Because Kristin didn't have any wonderful, funny commentary this week, instead please accept this picture of Katie Aselton. She plays the wife on The League, and she's really... talented. OK, she seriously is, but she's also a former Miss Teen Maine and some other good stuff. Good for her!It is a bit of a half-assed week for all us, since Bob had to submit his picks really early and I've been busy with work stuff. However, without further adieu...
Bob: This is a tough week for picks. I'll let you kick off the commentary again, but I wanted to bank these just in case.
Matt: I should probably get around to doing the picks now. Message for posting as follows. P.S. - I'm too lazy to verify if they're still correct, so I'm just using the lines as Bill Simmons posted them on ESPN. Hopefully they are similar to the ones that we're using:
Usually when people screw up things like NFL picks, they have a ready-made excuse: "I over-thought it." They then go on to explain how they talked themselves out of picks using things like sabermetrics, injury forecasting, game temperatures, home-road splits since 1996, and the amount of third-person references that Deion Sanders made in the pre-game show. I'm here with a quite different excuse: I under-thought it.
I am here to admit that, so this week, when I DO over-think my results and post an equally poor record, I at least have back to back different excuses. There are lots of big lines this week, which I don't really like. But I'm going to just go with it and give the ostensibly good teams a chance to see how good they really are. Most of the big lines are still under a touchdown, which is an entirely plausible margin of victory. Look at me overthinking already!
I also feel more strongly about some teams that looked good in week one than others - partially based on their opponents. I hate the Seahawks objectively still, but they are playing Denver and they did destroy SF last week. Then again, not that many teams did look good last week. Anyway.
Steve: I did crappy with my fantasy teams last week, and in this picking game, but at least I won the family competition for the week. My uncle runs it, and you just pick winners, without worrying about the spread. Sure, it's much easier as a result, but I have no problems with that. A win is a win, baby!
Actually, despite the fact that I have a job that now requires many more hours, and I'm still blogging daily, I've managed to get involved in co-owning two fantasy teams, owning another one solo, and still doing my family picks while nursing along a near-last place fantasy baseball team. How the heck did I get involved with so many leagues??? I'm not even a big Fantasy Sports guy. sigh. The picks chart for all four of us:
| Game | Steve | Bob | Kristin | Matt |
| KC at CLE (-1) | KC | CLE | KC | KC |
| BUF at GB (-13) | GB | GB | BUF | GB |
| BAL (-2) at CIN | BAL | CIN | BAL | CIN |
| PIT at TEN (-5) | PIT | TEN | TEN | TEN |
| PHI (-4) at DET | PHI | PHI | DET | PHI |
| CHI at DAL (-8.5) | CHI | CHI | DAL | DAL |
| TB at CAR (-2.5)* | CAR | TB | CAR | TB |
| ARI at ATL (-6.5) | ATL | ARI | ARI | ATL |
| MIA at MIN (-5.5) | MIA | MIN | MIN | MIN |
| STL at OAK (-4) | OAK | OAK | STL | OAK |
| SEA at DEN (-3.5) | SEA | DEN | SEA | SEA |
| HOU (-3) at WAS | WAS | HOU | WAS | HOU |
| JAX at SD (-8) | JAX | JAX | SD | JAX |
| NE (-1.5) at NYJ | NE | NYJ | NE | NE |
| NYG at IND (-5.5) | NYG | IND | IND | IND |
| NO (-4.5) at SF | NO | NO | NO | NO |
Can somebody explain to me why I picked Cleveland?
ReplyDelete@ Bob - Maybe you were trying to re-live the glory days of Derek Anderson and Kelly Holcomb?
ReplyDeleteDallas needs to wake up. I'm disgusted. I love them, but I'm disgusted. Offensive play calling sucks; Romo is inconsistent at best; defense left receivers uncovered; kicker clearly can't see the big yellow goal posts. Ridiculous.
ReplyDelete@ THE Frisky Virgin - It looks like it could be a rough year for Dallas. They have some great skill players, but the line play and fundamentals you need to win seem to be alluding them.
ReplyDelete