close for comfort for 57 minutes. Although the Lions played generally better than the Redskins for most of the game, they were still behind heading into the latter half of the 4th quarter. There were two reasons: the Redskins' Brandon Banks and his seemingly out-of-nowhere dominance in the return game, and Nate Burleson's idiotic fumble. The Burleson play was quite sloppy and took sure points off the board for Detroit, but the real story of the game for the Redskins was Brandon Banks, without whom the Skins would have been blown out of the building.
But blown out they were not, and this was an extremely tight game most of the way through. It was at the end, however, that the fireworks started. The Lions surged to a late 3-point lead, at which point they were covering the spread, and Shanahan proceeded inexplicably to bench McNabb in favor of Rex Grossman. As Bears' fans could have predicted, Grossman immediately turned the ball over, and the incomparable rookie DT Ndamukong Suh scooped the ball up and took it in for a score.
Along the way, many of my expectations for this game proved correct. The Skins' offense continued to struggle, failing to generate much yardage. In particular, the offensive line stunk, yielding 7 sacks and countless hits on McNabb. The Lions were able to run the ball well, for over 4 YPC. But more importantly, Stafford shook off some early rust and threw for 4 touchdowns. My feeling about DeAngelo Hall also proved somewhat accurate -- although he had a nice early interception in the redzone, Calvin Johnson exploded against him for 101 yards and 3 TDs. I also located a statistic, courtesy of Peter King, to back up my assertion that Hall remains wildly overrated: this year, he has allowed the highest completion percentage against of any cornerback in football.
Add it all up, and it produced a nice cover by the Lions. Perhaps I should have gone with the Dolphins, who I liked but leaned away from because of the contrarian theory, but the Lions ended up working out just fine.
LESSONS LEARNED
1. Keep an eye on the Lions. They now sport a nice +18 point differential on the year, including +45 at home. They also move to 6-1 against the spread. As I noted last week, they continue to be underrated among prognosticators, particularly at home.
2. The Skins are a mess, but the window for exploiting their failings may be closing. Many analysts are now recognizing that McNabb's numbers have been horrendous, and the claim that the Skins were suffering bad luck remains ludicrous. More worrisome is Shanahan's decision to bench McNabb and bring on Rex Grossman, as well as his conflicting and incoherent explanations for his decision. They have a bye week next week, but it seems unlikely that the marketplace will continue to overvalue the Redskins moving forward.
3. Keep a long-term perspective. An 0-6 start was pretty depressing, but in the long-run, it's important to stick to one's instincts -- BadNFL is still way under .500, but at least I'm no longer staring directly into the abyss. The importance of the long-term perspective, and riding out anomalies in the first few weeks of the season, is demonstrated by the recent performance by the Raiders. All year long, the sharps have loved Oakland (readers will remember that BadNFL did too). And despite some early struggles, Oakland has now reached 4-4 and is looking like a legitimately competitive team. One can only hope that we'll be able to use similar adjectives about BadNFL someday.
4. The "Hilton 100 theory" picks up steam. I noted last week that those picks were 2-0, beating the spread by an average of 10.5 points. This week, the three qualifying picks (including the Lions pick) went 3-0, beating the spread by an average of 9.75 points. I recognize that the sample size is small, but in the two weeks I've tracked it, we're now at 5-0 with a double digit differential. That's pretty incredible. I'll keep tracking it on this blog, and may try to further work in some Hilton stats into my predictions.
Tuesday, November 2, 2010
Saturday, October 30, 2010
Update: Lions Are Consensus Hilton Pick
Last week I wrote briefly about a theory that the Hilton Super Contest serves as a prediction market for NFL games, and I also said I'd track the performance of games that receive over 100 picks. This week, there were 3 such games: Saints -1 (110), Lions -2.5 (103), and Miami +2.5 (102). We'll see how these picks do -- keeping in mind that the Fins pick was one that I almost made. Overall, the top 5 picks from the Hilton contest don't do all that well, although that doesn't disprove my theory, because often the level of support for the 4th and 5th games will fall off dramatically.
But most intriguingly, my Lions pick enjoys by far the biggest margin of support this week (+61, or 103 Lions picks vs. 42 Redskins picks). It's a delicate line to tow, given that I premised my pick in large part on betting against the public. But I'm proceeding under a working hypothesis that Hilton contestants enjoy an advantage against the general public, and that this news is thus good news. At the very least, it means that my thinking this week is consistent with those who actually gamble, for a living (for the most part, at least -- I was inclined to take the Steelers and not at all impressed by the Saints -1 line). We'll see.
But most intriguingly, my Lions pick enjoys by far the biggest margin of support this week (+61, or 103 Lions picks vs. 42 Redskins picks). It's a delicate line to tow, given that I premised my pick in large part on betting against the public. But I'm proceeding under a working hypothesis that Hilton contestants enjoy an advantage against the general public, and that this news is thus good news. At the very least, it means that my thinking this week is consistent with those who actually gamble, for a living (for the most part, at least -- I was inclined to take the Steelers and not at all impressed by the Saints -1 line). We'll see.
Week 8 Pick: Lions -2.5 vs. Redskins
Fresh off my first win of the season, will the success continue this week? I started out tempted by Dolphins +1.5 @ Bengals, for reasons essentially captured by Simmons this week, but I couldn't pull the trigger in large part because of the overwhelming amount of public money on the Dolphins. For reasons explained below, I ended up going with the Lions instead.
1. The Skins are deceptively bad right now.
Most writers seem to think that the Skins have acquired an aura of respectability. Peter King even thinks that they may have a shot in the NFC title race. Of course, they're off what seems like a good road win last week against the 4-3 Bears. But their 4-3 record is full of a lot of really close, somewhat fluky wins, wins that have masked some serious deficiencies. Their offensive line is quite precarious and struggling with injury, and McNabb's play has epitomized maddening inconsistency.
But most troublingly, the Redskins' yardage stats are atrocious: they are next-to-last in the NFL in yards allowed on defense. In other words, this has been an extremely porous unit worse than the maligned defenses of the Bills, Cardinals, and Jaguars. To be sure, there have been the predictable stories about how the Redskins are forcing lots of turnovers, due to coordinator's Jim Haslett's practice techniques. In those stories, the Skins' players and commentators compare the Skins defense to that of the 2009 Saints, which was a porous but turnover-forcing unit. But those Saints were able to win with a historically high-powered offense driven by Drew Brees and his array of weapons, something to which this Skins offense, ranked 19th in the league in offensive DVOA, pales in comparison. Moreover, even adjusting for turnovers (as FO's defensive DVOA does), the Skins defense is in the bottom third of the league.
As I pointed out in my preseason analysis of the Saints' likely crash back down to earth (which does appear to be happening), turnovers are a tricky thing that fluctuate wildly week to week. To that point, not every game is going to be as ridiculously ugly as the Skins win over the Bears last week. Instead, this week I expect the Skins' atrocious 4.7 YPC allowed on the ground to rear its head, a facet of the game that will energize Best and the entire Lions' offense.
What is McNabb's explanation for their shaky play, notwithstanding their 4-3 record? Incredibly, he claims that they've been unlucky and that breaks haven't generally gone their way. But to claim that the Skins have suffered bad luck this year severely strains credulity. Let us review the ways in which the Skins have won games this year:
But why did I start out by emphasizing the Skins' inflated value? Because this pick presents a great opportunity to test out the contrarian theory that I briefly explored last week. In short, the Redskins are receiving 70% of the money this week, a fact that the stats suggest is a bad sign for them covering. Also, if you track the betting trends throughout the week (and the way that the line has been pushed up while the overall money stays heavily on the Skins), it confirms what Millman recently reported: that the Sharps have been buying the Lions strong while the public stays on the overrated Skins. The contrarian theory -- perhaps particularly appropriate in a year in which nothing related to the NFL seems to make much sense and in which the public is usually wrong -- suggests that now is a great time to pick the Lions.
2. Lions are significantly underrated, particularly at home.
The Lions are the best team in the league against the spread with a 5-1 record. Particularly intriguing is their point differential: despite their 1-5 record, they've scored more points than they've allowed. Given this point differential, their pythagorean record, which is in the long run a more accurate assessment of a team's quality than its actual win-loss record -- is closer to 4-3. They're also showing signs of improvement each week and might be a late blooming team this year.
I particularly like the Lions' defensive line, and the Lions' consonant ability to stop the Redskins' zone-blocking rushing scheme. But primarily, the Lions have been somewhat banged up, but they're coming out of their bye week much healthier than they've been. And although they've been somewhat inconsistent in the red zone, as BadNFL followers painfully remember, there are reasons to think that they'll perform better coming off a bye and a previous poor performance. Moreover, the Lions beat the Skins last year to snap a 19 game losing streak, and they look much better at home this year.
THE COUNTER-ARGUMENT: STAFFORD GROWING PAINS?
My main worry is that Stafford, in his first game back and pressing too much, might throw a lot of Cutler-esque interceptions. But he's looked good in practice and should be ready to run the entire offense. And more importantly, I expect the rejuvenated and talented rookie Jahvid Best to control the game on the ground against the Skins' porous rush defense, obviating the need for Stafford to sling it around too much.
Ultimately, this is the 2nd of back-to-back road trips for the Skins, and they've demonstrated a tendency to play down to the level of weaker opponents this year. I don't think they'll have the same turnover-inducing magic that they did last week, and thus I like the Lions to win. Admittedly, given the Skins' penchant for close games this year, I wouldn't like this game nearly as much if it were at -3. But if it stays below that key number, I'm taking it. Lions cover.
1. The Skins are deceptively bad right now.
Most writers seem to think that the Skins have acquired an aura of respectability. Peter King even thinks that they may have a shot in the NFC title race. Of course, they're off what seems like a good road win last week against the 4-3 Bears. But their 4-3 record is full of a lot of really close, somewhat fluky wins, wins that have masked some serious deficiencies. Their offensive line is quite precarious and struggling with injury, and McNabb's play has epitomized maddening inconsistency.
But most troublingly, the Redskins' yardage stats are atrocious: they are next-to-last in the NFL in yards allowed on defense. In other words, this has been an extremely porous unit worse than the maligned defenses of the Bills, Cardinals, and Jaguars. To be sure, there have been the predictable stories about how the Redskins are forcing lots of turnovers, due to coordinator's Jim Haslett's practice techniques. In those stories, the Skins' players and commentators compare the Skins defense to that of the 2009 Saints, which was a porous but turnover-forcing unit. But those Saints were able to win with a historically high-powered offense driven by Drew Brees and his array of weapons, something to which this Skins offense, ranked 19th in the league in offensive DVOA, pales in comparison. Moreover, even adjusting for turnovers (as FO's defensive DVOA does), the Skins defense is in the bottom third of the league.
As I pointed out in my preseason analysis of the Saints' likely crash back down to earth (which does appear to be happening), turnovers are a tricky thing that fluctuate wildly week to week. To that point, not every game is going to be as ridiculously ugly as the Skins win over the Bears last week. Instead, this week I expect the Skins' atrocious 4.7 YPC allowed on the ground to rear its head, a facet of the game that will energize Best and the entire Lions' offense.
What is McNabb's explanation for their shaky play, notwithstanding their 4-3 record? Incredibly, he claims that they've been unlucky and that breaks haven't generally gone their way. But to claim that the Skins have suffered bad luck this year severely strains credulity. Let us review the ways in which the Skins have won games this year:
- A holding call on Alex Barron negates what otherwise would have been the gamewinning touchdown for the Cowboys, converting a sure loss into a Skins win.
- Against the Packers, in a game in which the Packers lost their Pro Bowl LB and TE to fluky injuries in the 1st quarter, Green Bay's FG bounces off the left upright as time expires to send the game to OT, allowing the Skins to win the game on a field goal.
- Last week, the Redskins went 7 for 8 in recovering their own fumbles, which has to be an NFL all-time record. As people who read either this blog or FO know, fumble recoveries are generally pure luck. Seven for eight is, needless to say, quite lucky.
- In that same game, McNabb had what would have been a backbreaking pick-6 negated by his own delay-of-game penalty that nobody heard (remember: they won this game by 3 points).
- He's also had passes like this: deflected balls that rebound right to his receivers.
- Key players on opposing teams have gotten hurt at an absurd rate in the middle of Redskins' games -- and not because of hard hits, but because of pulled hamstrings and other random events.
But why did I start out by emphasizing the Skins' inflated value? Because this pick presents a great opportunity to test out the contrarian theory that I briefly explored last week. In short, the Redskins are receiving 70% of the money this week, a fact that the stats suggest is a bad sign for them covering. Also, if you track the betting trends throughout the week (and the way that the line has been pushed up while the overall money stays heavily on the Skins), it confirms what Millman recently reported: that the Sharps have been buying the Lions strong while the public stays on the overrated Skins. The contrarian theory -- perhaps particularly appropriate in a year in which nothing related to the NFL seems to make much sense and in which the public is usually wrong -- suggests that now is a great time to pick the Lions.
2. Lions are significantly underrated, particularly at home.
The Lions are the best team in the league against the spread with a 5-1 record. Particularly intriguing is their point differential: despite their 1-5 record, they've scored more points than they've allowed. Given this point differential, their pythagorean record, which is in the long run a more accurate assessment of a team's quality than its actual win-loss record -- is closer to 4-3. They're also showing signs of improvement each week and might be a late blooming team this year.
I particularly like the Lions' defensive line, and the Lions' consonant ability to stop the Redskins' zone-blocking rushing scheme. But primarily, the Lions have been somewhat banged up, but they're coming out of their bye week much healthier than they've been. And although they've been somewhat inconsistent in the red zone, as BadNFL followers painfully remember, there are reasons to think that they'll perform better coming off a bye and a previous poor performance. Moreover, the Lions beat the Skins last year to snap a 19 game losing streak, and they look much better at home this year.
THE COUNTER-ARGUMENT: STAFFORD GROWING PAINS?
My main worry is that Stafford, in his first game back and pressing too much, might throw a lot of Cutler-esque interceptions. But he's looked good in practice and should be ready to run the entire offense. And more importantly, I expect the rejuvenated and talented rookie Jahvid Best to control the game on the ground against the Skins' porous rush defense, obviating the need for Stafford to sling it around too much.
Ultimately, this is the 2nd of back-to-back road trips for the Skins, and they've demonstrated a tendency to play down to the level of weaker opponents this year. I don't think they'll have the same turnover-inducing magic that they did last week, and thus I like the Lions to win. Admittedly, given the Skins' penchant for close games this year, I wouldn't like this game nearly as much if it were at -3. But if it stays below that key number, I'm taking it. Lions cover.
Tuesday, October 26, 2010
Upon Further Review: Skins Cover!!!
Jay Cutler and the Bears' O-Line, I love you! Oh how sweet it feels; for the first time since January, BadNFL has a positive week. Although the Skins did everything possible to blow this game, they did manage to cover. Put simply, the QB play was atrocious.
Cutler obviously threw some backbreaking interceptions, but his fumble on the 1 yard-line on a QB sneak was particularly devastating. To be sure, Lovie probably should have challenged it, but that failure speaks volumes about the state of the Bears' organization. Some analysts argue that the breakdown extends beyond Cutler to the entire offensive system, as the breakdowns across the board leave the team in danger of unraveling.
He was under a lot of pressure from the Redskins' defensive line, which was bolstered by Albert Haynesworth long overdue emergence. And as I predicted, Orapko was a constant presence. But overall, this was about Cutler, and the Bears, being still significantly overrated. It is true that the Bears outgained the Skins by nearly a yard and a half per play. It is also true that the Redskins' offense failed to take advantage of numerous opportunities to close out the game. But this game was about the Bears' self-inflicted wounds (reminds me of the Cowboys) and allowing the Redskins to cover in an exceedingly sloppy game.
LESSON LEARNED
1. Identify QBs who are structurally flawed. Jay Cutler, take a bow. To his credit, he's taken a lot of hits, but because of it he's looked like he's playing scared, unable to make good decisions. Last week, that resulted in him holding the ball too long and getting repeatedly sacked -- something that BadNFL fans watched in agony. This week, it resulted in him chucking the ball up for grabs. His INTs were the story of the game, and despite a very uneven performance by the Skins, they still covered.
Next time we see a gunshy QB like that, one who has been seriously rattled by the pressure, picking against is a great idea. Of course, the counter-argument is that Sanchez looked totally overwhelmed week 1, and we all know what happened with his improbable bounceback against the Pats the following week.
2. The Skins' have been ugly but effective. This was yet another Skins' game that was so ugly it was hard to watch. But like most of their games (5 of their last 6 have been decided by 5 points or fewer, and 4 by exactly 3 points), it came down to 3 points, and this time the Skins' managed to pull it off. Morale of the story? The Skins are looking like a team I would never want to pick if they were favored, but as 3+ point underdog, they've proven pretty reliable.
3. Pay attention to the actual Hilton Contest. For those of you who don't know, this is a collection of mostly sharps who play for a major prize, picking 5 games each week. Given the number of participants, general quality of the players, and huge economic incentive for well thought-out picks, I've pondered whether the pool of Hilton contestants might serve as a prediction market (a concept that is gaining favor among many economists as outperforming statistical prediction) in which the wisdom of qualified crowds generates accurate predictions.
I've started systematically tracking the results this week, and I'm going to keep track of the performance, against the spread, of any pick that receives at least 100 Hilton picks (there are usually only 2 teams per week that qualify). This week, those two picks were Seattle -5.5 vs. Cardinals and Chiefs -7 vs. Jacksonville. Both teams covered easily, by an average of 10.5 points beyond the spread. That will be an interesting trend to monitor.
4. Conversely, beware the "wisdom" of the public. Chad Millman had a post this week in which he pointed out some remarkable stats: since 2003, when 65% of the public money comes in on one team, the other team covers 56% of the time. This year, such public-backed teams were 18-26 coming into Week 7 -- only a 40% win percentage.
Very interesting. The game singled out by Millman as being well-suited to the deployment of "contrarian logic" (i.e. betting against the public) was the Browns +13 @ Saints. Well, that obviously would have been a great pick. Especially betting against an overrated team like the Saints, coming off what was apparently a one-week mirage against the Bucs. In retrospect, I think that may have been the soundest pick of the week. In any event, check back next week to see if I can get that elusive 2nd win of the season.
Cutler obviously threw some backbreaking interceptions, but his fumble on the 1 yard-line on a QB sneak was particularly devastating. To be sure, Lovie probably should have challenged it, but that failure speaks volumes about the state of the Bears' organization. Some analysts argue that the breakdown extends beyond Cutler to the entire offensive system, as the breakdowns across the board leave the team in danger of unraveling.
He was under a lot of pressure from the Redskins' defensive line, which was bolstered by Albert Haynesworth long overdue emergence. And as I predicted, Orapko was a constant presence. But overall, this was about Cutler, and the Bears, being still significantly overrated. It is true that the Bears outgained the Skins by nearly a yard and a half per play. It is also true that the Redskins' offense failed to take advantage of numerous opportunities to close out the game. But this game was about the Bears' self-inflicted wounds (reminds me of the Cowboys) and allowing the Redskins to cover in an exceedingly sloppy game.
LESSON LEARNED
1. Identify QBs who are structurally flawed. Jay Cutler, take a bow. To his credit, he's taken a lot of hits, but because of it he's looked like he's playing scared, unable to make good decisions. Last week, that resulted in him holding the ball too long and getting repeatedly sacked -- something that BadNFL fans watched in agony. This week, it resulted in him chucking the ball up for grabs. His INTs were the story of the game, and despite a very uneven performance by the Skins, they still covered.
Next time we see a gunshy QB like that, one who has been seriously rattled by the pressure, picking against is a great idea. Of course, the counter-argument is that Sanchez looked totally overwhelmed week 1, and we all know what happened with his improbable bounceback against the Pats the following week.
2. The Skins' have been ugly but effective. This was yet another Skins' game that was so ugly it was hard to watch. But like most of their games (5 of their last 6 have been decided by 5 points or fewer, and 4 by exactly 3 points), it came down to 3 points, and this time the Skins' managed to pull it off. Morale of the story? The Skins are looking like a team I would never want to pick if they were favored, but as 3+ point underdog, they've proven pretty reliable.
3. Pay attention to the actual Hilton Contest. For those of you who don't know, this is a collection of mostly sharps who play for a major prize, picking 5 games each week. Given the number of participants, general quality of the players, and huge economic incentive for well thought-out picks, I've pondered whether the pool of Hilton contestants might serve as a prediction market (a concept that is gaining favor among many economists as outperforming statistical prediction) in which the wisdom of qualified crowds generates accurate predictions.
I've started systematically tracking the results this week, and I'm going to keep track of the performance, against the spread, of any pick that receives at least 100 Hilton picks (there are usually only 2 teams per week that qualify). This week, those two picks were Seattle -5.5 vs. Cardinals and Chiefs -7 vs. Jacksonville. Both teams covered easily, by an average of 10.5 points beyond the spread. That will be an interesting trend to monitor.
4. Conversely, beware the "wisdom" of the public. Chad Millman had a post this week in which he pointed out some remarkable stats: since 2003, when 65% of the public money comes in on one team, the other team covers 56% of the time. This year, such public-backed teams were 18-26 coming into Week 7 -- only a 40% win percentage.
Very interesting. The game singled out by Millman as being well-suited to the deployment of "contrarian logic" (i.e. betting against the public) was the Browns +13 @ Saints. Well, that obviously would have been a great pick. Especially betting against an overrated team like the Saints, coming off what was apparently a one-week mirage against the Bucs. In retrospect, I think that may have been the soundest pick of the week. In any event, check back next week to see if I can get that elusive 2nd win of the season.
Saturday, October 23, 2010
Week 7 Pick: Redskins +3 @ Bears
Short post this week, because I'm too busy being elated about the Rangers to really care much about my crappy picks. In short: Cutler looks like a deer in the headlights, Orapko is going to have a huge game against the Bears' horrendous offensive line, and the Bears aren't going to score many points. Meanwhile, if the Bears do win, they typically win close ones, and I like the points.
Or, alternatively, this post guarantees that the Bears are going to dominate the Redskins. Such has been the way things are going this year. I'll get up the stamina and motivation to write lengthy posts again if I ever manage to make a successful pick. Which doesn't seem all that likely right now.
Or, alternatively, this post guarantees that the Bears are going to dominate the Redskins. Such has been the way things are going this year. I'll get up the stamina and motivation to write lengthy posts again if I ever manage to make a successful pick. Which doesn't seem all that likely right now.
Wednesday, October 13, 2010
Week 6 Pick: Bears -6.5 vs. Seahawks
I despise Jay Cutler. But I'm going with him this week. I basically only have one reason: Seattle is atrocious on the road. Look at their point differentials: they're +32 at home and -34 on the road. This is also not just a 1-year anomaly, as they were just as putrid on the road last year. For those of you who have followed the BadNFL carnage this year, you'll remember week 1 and my underestimation of the Qwest Field advantage. The flip side of that advantage is that the Seahawks play without energy on the road, and they consequently tend to get spanked.
Cutler also seems good to go for this week, and despite the Bears' extraordinarily sloppy win over the Panthers last week, I think that Cutler will make them a lot better (I also think that his bad performance against the Giants can be attributed to the Giants' dominating D-line and Cutler's ongoing struggles at night). This is a day game, against a team that I continue to think is bad, playing at Soldier field. He'll be fine.
More importantly, I've been much impressed by the Bears' defense. Peppers is dominating, and the Seattle offensive line -- including Russell Okung playing his first full game in the NFL, coming off an ankle injury, will struggle. The Bears have shown a tendency to generate points off defense and special teams, eerily reminiscent of their 2006 season. I expect that trend to continue this week.
Yes, Cutler's Bears have not won many blowouts; their largest win, before last week's slopfest against Carolina, was by 7 over Dallas. But Seattle has made a habit of being blown out on the road. I thus think the Bears will cover this.
OTHER PICKS -- HILTON STYLE
As I said last week, I'm going to pick a few more games, in abbreviated form, just for fun at the bottom of each post. I unsurprisingly started off terribly last week, going 1-4. This week, I like:
Cutler also seems good to go for this week, and despite the Bears' extraordinarily sloppy win over the Panthers last week, I think that Cutler will make them a lot better (I also think that his bad performance against the Giants can be attributed to the Giants' dominating D-line and Cutler's ongoing struggles at night). This is a day game, against a team that I continue to think is bad, playing at Soldier field. He'll be fine.
More importantly, I've been much impressed by the Bears' defense. Peppers is dominating, and the Seattle offensive line -- including Russell Okung playing his first full game in the NFL, coming off an ankle injury, will struggle. The Bears have shown a tendency to generate points off defense and special teams, eerily reminiscent of their 2006 season. I expect that trend to continue this week.
Yes, Cutler's Bears have not won many blowouts; their largest win, before last week's slopfest against Carolina, was by 7 over Dallas. But Seattle has made a habit of being blown out on the road. I thus think the Bears will cover this.
OTHER PICKS -- HILTON STYLE
As I said last week, I'm going to pick a few more games, in abbreviated form, just for fun at the bottom of each post. I unsurprisingly started off terribly last week, going 1-4. This week, I like:
- Falcons + 3 @ Eagles. Falcons are playing like the NFC's best team, and the Eagles have been quite inconsistent. I like the points here.
- Bucs +4.5 vs. Saints. I almost picked this game as my main pick -- the Saints are playing really bad football and Tampa Bay is young and energetic, and they're playing at home. Tampa Bay is certainly better than the Cardinals, to whom the Saints lost rather handily last week. I thought this game would be a pick 'em, so at +4.5, I love the Bucs.
- Colts -3 @ Redskins. You never pick against Peyton Manning in a night game. I'm sure that's what Simmons will write this week, and I subscribe to that theory.
- Chiefs +4.5 @ Texans. The Chiefs acquitted themselves well in a narrow loss against Indy last week, and I think we may be overrating the Texans based upon their admittedly impressive week 1 performance. But it's now week 6, and the Chiefs shouldn't be getting this many points.
Monday, October 11, 2010
Upon Further Review: Cowboys Lose 27-34.
Yet another Monday leaves me trotting out the same old tired refrain: things did not go as expected. What a disappointing weekend. I was obviously wrong about the Cowboys being mentally prepared emerging from their bye; they lost despite having a 400 yard passer and well over 100 yards on the ground. Jean-Jacques Taylor of the DMN put it well:
Also give credit to the Titans; they found a way to make plays when it mattered, and their defensive line was very impressive. In fact, they've now won 2 games in which they've been seriously outgained (the other was the game where the Giants imploded even worse than the Cowboys). Sharps and stats people generally say that such trends aren't sustainable. We'll see.
My only consolation is that many actual bettors and sharps did terribly this week. As Millman wrote:
What do I wish my strategy had been through this point in the season? I wish I had stayed true to two of my preseason convictions -- that the Saints were seriously overrated and that the Bills were the worst team in the league. The Saints have stayed true to the form that I thought they would take, failing to cover in 3 straight now, including an awful loss to the Cardinals. The Bills look as bad as ever, losing handily to a Jacksonville team that struggles mightily on the road. If my predictions had simply stuck to those convictions, my record would be much better. As it stands, however, the blog falls to 0-5, and my Hilton Contest feature that I debuted last week opens with a putrid 1-4 (thanks Atlanta!).
I've essentially now written off this season, but am going to stick with this in the hopes that I can continue to learn and wow everyone with an amazing Year 3.
It happened Sunday because these Cowboys play with the consistency of a six-year-old’s flag football team. Mental mistakes. Physical mistakes. Dumb mistakes.That was the story of the game, and the Cowboys blew it with mistake after mistake. I'm at a loss to explain it, except that the Cowboys have some stupid players and lax coaches. So much for the great practices and bye week history of success that I wrote about.
Also give credit to the Titans; they found a way to make plays when it mattered, and their defensive line was very impressive. In fact, they've now won 2 games in which they've been seriously outgained (the other was the game where the Giants imploded even worse than the Cowboys). Sharps and stats people generally say that such trends aren't sustainable. We'll see.
My only consolation is that many actual bettors and sharps did terribly this week. As Millman wrote:
But this year, no one -- 'dogs or favorites -- has been showing enough consistency that people can get a read on where the value is. When I was trolling through the viewfromvegas.com forums last week, people were lamenting how tough it was to handicap this week's 'dog slate.No kidding. The underdogs have been dominating lately, but it's been difficult to get a good sense of which dogs will play well. Detroit is the most obvious example -- they've now covered in 4 of their 5 games, the lone exception being when they were a double-digit dog to the 1-2 Vikings (and of course the one week that BadNFL picked them).
What do I wish my strategy had been through this point in the season? I wish I had stayed true to two of my preseason convictions -- that the Saints were seriously overrated and that the Bills were the worst team in the league. The Saints have stayed true to the form that I thought they would take, failing to cover in 3 straight now, including an awful loss to the Cardinals. The Bills look as bad as ever, losing handily to a Jacksonville team that struggles mightily on the road. If my predictions had simply stuck to those convictions, my record would be much better. As it stands, however, the blog falls to 0-5, and my Hilton Contest feature that I debuted last week opens with a putrid 1-4 (thanks Atlanta!).
I've essentially now written off this season, but am going to stick with this in the hopes that I can continue to learn and wow everyone with an amazing Year 3.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)