2008 Season

<body topmargin=0 leftmargin=0 marginheight=0 marginwidth=0> <table cellpadding=0 cellspacing=0 border=0><tr> <td valign="top" colspan=2 height=90 BGCOLOR="#006699" TEXT="#080000" bgproperties="fixed" background="002285a1erlcgo.gif"> <div> <FONT SIZE="5" COLOR="#FFCC66" FACE="Arial" ><B>www.chapmansfriend.com</B></FONT><B>     |     </B><A HREF="default.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="www.chapmansfriend.com"><U><B>home</B></U></A></div> <div>                                                   </div> <div> </div> </td> </tr><tr> <td valign="top" width=210 BGCOLOR="#FFCC66" TEXT="#080000" background="001d2c00dkelyh.gif"> <div> <A HREF="id21.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Marky The Greek. "><U>Marky The Greek. </U></A></div> </td> <td valign="top" height=390 BGCOLOR="#FFFFFF" TEXT="#080000"> <div> <I>2008 Season</I></div> <div> <I><B>2008 Season</B></I></div> <bR> <div> <B>Week Twenty-0ne: NFL Championship Game</B></div> <div> The Cardinals, Team of Destiny, confounded me again two weeks ago, so it was another even-steven week: <B>5-5 </B>for the<B> </B>week, <B>51-50-1 for season.</B></div> <bR> <div> <B>February 1</B></div> <div> PIT (-7) vs. AZ. The main reasons why the Steelers will win:</div> <div> The Steelers' pass defense is ranked more highly (#1) than the Cardinals' passing offense (#6).</div> <div> The Steelers' passing offense is ranked more highly (#13) than the Cardinals' pass defense (#22).</div> <div> The Steelers' rush defense is ranked more highly (#2) than the Cardinals' rushing offense (#32).</div> <bR> <div> True, the Steelers' rushing offense is ranked <I>less</I> highly (#23) than the Cardinals' rush defense (#16), but that's the only statistical advantage the Cardinals have. </div> <bR> <div> I suppose it's possible that the Cardinals really are a Team of Destiny, in which case statistical analysis is pointless anyway. But I have to go with the stats. <B>PIT - 7 (x5).</B></div> <bR> <div> Let's see how this goes...</div> <bR> <div> <B>Week Twenty: Conference Championships Round</B></div> <div> Well, I won with the Steelers and lost with the Giants, so essentially I am back where I started at the beginning of last week. Which prompted my strategy for this week, but first: <B>2-2 </B>for the<B> </B>week, <B>46-45-1 for season.</B></div> <bR> <div> <B>Week Twenty: Conference Championships Round</B></div> <div> Well, I won with the Steelers and lost with the Giants, so essentially I am back where I started at the beginning of last week. Which prompted my strategy for this week, but first: <B>2-2 </B>for the<B> </B>week, <B>46-45-1 for season.</B></div> <bR> <div> <B>January 18</B></div> <div> PHI (-3.5) at AZ</div> <div> BAL at PIT (-5.5)</div> <bR> <div> As it turns out, in picking two games in a week there are only three possible outcomes. One, I lose both, which for this week only means I have to make a bigger than normal "bet" in the NFL Championship game (yes, I am back to the mode of not referring to it as the "Super Bowl"-- this is a longstanding tradition of mine) to try to get back to even... Two, I split, meaning I need only make a slightly lesser winning "bet" to get even in two weeks... and Three, I win both and secure a season "win". In "game theory" mode, I have little really to lose by increasing the value of wagers on both games. So...</div> <bR> <div> <B>PHI - 3.5 (x5)</B>. Over the years, betting against the Cardinals has been a more certain winning strategy than long-term investment in the stock market. Now, just as the stock market isn't looking like such a hot investment, it might be that the Cardinals are this year's Team of Destiny. But the odds still must favor betting aginst them. "The race might not always be to the swift, nor the battle to the strong, but that is the way to bet." </div> <div> <B>PIT - 5.5 (x5). </B>Potentially setting up an all-Pennsylvania title game, or else generating nostalgia for the old <FONT SIZE="3" COLOR="#0000BF" FACE="Microsoft Sans Serif" ><A HREF="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steagles" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steagles"><U>Steagles.</U></A> </FONT></div> <bR> <div> So, at the end of Sunday I will be either 46-55-1; 51-50-1; or 56-45-1. Let's see what happens...</div> <bR> <div> <B>Week Nineteen: Divisional Playoffs Round</B></div> <bR> <div> <IMG SRC="3e903590.jpg" border=0 width="259" height="345" ALIGN="BOTTOM" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0"></div> <div> My hero :)</div> <bR> <div> Millen's Lions went winless this season, and in the first weekend of the playoffs, so did I. Total disaster. Ironically, had I went ahead and picked the Eagles game, the one I felt "uncertain" about, I would have ended up 1-3. As it was, <B>0-3 </B>for the<B> </B>week, <B>44-43-1 for season.</B></div> <bR> <div> I did not pick either of the Saturday games because I didn't sense that teh lines were too far off from what would happen. Lucky for me, because neither turned out the way I expected. So, what are the odds that none of the favorites this weekend will win, or cover? I don't know exactly, but I'm betting the odds are slim. Therefore...</div> <bR> <div> <B>January 11</B></div> <div> PHI at NYG (-4)</div> <div> SD at PIT (-6)</div> <bR> <div> I will take both the Giants and Steelers to cover, and I will double my bets on both games. I can't pick <I>all </I>the games wrong, can I??</div> <div> <B>NYG - 4 (x2)</B></div> <div> <B>PIT - 6 (x2)</B></div> <bR> <div> <B>Week Eighteen: Wild Card Round</B></div> <div> The last regular season week. Kyle Orton let me down, and the Lions missed out on the moral victory (coming within the spread) by a half point. Ouch. I did not think they could do it, but... Congratulations, Matt Millen. You built an organization that achieved what seemed impossible. It is a twisted, demented kind of genius, but genius nonetheless.</div> <div> Colts won, Giants came close enough, Favre and the Jets fell flat on their face. Good enough for another workmanlike, grind-it-out <B>3-2 </B>week, <B>44-40-1 for season.</B></div> <div> Throwing out the tie, 44-40 is <I>sooo</I> close to a winning margin (taking house odds into account) that the difference between me and a winning regular season is approximately the margin between Franken and Coleman in the Minnesota Senate recount. But I am still a little behind, so...</div> <bR> <div> <B>January 3</B></div> <div> IND at SD (-1). I find this line surprising. I assumed that the Colts would be favored, as they are a very hot team now, and the Chargers are only in the playoffs due to kicking in the rotting door that was the Denver Broncos. <B>IND + 1</B>.</div> <div> ATL (-2) at AZ. This is the Cardinals' first home playoff game since 1947. I don't think that fact needs any further adornment. All aboard the Falcons' bandwagon! <B>ATL - 2</B>. Michael who?</div> <bR> <div> <B>January 4</B></div> <div> BAL (-3) at MIA. It is trendy to pick all the road teams this weekend, but here I will go against the grain and take the Dolphins. <B>MIA + 3</B>.</div> <bR> <div> The fourth game, Eagles at the Vikings, I expect to go Philly's way, but I am not confident enough to make it a pick...</div> <bR> <div> <B>Week Seventeen</B></div> <div> After a few weeks of succeeding with the low-expectation Lions, last week was a reality check. And the Bengals chose last week to win their first game of the season on the road. Still, with the Titans, Seahawks, and Falcons winning, it ended up being another <B>3-2 </B>week, <B>41-38-1 for season.</B></div> <bR> <div> <B>December 28:</B></div> <bR> <div> TEN (-3) at IND. I know the Titans have a better record this season, but over the past few weeks, the Colts have been playing better. <B>IND + 3</B>.</div> <div> CHI at HOU (-2.5). How can you bet against this leader with a playoff spot on the line?</div> <div> <IMG SRC="3e64dfa0.jpg" border=0 width="333" height="250" ALIGN="BOTTOM" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0">      <IMG SRC="3e72c900.jpg" border=0 width="300" height="400" ALIGN="BOTTOM" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0"></div> <div> You can't, is the answer. <B>CHI + 2.5</B>.</div> <div> NYG at MIN (-6.5). I could possibly see the Vikings as a slight favorite, with them being at home and playoff implications, but 6 and a half points seems too many. I have a new theory... the NFC North as football's version of the 2008 battle for the Republican nomination. The best-case scenario for the Bears and the Vikings ts that they are John McCain, winning in order to be crushed by better teams in the playoffs. Whichever team isn't McCain becomes the division's Mitt Romney, while the Packers are Mike Huckabee and the Lions are Duncan Hunter. <B>NYG + 6.5</B>.</div> <div> DET at GB (-9.5). I am going to invoke the Hunter Thompson- Muhammad Ali story here. Before the 1974 "Rumble in the Jungle" between Ali and George Foreman, a fight nobody thought Ali could win, HST said that he could accept betting on Ali and losing, but could not bear it if he bet against Ali and he won. At this point, I can accept losing a bet on the Lions, but betting against them and seeing them finally win? Couldn't take it. <B>DET + 9.5</B>.</div> <div> MIA at NYJ (-2.5). This misbegotten season will end for the Jets, and maybe nobody will care when Favre plays his coy games during the next offseason... <B>MIA + 2.5</B>.</div> <bR> <div> <B>Week Sixteen</B></div> <div> I was wrong, of the three home underdogs I took last week, only one won outright... but one of the other ones got to within the spread (and the Rams blew a lead and lost by a field goal on a 2 1/2 point spread... aaaahhh!!!), so my essential point stands. And how weird is it that the Lions are now a go-to pick for me? A <B>3-2 </B>week, <B>38-36-1 for season.</B></div> <bR> <div> <B>December 21</B></div> <bR> <div> NO (-7) at DET. In the words of the old Cornelius Brothers and Sister Rose hit, <FONT SIZE="3" COLOR="#0000BF" FACE="Microsoft Sans Serif" ><A HREF="http://www.oldielyrics.com/lyrics/cornelius_brothers_and_sister_rose/too_late_to_turn_back_now.html" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://www.oldielyrics.com/lyrics/cornel"><U>"It's too late to turn back now."</U></A> </FONT><B>DET + 7</B>.</div> <div> PIT (-1.5) at TEN. After weeks of being overestimated, maybe the Titans are on the verge of being underestimated. <B>TEN + 1.5</B>.</div> <div> CIN at CLE (-3). I really, really feel uneasy at taking either of these teams, but then I read "the Bengals are 0-7 on the road, where they have lost by an average of 17 points." And suddenly I felt better. <B>CLE - 3</B>.</div> <div> ATL at MIN (-3). I have the Vikings picked to win this game, but I have been on the Falcons' bandwagon for a while now, so I'll take a chance on them plus the points. <B>ATL + 3</B>.</div> <div> NYJ (-5) at SEA. Favre vs. Holmgren, a master vs. pupil matchup. If I knew my Superman mythology better I'd make some sort of Superman/ Jor-el/ Kryptonite reference here, but... nope. BTW, Brett Favre is very popular in parts of Minnesota...</div> <bR> <div> <IMG SRC="3e390900.gif" border=0 width="400" height="400" ALIGN="BOTTOM" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0"></div> <bR> <div> Yeah, it's that prized Favre-Coleman voting demographic. (In related news, former Viking and now Minnesota Supreme Court Justice Alan Page delivered a very well-received and cogent dissent in the latest decision on the Senate recount. Not that I, you know, <I>read </I>it or anything, but that's what I heard.) <B>SEA + 5</B>.</div> <bR> <bR> <div> <B>Week Fifteen</B></div> <div> The Lions and the Chiefs won (against the spread) by losing last week, and while I did not correctly guess the <I>exact </I>score of the Steelers-Cowboys game, I had the margin right...A <B>3-2 </B>week, <B>35-34-1 for season.</B></div> <bR> <div> <B>December 14</B></div> <bR> <div> SEA (-2.5) at STL. </div> <div> SD (-5.5) at KC. </div> <div> GB (-1.5) at JAX. I see a pattern here... Three road teams, none of them playing very well, are favored this week. Granted, the Rams, Chiefs, and Jags aren't playing that well either, but if home-field advantage means anything, at least two of them ought to win. It's f***ing golden! <B>STL + 2.5, KC + 5.5, JAX + 1.5</B>.</div> <div> DET at IND (-17). For being "forced" to keep picking the Lions, it actually hasn't worked out badly. I am 3-2 when picking the Lions, and 17 points is a lot of points... <B>DET + 17</B>.</div> <div> PIT at BAL (-2.5). Better pick one favorite this week, I guess. I am not particularly enthusiastic about any of the remaining options, but the Ravens seem to be on a roll. <B>BAL - 2.5</B>.</div> <bR> <div> <B>Week Fourteen</B></div> <div> Only the Falcons pick was a winner last Sunday, so along with the Thanksgiving games it was a <B>1-4 </B>week, <B>32-32-1 for season.</B></div> <bR> <div> <B>December 7</B></div> <bR> <div> MIN (-10) at DET. No point turning back now... Lions all the way! (Boy, they suck.) <B>DET + 10</B>.</div> <div> PHI at NYG (-7). A year ago, a McNabb- Eli Manning matchup would have been considered a mismatch too, only not the way it seems now. Plaxico who? <B>NYG - 7</B>. </div> <div> DAL at PIT (-3). Once each season, in the tradition of the original Norman "The Man" Chad columns (before he became consumed by TV poker), I will predict the <I>exact score </I>of a game. This is that game. Steelers 24, Cowboys 17. <B>PIT - 3</B>.</div> <div> KC at DEN (-9). I don't really think they will win, but the Chiefs exceeded expectations last week, and the Broncos have been iffy at times this season. <B>KC + 9</B>.</div> <div> MIA at BUF (sort of) (-1). The Bills will play well for their soon-to-be fans... Maybe Buffalo will eventually get the Argos? <B>BUF - 1</B>.</div> <bR> <div> <B>Week Thirteen</B></div> <div> Last week, Week 12, saw the Jets beat the Titans, making all those old '72 Dolphins very happy, and the Ravens and Falcons also won. Enough to make it a <B>3-2 </B>week, <B>31-28-1 for season.</B></div> <bR> <div> Then, the Thanksgiving debacle. Not only did the Lions look like Boise State could take them, but the Cardinals also played like... well, the Cardinals (historically speaking). So updated , we are <B>0-2 </B>for the week so far, and <B>31-30-1</B> for the season...</div> <bR> <div> <B>November 30</B></div> <div> NO at TB (-4). I have a soft spot for the Saints, but they are lousy on the road, only winning at Kansas City (and at Wembley, go figure) away from the Superdome. So... <B>TB - 4</B>.</div> <div> PIT at NE (-1.5). Guess I learned my lesson last week... don't pick against the Patriots at this time of the season. <B>NE - 1.5</B>.</div> <div> ATL at SD (-4.5). The Chargers have been underperforming all season, and the Falcons are hot now. <B>ATL + 4.5</B>.</div> <bR> <div> <B>November 27</B></div> <div> I will do the recap on last week's games later, but now let's pick a few Turkey Day games...</div> <bR> <div> TEN (-11) at DET. I seem to have painted myself into a corner with my pledge to pick the Lions until they won a game, no matter how increasingly ill-advised that looks as the weeks go by. But hey, don't they usually wear those awesome 50's-era throwback unis on Thanksgiving? That's gotta be worth 3, 4 points right there! (If they do have throwback uniforms for both teams, would the Titans wear old Oilers jerseys?) <B>DET + 11</B>.</div> <div> AZ at PHI (-3). In addition to not knowing that there were ties in the NFL, Donovan McNabb, <FONT SIZE="3" COLOR="#0000BF" FACE="Microsoft Sans Serif" ><A HREF="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P2ifyi8-lxo" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P2ifyi8-l"><U>as God is his witness, thought turkeys could fly.</U></A></FONT> <B>AZ + 3</B>.</div> <bR> <div> <B>Week Twelve</B></div> <bR> <div> Though the Lions didn't win, they did beat the spread, and the Cardinals covered. (The Cardinals? <I>Really?</I>) But, speculating that it might finally be the Titans' week to lose didn't pan out, and Washington also fell short. That put me 2-2 pending the Steelers-Chargers game...   </div> <bR> <div> <A HREF="http://deadspin.com/5090503/bad-call-costs-steelers-fans-32-million#c8956363" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://deadspin.com/5090503/bad-call-cos"><U>You might have heard something about this one.</U></A> </div> <bR> <div> As King Kaufman said, if NFL officials were going all-Tim-Donaghy and fixing games, and they had wanted to make it look as obvious and ham-handed as possible, <I>that's what it would have looked like</I>. </div> <bR> <div> So, yes, officially, I "lost" that game. But if that one game ends up being the difference between a winning and losing season... Huge asterisk.</div> <bR> <div> A <B>2-3 </B>week, <B>28-26-1 for season.</B></div> <bR> <div> <B>November 23:</B></div> <bR> <div> TB (-8) at DET. I'll keep saying it-- I don't think that even as bad as the Lions are, they can't screw up and win a game. So until they do, consider the Lions a permanent pick. <B>DET + 8</B>.</div> <div> PHI at BAL (-1). In other news,<FONT SIZE="3" COLOR="#0000BF" FACE="Microsoft Sans Serif" > <A HREF="http://deadspin.com/5093358/dim+witted-donovan-mcnabb-sick-of-talking-about-dim+wittedness" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://deadspin.com/5093358/dim+witted-d"><U>Donovan McNabb </U></A></FONT>also didn't know that the band always comes back for an encore after they say "good night", regardless of whether you scream and clap and light your Bic lighter. And that the TV needs to be on channel 3 to watch a tape on the VCR. And that local TV stations save all the sexy features for their news programs to run during sweeps month. "Didn't know there were ties in the NFL..." <B>BAL -1</B>.</div> <div> NYJ at TEN (-5.5). Hey, didja know that the Jets' franchise used to be named the "Titans"? Isn't that neato? As with the Lions, I remain convinced that the Titans will lose at some point, so I'm going against them until they do. <B>NYJ + 5.5</B>.</div> <div> NE at MIA (-1). For the first time in what seems like forever, the Patriots aren't an easy pick if they come attached with points. <B>MIA - 1</B>.</div> <div> CAR at ATL (-1). Just in time for the Falcons' revival under Matt Ryan, <FONT SIZE="3" COLOR="#0000BF" FACE="Microsoft Sans Serif" ><A HREF="http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=3718304" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story"><U>Mike Vick resurfaces</U></A></FONT>. Good times... <B>ATL - 1</B>.</div> <bR> <div> <B>Week Eleven</B></div> <bR> <div> After watching the Brady Quinn-led Browns lose last Thursday night (though to be fair, it didn't seem to be his doing), I didn't do so well on the regular Sunday games. The Falcons won, but the Vikings failed to cover the 1 1/2 point spread, and the Bears and Texans also came up short for me. Oh, and about that Bears game and the return of the Sex Cannon...</div> <div> <IMG SRC="3e1901a0.jpg" border=0 width="400" height="282" ALIGN="BOTTOM" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0"></div> <div> Hee.   A <B>2-3 </B>week, <B>26-23-1 for season.</B></div> <bR> <div> <B>November 16:</B></div> <bR> <div> DET at CAR (-14). It has lately become accepted wisdom that the Lions are wretched enough to lose all 16 games this season. I continue to think that this is nonsense, that it's impossible to "build" a team (maybe I should say "team") that can't, just by stupid luck, win one lousy game a season. If they do go 0-16, then I'll say that Matt Millen is a genius of some sort, albeit a negative genius. I don't think the Lions will win <I>this</I> particular game, but I'm not going to be caught short if they do. <B>DET + 14</B>.</div> <div> TEN (-3) at JAX. On the other hand, I also think it's unlikely that the Titans will go unbeaten. <B>JAX + 3</B>.</div> <div> AZ (-3) at SEA. The Cardinals are 6-3, the Seahawks are 2-7, and yet the Cardinals are only a 3 point favorite on the road. It seems odd until you remember that they are, you know, the Cardinals. But I'll bite. <B>AZ - 3</B>.</div> <div> SD at PIT (-5.5). Fun fact about this matchup-- the Chargers are 0-12 in their history when playing in Pittsburgh. This says nothing about point spreads, but I still like the odds. <B>PIT - 5.5</B>.</div> <div> DAL (-1.5) at WAS. Now that the election is over, I can go back to looking at Washington's games without <FONT SIZE="3" COLOR="#0000BF" FACE="Microsoft Sans Serif" ><A HREF="http://www.snopes.com/politics/ballot/redskins.asp" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://www.snopes.com/politics/ballot/re"><U>considering the political ramifications</U></A></FONT>. <B>WAS + 1.5</B>.</div> <bR> <bR> <div> <B>Week Ten</B></div> <bR> <div> Last Sunday, the Lions played it <I>just </I>close enough to beat the spread, the Bengals actually won, and the Packers made it to overtime, where a loss by a field goal still gave <I>me </I>the win. Only the Rams failed me. Stupid Rams.</div> <bR> <div> But the big game was on Monday night, when the Steelers sealed the fate of the election. I should have known it would happen, as Dan Rooney endorsed Obama... excuse me, I mean, <I>President-Elect Obama! </I>... way back in the primary season. They even did it with backup Byron Leftwich. And ESPN even worked out a way to explain away the 2004 result... From now on, the rule is that if the Redskins win in the last home game before the election, the party that <I>won the most popular votes four years before</I> will win the election. If they lose, the other party wins. That explains away the 2004 result-- since Gore won the most votes in 2000, when the Redskins lost to the Packers four years ago, that predicted a win for Bush. </div> <bR> <div> Now all we have to do is arrange for the Redskins to play a really crappy team the week before the election in 2012. The Raiders should still be lousy by then. Make it happen, Roger Goodell!  A <B>4-1 </B>week, <B>24-20-1 for season.</B></div> <bR> <div> <B>November 9:</B></div> <bR> <div> GB at MIN (-1.5). If Aaron Rodgers really wants to show that he's stepped into Favre's shoes, he's going to have to learn to underperform while playingthe Vikings in the Metrodome. <B>MIN - 1.5</B>.</div> <div> BAL at HOU (Pick 'em). The Texans are goin' rogue this week! <B>HOU</B>.</div> <div> NO at ATL (-1). A game featuring two teams based in red states, which is rarer than you'd think after this election. (Indiana? Seriously, <I>Indiana?</I>) Only eight of them that I can see-- Saints, Texans, Cardinals, Cowboys, Falcons, Titans, Rams and Chiefs. <B>ATL - 1</B>.</div> <div> TEN (-3) at CHI. The return of the Sex Cannon to the starting lineup! Now he's going to start playing well, just to mess with everybody's minds. <B>CHI + 3</B>.</div> <bR> <div> <B>November 6:</B></div> <bR> <div> DEN at CLE (-3). One of those weird NFL Network games that I can't watch. But I can't pass up the opportunity to take the Broncos on the road. Not only is it Browns' QB Brady Quinn's first start in the pros, not only is Quinn a Domer, but he was a high-profile McCain supporter during the campaign. Grudges? What grudges? <B>DEN + 3</B>.</div> <bR> <div> <B>Week Nine</B></div> <bR> <div> Not so good, for the second week in a row. The Saints did win on the road/ at home in London, and the Giants had a big win, but otherwise... the Bengals really might be "that bad", and the Falcons and Bills disappointed.  A <B>2-3 </B>week, <B>20-19-1 for season.</B></div> <bR> <div> <B>November 3:</B></div> <bR> <div> PIT at WAS (-2.5). For those of us eagerly anticipating election night, should we still care what happens to the Redskins this Monday night?</div> <bR> <div> <FONT SIZE="3" COLOR="#000000" FACE="Microsoft Sans Serif" >Four years ago, the answer seemed obvious. </FONT><A HREF="http://www.snopes.com/politics/ballot/redskins.asp" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://www.snopes.com/politics/ballot/re"><U>For the previous </U></A><A HREF="http://www.snopes.com/politics/ballot/redskins.asp" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://www.snopes.com/politics/ballot/re"><U><I>seventeen </I></U></A><A HREF="http://www.snopes.com/politics/ballot/redskins.asp" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://www.snopes.com/politics/ballot/re"><U>presidential elections, the outcome of this game, the last Washington home game before the polls opened, had "predicted" the results-- a Washington win, and the incumbent party won; a loss, and the other party won.</U></A> <FONT SIZE="3" COLOR="#000000" FACE="Microsoft Sans Serif" >17 times in a row. Even though it was only random chance, 17 in a row will get your attention. That was why in 2004, it seemed so crucial that the Packers beat the Redskins on the weekend before the election... and they did, causing lots of superstitious relief. Surely now, the omens were favorable to Kerry, weren't they?</FONT></div> <bR> <div> Well, the omens might have been favorable, but the election results weren't. So now, four years later, as a superstitious Obama supporter trying his best to not jinx things for Tuesday, I must decide how to approach this game. Should I say that 17 out of 18 is still a damned good indicator, and root for the Steelers? Or has the mojo been broken, and a new streak started-- this one being that a Washington <I>loss </I>is favorable to the incumbent party, and therefore, Go Skins? Maybe things really started to change in 2000-- instead of confirming the old streak, maybe it started a new streak where, if Washington lost this given game, the incumbent party would win more national popular votes. That would mean we are currently on a two-election year streak where we ought to be looking at a Redskins win leading to a win by the opposition party...</div> <bR> <div> These are the things you ponder on the weekend before an election if you are <I>completely frazzled over the outcome!</I></div> <bR> <div> If I have to pick this game with an eye towards its election portents... I have to go with tradition. 17 out of 18 speaks very loudly for me. So after much consideration of the implications, I will go with... <B>PIT + 2.5</B>. A nation's future rests upon Ben Roethlisberger's arm. I hope :)</div> <bR> <div> <B>November 2:</B></div> <bR> <div> I am picking four games today, with the fifth coming on Monday night. That one (the Monday night game) will be the subject of a campaign-related "special comment", added tomorrow. The other four picks...</div> <bR> <div> AZ (-3) at STL. The Cardinals, favorites on the road? Doesn't seem right. And the Rams seem to be playing better under the new coach. Unlike, you know, what will happen with the <FONT SIZE="3" COLOR="#0000BF" FACE="Microsoft Sans Serif" ><A HREF="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QYaDJ-WuuSY" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QYaDJ-Wuu"><U>49ers and their new, completely insane coach.</U></A> </FONT><B>STL + 3</B>.</div> <div> GB at TEN (-4.5). The Packers have the advantage according to the old Bye Effect, and besides, the Titans ought to lose eventually. <B>GB + 4.5</B>.</div> <div> JAX at CIN (-7.5). I'll try this one more time... Just as the Titans must lose eventually, the Bengals have to win eventually... right? Right?? <B>CIN + 7.5</B>.</div> <div> DET at CHI (12.5). To be consistent with the Titans and Bengals picks, I suppose I have to take the winless Lions too. Doesn't mean I have to like it. <B>DET + 12.5</B>.</div> <bR> <bR> <div> <B>Week Eight</B></div> <bR> <div> I knew the consecutive 4-1 weeks were too much good luck, so I decided to give one back, so to speak. My sleection of the Bills was the only winner, and while the Texans at least came close to covering, nothing else worked out right.  A <B>1-4 </B>week, <B>18-16-1 for season.</B></div> <bR> <div> <B>October 26:</B></div> <bR> <div> BUF (-1) at MIA. The Bills appear to be on a roll, so I will take them to win on the road. <B>BUF -1</B>.</div> <div> SD (-3) at NO. (Sort of.) I have nothing against the NFL trying to grab a market in England, but it seems harshly unfair that some teams, like the Saints this year, lose a home game over it. I mean, that's one-eighth of their home schedule. That's like an MLB team spending a ten-game "homestand" in Oslo on the off chance that it will inspire a Norwegian baseball revival. But anyway... Let's say for argument's sake that the Saints have a built-in Wembley advantage... <B>NO + 3</B>.</div> <div> ATL at PHI (-9). Eagles are far too sleepy and drowsy after staying up until the end of that World's Series game last night. In a battle of birds, the Falcons may have a shot at the upset. <B>ATL + 9</B>.</div> <div> NYG at PIT (-3). I never would have said this a year ago, but... gotta have faith in Eli Manning :) <B>NYG + 3</B>.</div> <div> CIN at TEX (-9). Only because, rationally, the Bengals have to win a game <I>sometime </I>this season. <B>CIN + 9</B>.</div> <bR> <bR> <div> <B>Week Seven</B></div> <bR> <div> This is the kind of rut I can get into, two consecutive 4-1 weeks. The 49ers hung tough for a while, denying me the perfect week.  A <B>4-1 </B>week, <B>17-12-1 for season.</B></div> <bR> <div> <B>October 19:</B></div> <bR> <div> NO at CAR (-3). Last week the Panthers were schooled by <I>Jeff Garcia </I>27-3, so with Drew Brees against them this week... You see where this is going. <B>NO + 3</B>.</div> <div> SD at BUF (Pick 'Em). No spread to worry about, just the way the Founding Fathers intended. (<FONT SIZE="3" COLOR="#0000BF" FACE="Microsoft Sans Serif" ><A HREF="http://irregulartimes.com/index.php/archives/2008/09/01/sarah-palin-displays-lazy-ignorance-yet-again-palin-thinks-the-founding-fathers-wrote-the-pledge/" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://irregulartimes.com/index.php/arch"><U>That's a very inside joke about Sarah Palin...</U></A></FONT>) It seems that West Coast teams travelling back east to play in the early afternoon game always have trouble, so... <B>BUF</B>.</div> <div> IND (-2) at GB. Road teams at Lambeau shouldn't be favored, and yet I sense that the Colts will win this one handily. <B>IND -2</B>.</div> <div> DET at HOU (-9). Nine points is a lot to give, but it is against the Lions... <B>HOU - 9</B>.</div> <div> NYJ (-3) at OAK. To quote<FONT SIZE="3" COLOR="#0000BF" FACE="Microsoft Sans Serif" > <A HREF="http://www.salon.com/sports/daily/" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://www.salon.com/sports/daily/"><U>King Kaufman</U></A></FONT>, "A nation begs for <FONT SIZE="3" COLOR="#0000BF" FACE="Microsoft Sans Serif" ><A HREF="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heidi_Game" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heidi_Game"><U><I>Heidi</I></U></A><A HREF="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heidi_Game" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heidi_Game"><U>.</U></A></FONT>" <B>NYJ - 3</B>.</div> <bR> <bR> <div> <B>Week Six</B></div> <bR> <div> All in all, not a bad week. A perfect Sunday, though I did not realize it at the time. I for some reason thought that the Steelers were favored, and that I'd taken the Jags and the points. But of course it was the other way around... If not for the disappointing Monday night Saints result, it would have been a perfect 5-0 week. The current standings... A <B>4-1 </B>week, <B>13-11-1 for season.</B></div> <bR> <div> <B>October 12:</B></div> <bR> <div> CAR at TB (-1.5). The Bucs are going to bogart a little of that Rays! Fever! <B>TB - 1.5</B></div> <div> MIA at HOU (-3). I don't care what the underlying matchups are, if a team that's 2-2 plays an 0-4 team, the winless team really shouldn't be favored, even if it's playing at home. 'Sides, the Dolphins are playing surprisingly well. <B>MIA + 3</B></div> <div> CHI (-3) at ATL. This, I also don't get. The Bears and Falcons are playing about equally well so far this season-- well at times, inconsistently at others. You'd think that in that case, the home team would be slightly favored. Unless the Orton Magic strikes again, I see a Falcons' win. <B>ATL + 3</B>.</div> <div> PHI (-5) at SF. Also puzzling-- the Eagles have not been consistent enough to be favored by this much on the road, plus the Niners have shown signs of life. Or maybe that's just in comparision to the freakshow across the Bay. <B>SF + 5</B>.</div> <div> GB at SEA (-1.5). The latest installment of the Holmgren Bowl. <B>GB + 1.5</B></div> <bR> <div> <B>Week Five</B></div> <bR> <div> <B>Cleanup Time</B></div> <div> Yes, I have been skimpy in my comments the past few weeks, so first of all, let's catch up there...</div> <bR> <div> My <B>Week 2 </B>picks were <B>3-1-1</B>, winning with the Colts, Patriots and Washington games. My faith in the Bengals obviously went unrewarded, and the "push" came from that weird game where the Broncos received a gift call enabling them to eventually score a late TD to get them within one, then Mike "Rambling Gambling Man" Shanahan went for two to win the game rather than the PAT to go to overtime. (All in all, a gamble that should be taken more often.) The two-pointer to win the game gave me the push, while an overtime game would have given me the possibility of a win, but considering that the call that made the TD possible was so questionable, maybe I should accept the push and move on...</div> <bR> <div> For <B>Week 3 </B>I was away from home (location hint: try the roast beef po' boys at <FONT SIZE="3" COLOR="#0000BF" FACE="Microsoft Sans Serif" ><A HREF="http://www.parasols.com/" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://www.parasols.com/"><U>Parasol's</U></A></FONT> and the absinthe at <FONT SIZE="3" COLOR="#0000BF" FACE="Microsoft Sans Serif" ><A HREF="http://www.myspace.com/pravdaofnola" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://www.myspace.com/pravdaofnola"><U>Pravda</U></A></FONT>!) and didn't have a lot of time to expand on my picks. Given my whereabouts, the Saints' game was a no-brainer selection, and it (along with the Vikings selection) was one of my two winners, even though the game itself was lost on a last-minute FG miss. But the Jets and Packers both lost miserably, and the Giants barely escaped.</div> <bR> <div> Lat week, <B>Week 4</B>, I just ran out of time to do anytrhing other than make the picks, cutting it closer than usual. To some extent, the picks relect that... What was I doing taking the Raiders? (After last week's<FONT SIZE="3" COLOR="#0000BF" FACE="Microsoft Sans Serif" ><A HREF="http://nfl.fanhouse.com/2008/09/30/al-davis-holds-bizarre-press-conference-to-denounce-ex-coach-lan/" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://nfl.fanhouse.com/2008/09/30/al-da"><U> Al Davis press conference</U></A></FONT>, I'm torn as to whether he most reminds me of <FONT SIZE="3" COLOR="#0000BF" FACE="Microsoft Sans Serif" ><A HREF="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apocalypse_Now" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apocalypse_"><U>Colonel Kurtz from Apocalypse Now</U></A></FONT>, or <FONT SIZE="3" COLOR="#0000BF" FACE="Microsoft Sans Serif" ><A HREF="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicolae_Ceau%C5%9Fescu#Execution" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicolae_Cea"><U>Nicolae Ceausescu</U></A>.</FONT> 50-50 either way, really.) They, along with the Cowboys and Packers, stunk up the joint, but the Bears won for me, as did the Jets. The Jets seem to have a bright new QB, by the way. He's like a kid out there, just havin' fun :)</div> <div> Results? A <B>2-3 </B>week, <B>9-10-1 for season.</B></div> <bR> <div> <B>October 5:</B></div> <bR> <div> CHI (-3.5) at DET. What do John McCain and Matt Millen have in common? They both pulled out of Michigan last week. Hah! <B>CHI - 3.5</B>.</div> <div> BUF at AZ (-1). Taking the Cardinals and giving points always scares me, but it's only a one-point spread... <B>AZ -1</B>.</div> <div> PIT at JAX (-4). I figure the Jags should win this one, but I feel that the spread is too great. <B>PIT + 4</B>.</div> <div> SD (-6.5) at MIA. The Dolphins aren't total pushovers this season, so I look for them to make this close, if not to win it. <B>MIA + 6.5</B>.</div> <div> MIN at NO (-3.5). <FONT SIZE="3" COLOR="#0000BF" FACE="Microsoft Sans Serif" ><A HREF="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ROEWiNsb754&eurl=http://video.google.com/videosearch?q=do%20you%20know%20what%20it%20means%20to%20miss%20new%20orleans%" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ROEWiNsb7"><U>Do you know what it means to miss New Orleans?</U></A></FONT> <B>NO - 3.5</B>.</div> <bR> <div> <B>Week Four</B></div> <bR> <div> I don't have a chance to get detailed now on last week (really cutting it close again!), but it was a <B>2-3 </B>week, <B>7-7-1 for season.</B></div> <bR> <div> <B>September 28:</B></div> <div> <FONT SIZE="3" COLOR="#000000" FACE="Microsoft Sans Serif" >As with Sarah Palin, I'll have to </FONT><A HREF="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RM72M62jAUc" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RM72M62jA"><U>"get back to ya"</U></A>  <FONT SIZE="3" COLOR="#000000" FACE="Microsoft Sans Serif" >on the game comments... but in brief, this week's games are:</FONT></div> <bR> <div> AZ at NYJ (-1.5). <B>NYJ - 1.5</B></div> <div> GB at TB (-1.5). <B>GB + 1.5</B></div> <div> WAS at DAL (-10.5). <B>DAL - 10.5</B></div> <div> SD (-7) at OAK. <B>OAK + 7</B></div> <div> PHI (-3) at CHI. <B>CHI + 3</B></div> <bR> <div> <B>Week Three</B></div> <bR> <div> I'll go over last week's record soon, but it was a <B>3-1-1 </B>week, <B>5-4-1 for season.</B></div> <bR> <div> <B>September 21:</B></div> <div> Just the picks this week... and the lines come from tradesports.com, not the normal Sheridan line in <I>USA Today</I>...</div> <bR> <div> NO at DEN (-4.5). <B>NO + 4.5</B></div> <div> DAL (-3.5) at GB. <B>GB + 3.5</B></div> <div> NYJ at SD (-9.5). <B>NYJ + 9.5</B></div> <div> CIN at NYG (-13.5). <B>NYG - 13.5</B></div> <div> CAR at MIN (-3.5). <B>MIN - 3.5</B></div> <bR> <div> <B>Week Two</B></div> <bR> <div> After an unusual 1-0 start to the season with the Giants' win, things reverted to early-season form with three losses-- only the Falcons won for me. Betting against the Lions? Never a bad choice.</div> <div> <B>2-3 for season.</B></div> <bR> <div> <B>September 14:</B></div> <div> All 5 games this week are ones with 1 or 1.5 point spreads-- the simplest games to bet, because they basically require only picking straight up winners. Not that that's so simple...</div> <bR> <div> TEN at CIN (-1). For a change, with the Vince Young controversy, the Bengals aren't the most screwed-up team in this matchup. <B>CIN -1</B>.</div> <div> NO at WAS (-1). Washington played on the Thursday night kickoff night 10 days ago, which is almost like coming off a bye week, and I like teams coming off a bye. <B>WAS -1</B>.</div> <div> IND  (-1.5) at MIN. The Colts are strangely underrated in the betting lines so far this season. <B>IND -1.5.</B></div> <div> NE at NYJ (-1.5). Anything happening with these two teams lately? Some teams run so far under the radar...</div> <div> HA! More trees have been wasted making paper to print the coverage of the Favre mess and the Brady injury than I can imagine. So what we have here is a test of my longstanding belief that one player, even the quarterback, makes less difference in a game's outcome than the "line" would suggest. Even Favre in his prime (which he isn't;  I think history will clearly show that the Packers made the correct decision not to give into emotional blackmail by bringing him back) doesn't make the Jets a great team. Even without Brady and his hot supermodel girlfriend in the stands, the Patriots are better than an ordinary team. So I think the Patriots end up winning. <B>NE + 1.5.</B></div> <div> SD (-1) at DEN. The Broncos ought to be fine as long as they don't trip over any Greek column remnants left over from the Obama speech at Mile High Stadium. <IMG SRC="3dc967f0.jpg" border=0 width="150" height="127" ALIGN="BOTTOM" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0"> <B>DEN - 1.</B></div> <bR> <div> <B>Week One</B></div> <bR> <div> Well, hello again, sports fans, it's time for another season of playing the odds. I'm pretty sure I ended up with a winning season last year, but I'll have to run the figures again. I vaguely remember winning big on the Patriots in the AFC championship game, and that secured my winning season despite saying there was <I>no way  </I>that Eli manning could possibly win a Super Bowl.</div> <bR> <div> Eh.</div> <bR> <div> Well, another season is ready to start, and as usual, it's a Thursday night game. I'll pick this one, and then catch the rest of the games later...</div> <bR> <div> <B>September 4:</B></div> <bR> <div> WAS at NYG (-4). I didn't believe it last season, but I believe it now-- I think that Eli Manning <I>can </I>win... a season opener at home. <B>NYG - 4</B>.</div> <bR> <div> <B>September 7:</B></div> <bR> <div> OK, the other 4 games for this week. As usual, my early-season picks are a mixture of hunch and ignorance...</div> <bR> <div> SEA at BUF (-1). The Bills are still confused from the preseason game they played in Toronto and will only allow themselves 3 downs today on offense. <B>SEA + 1</B></div> <div> DET (-3) at ATL. I find it hard to believe the Lions are a road favorite at any price. What in the name of Wayne Fontes is going on here? <B>ATL + 3</B></div> <div> CIN (-1.5) at BAL. Chad Johnson has made a giant leap into Dennis Rodman territory with his wacky name change, but the Mighty Bengals of Cincinnati (obligatory yearly <I>Sports Night</I> reference) should still win handily. <B>CIN - 1.5</B></div> <div> DAL (-5.5) at CLE. Tony Romo was distracted by Jessica's new CD release party, will be unable to perform at top level. <B>CLE + 5.5</B></div> <bR> <bR> <bR> <bR> <bR> </td> </tr></table></body>