Here we are, at the best weekend of the year. I went 3-1 in the first week, so it looks like it may be possible to top my 8-3 playoff record ATS from 2009. Last year I made only three picks and got them all wrong (in my defense, I got the winner of Jets/Steelers right, but not against the spread). Divisional Weekend is probably the greatest football weekend of the year (at least until they make the AFC and NFC Championships on different days, which they should definitely do, because that makes each one more important). It has four games, with the four best teams all at home. It gets extra special if you have some nice home crowds. Other than New England, all the home crowds should be great. I wish they switched the NE and BAL game times and had the Ravens have the night game. Their crowd would've been insane. The Patriots crowd will probably be as quiet and lifeless as it always is no matter what time the game is played (plus, home teams lose 1pm starts more often than any other start time). But alas, the Gods wanted Tebow and Brady to be played at primetime. Anyway, two of these games should be fun (the NFC ones), and the other two could easily both be really, really one-sided. The last time there was this dichotomy between the attractiveness of the divisional games was probably in 2004, where the AFC had a 15-1 Steelers team hosting an underrated Jets team, and the Pats-Colts rematch, while the NFC gave us two 9-8 teams on the road , against the Falcons and Eagles. Hopefully the games this year are a little more fun than those that weekend. Anyway, on to the games.
This is just the second time EVER that a road team is favored in the divisional round. The other time was in 1996, when the 11-6 Cowboys were favored by three in Carolina. It made no sense then (Carolina was a lot better in the regular season), and the only reasons to be made for the Cowboys to be favored was their 40-15 win in the WC round, and their pedigree. It is a little more understandable, because both of these teams were 13-3 in the regular season, and both are legitimately very good teams, with major strengths (NO's offense, SF's defense). Three other times the road team has been favored in a round after the wild card round (WC road favorites are common since they can often have better records than their opponent). They are 2-1 heads up and ATS, with the 2004 Patriots and 2010 Packers winning as road favorites in Pittsburgh and Chicago, and the 2008 Eagles losing in Carolina. Anyway, this line is a major form of disrespect, and I have a feeling the 49ers will play with this knowledge.
The Saints offense is of course great, but on the road, and especially outdoors, they are merely good. The Saints played five outdoor games this season (@ GB, JAX, CAR, TB, TEN). Other than GB, none of these teams are all that great (and GB's defense is bad), and the Saints averaged 25.8 points in those games (going 3-2). The Saints actually put up more yards outdoors than indoors (462.8 ypg outdoors), but turned it over a lot more, and kicked a lot of field goals. The Saints had to kick 13 field goals in those five games, and turned it over 10 times. In the eleven indoor games, they kicked only 15 field goals, and turned it over 9 times. This isn't just a lie that they are better indoors. They are appreciably better. The worst part is, the 49ers defense is better than any of those defenses. I really doubt the Saints crack 30, which seems crazy since their last four games saw them score 42, 45, 45 and 45 points. However, to further my point, the game before those was @TEN, and the Saints won 22-17, kicking three field goals, turning it over twice and giving up two sacks.
That said, the Saints could still win because the 49ers offense isn't great. However, if they turn it over, it will be a major surprise. The 49ers had just 10 turnovers all year long. The Saints had just 16 takeaways all year long (why they fuck couldn't they have had just 16 takeaways in 2009??). Alex Smith may not be great, but he is great at not throwing picks. He had the lowest int% in the NFL. Now, this might have been a fluke since his previous years were nothing close to as good, but he's been doing it consistently all year long. The 49ers offense is predicated on the run, but Vernon Davis is good enough to make plays against a flaccid secondary. There is no Calvin Johnson type, but the 49ers won't need one. The great unequalizer in this game is special teams. The 49ers have incredible coverage teams, and routinely puts the opposition deep in their own territory. This doesn't bode well for any team, because even as good as the Saints are, having to go 90 yards time and time again is hard for any offense.
The final factor for this game (btw, I should note my breakdown for this game is longer than all the others, because it is by far the most interesting matchup for a football geek, with contrasting styles like these) is just the fact that I can't get over a 13-3 team who was 7-1 at home (the loss being in OT) being an underdog against a team with a track record of plodding play at home. I remember back in 2009, how everyone loved the Cowboys #2 ranked offense. However, that #2 ranked offense scored just under 25 points per game. They were bad in yards/point, a ratio I believe in. If you average a lot of yards to score points, it either means that your special teams is awful or you kick a lot of field goals. For the Saints, outdoors, it is both (17.9 yards/point - compared to 12.3 indoors). That isn't good. And this matchup isn't.
This is a high line. That said, this is a game that on paper isn't that close. The Patriots are 13-3, with a great offense. The Broncos are 9-8, with an above average defense and a sporadically mediocre offense. They met just five weeks ago in Denver and New England won handily. However, there are a couple reasons why that game was closer than the score. The Broncos committed back-to-back-to-back turnovers, and that saw the game switch from a 16-7 lead to a 27-16 halftime defecit. the Broncos can take from the game that before the turnover frenzy (some of them flukey like a muffed punt), they were competitive. They also did something good in that they forced NE to kick two field goals from inside the red zone, which they will need to do more of.
That said, New England will probably play Tebow better the second time around. They had a pretty good read on his runs the first time, and that should continue. Tom Brady wasn't rushed too much and had a flawless game. Aaron Hernandez ran wide open time and time again. The Patriots offense did what the Patriots offense does, and there is no reason that shouldn't continue. The Denver pass rush could be better, as Von Miller has adjusted to his cast. But even then, Brady should have time.
There are many reasons why I don't like the Patriots as a team overall. Namely, the fact that they built their 8-game winning streak to end the season on beating the following QBs: Sanchez, Palko, Vince Young, Dan Orlovsky, Grossman, Tebow, Matt Moore and Ryan Fitzpatrick, and only gave up more than 20 points in each of their last six games. They also fell behind 17-0 and 21-0 in their past two games before recoving, but that was against Miami (a game they only won by 3) and Buffalo (which they got the help of Stevie Johnson being benched and a flukey interception as the Bills were driving in a one score game). But none of that matters right now. The Broncos aren't good enough to win, but are they good enough to not allow the Pats to cover? That is another issue.
The Patriots haven't covered a spread in the playoffs since the 2006 Divisional in San Diego. I shit you not. They came close in their loss the next week (Indy, favored by 3.5 won by 4), but they didn't cover any of their playoff games in 2007. Of course, we all know they've lost three straight (Brady is 4-5 since that magical 10-0 start). In fact, the Patriots, ever since they truly became a public team in 2007, have been handed a load of high lines and haven't done really well in covering them. The Patriots under Tom Brady are 6-16 ATS as a home favorite of 9 or more since November 2007 (the end of their eff-you period). That is not good. I don't think the Patriots lose, but I think they got a lot of breaks in that first game, and won by 18. Vegas did a good job with this line. I'll go with my head for the overall pick, and gut for the cover.
I've heard a lot of people trying to talk themselves into Baltimore, and I put that down to the fact that on paper, if Houston is what we think they will be, this game will be boring. That is okay. There is usually one awful, boring divisional game each year, and it is often the 1pm start on Sunday. Think the 35-24 Bears win last year, or the 34-3 Vikings win over Dallas in 2009 (it was fun if you like seeing Romo run for his life, though), or even the desultory 23-11 Eagles win in 2008. The 1pm game is also the game with the most road wins since the playoffs went to their new scheduling in 2001. Since then, 21 1pm games have been played (WC and Divisional in 2001-2010, and last weeks NYG-ATL game). The home team has been favored in all but two of these games (Baltimore was favored @ MIA and @ KC in 2008 and 2010), and had a record heads up of 12-7 in those games (the good). However, the were 9-10 ATS in that timeframe. Anyway, just something to think about.
As for the game, these teams met in Week 6. Baltimore won (one of their six wins against zero losses against 2011 playoff teams - including 6-0 ATS) 29-14. The Texans actually led 14-13, mainly because they got some breaks. I've heard a lot in this game that if Flacco plays badly, the Texans can win, but Flacco didn't even play all that well the first time, going 20-33 for 305 yards and an interception and fumble. The Texans actually won the turnover battle in that game 2-0, and forced the Ravens to kick 5 field goals. Again, they lost that game by four-fucking-teen. Don't tell me these teams are even. Yes, the Ravens have had some bad games against less-than competition on the road, but they have been money at home.
Matt Schaub played in that game, but conversely Andre Johnson did not. Make what you will out of that on your own presumption of who is more important, but either way, it is close to a wash. The Ravens got tons of pressure against a good o-line (four sacks), and really shut down Arian Foster (15 carries for 49 yards). The Texans scored 7 points on offense that day. They couldn't really move the ball at all. Why should this matchup be any different.
It may be blind faith in Baltimore, but I think the Ravens are a lot better than most. They have the most impressive resume apart from Green Bay, going 6-0 against playoff teams, including beating the 49ers and Steelers (combined 25-7 in the regular season) a total of three times, including a combined 51-13 scoreline at home. They beat the Texans with Schaub. They'll beat them with Yates.
Ah, the fun one. Hopefully, if some of my picks are right (mostly the Baltimore one), this will be an excellent way to cap off a weekend. The 4pm game is usually the marquee game of the weekend, and has given us classics like the Jets upset last year (or the Jets upset the year before that), and the Patriots stunning win in San Diego, and 4th and 26. Especially when this game is played at a location not on the West Coast, and night sets in, it is a football sight to behold. This brings me back to the 2007 NFC Championship Game. Yes, the Packers in 2011 are better than that team, but so are the Giants. Anyway, those two teams played a beautiful game, in actuality and aesthetically as well, with the green of the Packers perfectly contrasting the white with red and blue trim of the Giants. It was one of the most visually pleasing games I have ever seen (the Giants are one of the few teams who's road uniform I prefer to the home one). The colors will be the same, but the tone of the game will be a lot different.
Passing. Passing. Passing. The first three games feature two great HOF QBs, but they are going up against a great defense, and a great run game. Here we have two butting heads. Eli Manning reminds me a lot of Peyton. He's nowhere near as good as Peyton in his prime, but he has that same unflappable demeanor that Peyton had in 2008 and 2009 (his apex of his clutch play, if there is such a thing). Nothing bothers Eli. Other teams score? Not a problem. Rolling out to the right needing to throw into a tight window? Not a problem. Eli Manning and those receivers are great. The running game is actually doing something now, and if it gets going, the Giants offense could really put up numbers.
Of course, there is that Packers offense. Here is where the game will be won. This matchup. Eli and the offense will probably score around 27. The only question is will they keep the Packers above or below that number. Rodgers was great against the Giants the first time around, but his accuracy was a little off (for him, of course). He also threw one of his only bad interceptions of the year. He was pressured quite a bit, and the Giants pass rush is only better now. They key for the Packers (other than the Clay Matthews pick-6) was the fact that they were 7-12 on third down. On their drive to take a 28-17 lead, the Packers went 3-3 on 3rd down, including the TD. If the Giants can make plays on 3rd down, they have a shot. The Giants defense can rush with four, and that has worked against the Packers. the Chiefs did it well, as did the Rams and the Buccaneers, both losing to the Packers but playing respectably against the Packers offense. The key is 3rd down. I think if the Packers convert less than 50% of 3rd downs, they will lose.
Here is my thinking about this game. I probably have never thought this way ever, but I think the outcome of the Saturday game will impact this game. If the Saints win, I think the Giants will have a let-down. The Giants do not want to go to New Orleans. They've given up 48 and 49 points the last two times, and the Saints are a guaranteed 38 at home. If the 49ers win, the Giants might be jacked up. I think the outcome of the Saturday game has effected Sunday games before, with one of my notable assumptions being that the fact the Patriots lost in 2005 relaxed the Colts, thinking their biggest rival was out of the way. So, here is my pick. Technically, it is two picks, but only one counts. I think the Giants pull it off if the Saints lose, but lose, and lose ATS if the Saints win.
Enjoy the games!!
New Orleans Saints (-3.5) @ San Francisco 49ers
This is just the second time EVER that a road team is favored in the divisional round. The other time was in 1996, when the 11-6 Cowboys were favored by three in Carolina. It made no sense then (Carolina was a lot better in the regular season), and the only reasons to be made for the Cowboys to be favored was their 40-15 win in the WC round, and their pedigree. It is a little more understandable, because both of these teams were 13-3 in the regular season, and both are legitimately very good teams, with major strengths (NO's offense, SF's defense). Three other times the road team has been favored in a round after the wild card round (WC road favorites are common since they can often have better records than their opponent). They are 2-1 heads up and ATS, with the 2004 Patriots and 2010 Packers winning as road favorites in Pittsburgh and Chicago, and the 2008 Eagles losing in Carolina. Anyway, this line is a major form of disrespect, and I have a feeling the 49ers will play with this knowledge.
The Saints offense is of course great, but on the road, and especially outdoors, they are merely good. The Saints played five outdoor games this season (@ GB, JAX, CAR, TB, TEN). Other than GB, none of these teams are all that great (and GB's defense is bad), and the Saints averaged 25.8 points in those games (going 3-2). The Saints actually put up more yards outdoors than indoors (462.8 ypg outdoors), but turned it over a lot more, and kicked a lot of field goals. The Saints had to kick 13 field goals in those five games, and turned it over 10 times. In the eleven indoor games, they kicked only 15 field goals, and turned it over 9 times. This isn't just a lie that they are better indoors. They are appreciably better. The worst part is, the 49ers defense is better than any of those defenses. I really doubt the Saints crack 30, which seems crazy since their last four games saw them score 42, 45, 45 and 45 points. However, to further my point, the game before those was @TEN, and the Saints won 22-17, kicking three field goals, turning it over twice and giving up two sacks.
That said, the Saints could still win because the 49ers offense isn't great. However, if they turn it over, it will be a major surprise. The 49ers had just 10 turnovers all year long. The Saints had just 16 takeaways all year long (why they fuck couldn't they have had just 16 takeaways in 2009??). Alex Smith may not be great, but he is great at not throwing picks. He had the lowest int% in the NFL. Now, this might have been a fluke since his previous years were nothing close to as good, but he's been doing it consistently all year long. The 49ers offense is predicated on the run, but Vernon Davis is good enough to make plays against a flaccid secondary. There is no Calvin Johnson type, but the 49ers won't need one. The great unequalizer in this game is special teams. The 49ers have incredible coverage teams, and routinely puts the opposition deep in their own territory. This doesn't bode well for any team, because even as good as the Saints are, having to go 90 yards time and time again is hard for any offense.
The final factor for this game (btw, I should note my breakdown for this game is longer than all the others, because it is by far the most interesting matchup for a football geek, with contrasting styles like these) is just the fact that I can't get over a 13-3 team who was 7-1 at home (the loss being in OT) being an underdog against a team with a track record of plodding play at home. I remember back in 2009, how everyone loved the Cowboys #2 ranked offense. However, that #2 ranked offense scored just under 25 points per game. They were bad in yards/point, a ratio I believe in. If you average a lot of yards to score points, it either means that your special teams is awful or you kick a lot of field goals. For the Saints, outdoors, it is both (17.9 yards/point - compared to 12.3 indoors). That isn't good. And this matchup isn't.
The Pick:
Saints 23 49ers 27 (SF)
Denver Broncos @ New England Patriots (-13.5)
This is a high line. That said, this is a game that on paper isn't that close. The Patriots are 13-3, with a great offense. The Broncos are 9-8, with an above average defense and a sporadically mediocre offense. They met just five weeks ago in Denver and New England won handily. However, there are a couple reasons why that game was closer than the score. The Broncos committed back-to-back-to-back turnovers, and that saw the game switch from a 16-7 lead to a 27-16 halftime defecit. the Broncos can take from the game that before the turnover frenzy (some of them flukey like a muffed punt), they were competitive. They also did something good in that they forced NE to kick two field goals from inside the red zone, which they will need to do more of.
That said, New England will probably play Tebow better the second time around. They had a pretty good read on his runs the first time, and that should continue. Tom Brady wasn't rushed too much and had a flawless game. Aaron Hernandez ran wide open time and time again. The Patriots offense did what the Patriots offense does, and there is no reason that shouldn't continue. The Denver pass rush could be better, as Von Miller has adjusted to his cast. But even then, Brady should have time.
There are many reasons why I don't like the Patriots as a team overall. Namely, the fact that they built their 8-game winning streak to end the season on beating the following QBs: Sanchez, Palko, Vince Young, Dan Orlovsky, Grossman, Tebow, Matt Moore and Ryan Fitzpatrick, and only gave up more than 20 points in each of their last six games. They also fell behind 17-0 and 21-0 in their past two games before recoving, but that was against Miami (a game they only won by 3) and Buffalo (which they got the help of Stevie Johnson being benched and a flukey interception as the Bills were driving in a one score game). But none of that matters right now. The Broncos aren't good enough to win, but are they good enough to not allow the Pats to cover? That is another issue.
The Patriots haven't covered a spread in the playoffs since the 2006 Divisional in San Diego. I shit you not. They came close in their loss the next week (Indy, favored by 3.5 won by 4), but they didn't cover any of their playoff games in 2007. Of course, we all know they've lost three straight (Brady is 4-5 since that magical 10-0 start). In fact, the Patriots, ever since they truly became a public team in 2007, have been handed a load of high lines and haven't done really well in covering them. The Patriots under Tom Brady are 6-16 ATS as a home favorite of 9 or more since November 2007 (the end of their eff-you period). That is not good. I don't think the Patriots lose, but I think they got a lot of breaks in that first game, and won by 18. Vegas did a good job with this line. I'll go with my head for the overall pick, and gut for the cover.
The Pick:
Broncos 24 (DEN) Patriots 34
Houston Texans @ Baltimore Ravens (-7.5)
I've heard a lot of people trying to talk themselves into Baltimore, and I put that down to the fact that on paper, if Houston is what we think they will be, this game will be boring. That is okay. There is usually one awful, boring divisional game each year, and it is often the 1pm start on Sunday. Think the 35-24 Bears win last year, or the 34-3 Vikings win over Dallas in 2009 (it was fun if you like seeing Romo run for his life, though), or even the desultory 23-11 Eagles win in 2008. The 1pm game is also the game with the most road wins since the playoffs went to their new scheduling in 2001. Since then, 21 1pm games have been played (WC and Divisional in 2001-2010, and last weeks NYG-ATL game). The home team has been favored in all but two of these games (Baltimore was favored @ MIA and @ KC in 2008 and 2010), and had a record heads up of 12-7 in those games (the good). However, the were 9-10 ATS in that timeframe. Anyway, just something to think about.
As for the game, these teams met in Week 6. Baltimore won (one of their six wins against zero losses against 2011 playoff teams - including 6-0 ATS) 29-14. The Texans actually led 14-13, mainly because they got some breaks. I've heard a lot in this game that if Flacco plays badly, the Texans can win, but Flacco didn't even play all that well the first time, going 20-33 for 305 yards and an interception and fumble. The Texans actually won the turnover battle in that game 2-0, and forced the Ravens to kick 5 field goals. Again, they lost that game by four-fucking-teen. Don't tell me these teams are even. Yes, the Ravens have had some bad games against less-than competition on the road, but they have been money at home.
Matt Schaub played in that game, but conversely Andre Johnson did not. Make what you will out of that on your own presumption of who is more important, but either way, it is close to a wash. The Ravens got tons of pressure against a good o-line (four sacks), and really shut down Arian Foster (15 carries for 49 yards). The Texans scored 7 points on offense that day. They couldn't really move the ball at all. Why should this matchup be any different.
It may be blind faith in Baltimore, but I think the Ravens are a lot better than most. They have the most impressive resume apart from Green Bay, going 6-0 against playoff teams, including beating the 49ers and Steelers (combined 25-7 in the regular season) a total of three times, including a combined 51-13 scoreline at home. They beat the Texans with Schaub. They'll beat them with Yates.
The Pick:
Texans 10 Ravens 27 (BAL)
New York Giants @ Green Bay Packers (-7.5)
Ah, the fun one. Hopefully, if some of my picks are right (mostly the Baltimore one), this will be an excellent way to cap off a weekend. The 4pm game is usually the marquee game of the weekend, and has given us classics like the Jets upset last year (or the Jets upset the year before that), and the Patriots stunning win in San Diego, and 4th and 26. Especially when this game is played at a location not on the West Coast, and night sets in, it is a football sight to behold. This brings me back to the 2007 NFC Championship Game. Yes, the Packers in 2011 are better than that team, but so are the Giants. Anyway, those two teams played a beautiful game, in actuality and aesthetically as well, with the green of the Packers perfectly contrasting the white with red and blue trim of the Giants. It was one of the most visually pleasing games I have ever seen (the Giants are one of the few teams who's road uniform I prefer to the home one). The colors will be the same, but the tone of the game will be a lot different.
Passing. Passing. Passing. The first three games feature two great HOF QBs, but they are going up against a great defense, and a great run game. Here we have two butting heads. Eli Manning reminds me a lot of Peyton. He's nowhere near as good as Peyton in his prime, but he has that same unflappable demeanor that Peyton had in 2008 and 2009 (his apex of his clutch play, if there is such a thing). Nothing bothers Eli. Other teams score? Not a problem. Rolling out to the right needing to throw into a tight window? Not a problem. Eli Manning and those receivers are great. The running game is actually doing something now, and if it gets going, the Giants offense could really put up numbers.
Of course, there is that Packers offense. Here is where the game will be won. This matchup. Eli and the offense will probably score around 27. The only question is will they keep the Packers above or below that number. Rodgers was great against the Giants the first time around, but his accuracy was a little off (for him, of course). He also threw one of his only bad interceptions of the year. He was pressured quite a bit, and the Giants pass rush is only better now. They key for the Packers (other than the Clay Matthews pick-6) was the fact that they were 7-12 on third down. On their drive to take a 28-17 lead, the Packers went 3-3 on 3rd down, including the TD. If the Giants can make plays on 3rd down, they have a shot. The Giants defense can rush with four, and that has worked against the Packers. the Chiefs did it well, as did the Rams and the Buccaneers, both losing to the Packers but playing respectably against the Packers offense. The key is 3rd down. I think if the Packers convert less than 50% of 3rd downs, they will lose.
Here is my thinking about this game. I probably have never thought this way ever, but I think the outcome of the Saturday game will impact this game. If the Saints win, I think the Giants will have a let-down. The Giants do not want to go to New Orleans. They've given up 48 and 49 points the last two times, and the Saints are a guaranteed 38 at home. If the 49ers win, the Giants might be jacked up. I think the outcome of the Saturday game has effected Sunday games before, with one of my notable assumptions being that the fact the Patriots lost in 2005 relaxed the Colts, thinking their biggest rival was out of the way. So, here is my pick. Technically, it is two picks, but only one counts. I think the Giants pull it off if the Saints lose, but lose, and lose ATS if the Saints win.
The Pick:
If the Saints win:
Giants 24 Packers 34 (GB)
If the 49ers win:
Giants 27 (NYG) Packers 24
Enjoy the games!!
