Lots of games this week that look like outright gimmes. That’s dangerous. Usually means crazy upsets. Trouble is, I’ll be damned if I can foresee any. Here’s what not to expect.<\/p>\n
NY Jets (-4) at Detroit<\/strong> New Orleans (-6.5) at Carolina<\/strong> Tampa Bay (+8.5) at Atlanta<\/strong> Miami (+5) at Baltimore<\/strong> New England (-4) at Cleveland<\/strong> San Diego (-3) at Houston<\/strong> Arizona (+8) at Minnesota<\/strong> Chicago (-3) at Buffalo<\/strong> NY Giants (-6.5) at Seattle<\/strong> Indianapolis (+3) at Philadelphia<\/strong> Kansas City (+2) at Oakland<\/strong> Dallas (+7.5) at Green Bay<\/strong> Pittsburgh (-4.5) at Cincinnati<\/strong>
\nYes, the Frat Boys were awful last week<\/a>. And the Lions, with Matthew Stafford<\/a> back under center, logged an impressive win<\/a>. But New Jersey, over hyped though it may be, is not the mess of a team that Washington is right now. You can’t expect Stafford to have the success through the air this week that he enjoyed last. And while I continue to anticipate that Mark Sanchez<\/a> at some point is bound to start looking like the mistake-prone quarterback we’ve seen in the past (and a Lions pass rush that has logged 23 sacks to date, six and a half of them by their defensive rookie of the year candidate<\/a>, could prove problematic), I still don’t see Detroit having quite enough firepower to get the job done. So I’m taking the Frat Boys straight up, though I supposed I’ll hedge a little bit<\/em> and take the home team with the points.<\/p>\n
\nThe Saints appear to have righted the ship<\/a>. The Panthers have gone from foundering to plain old sunk. What more could you possibly need to know? New Orleans by 10.<\/p>\n
\nOn one hand, this is a matchup between the teams currently vying for first place in the NFC South. On the other, it’s a second straight road game for the Buccaneers, this time against a well-rested division rival. Given the fact that Tampa’s pass defense occurs to me to be rather better than advertised, I’m not giving eight and a half , but I don’t see the Bucs doing any better than a three-point loss.<\/p>\n
\nIn which a Dolphins season that opened with great promise closes (effectively) with great disappointment. They shoulda been contendahs.<\/p>\n
\nIn their last four games (all wins), the Patriots have squared off against defenses ranked among the league’s ten best. Here, they face a Browns D that, while much improved from 2009, ranks 18th overall and has lots of trouble stopping the pass. There’s no reason not to assume that will translate into better offensive production from New England’s already highly productive offense. That’s bad news for Colt McCoy<\/a>. Because, yeah, the rookie played well in his first two starts. But the more he plays in the NFL, the more film opponents have to study. That alone, when you’re staring down a Bill Belichick<\/a>-coached defense, is problematic. Add the task of trying to keep up with Tom Brady<\/a> and the league’s highest scoring offense to the task and things have the potential to get ugly. Pats by 14.<\/p>\n
\nIf the Texans had any kind of defense at all, or if they hadn’t looked so entirely inept on both sides of the ball on Monday night<\/a>, I’d probably take them to overcome a Chargers squad that seems determined to flame out. But they don’t. And they did. So I’m not. San Diego wins it straight up; it’s a push with the points.<\/p>\n
\nIt’s hard to know which of these teams is more of a mess. Sure, this week it looks decidedly like the Vikings take the prize<\/a>. But on the season it might be … nah, probably the Vikings there, too. I’m still taking Minnesota, but mostly just because I figure one of these teams has to win and it might as well be the home team. But I’m not giving eight or anything remotely close to it. Vikings by a point.<\/p>\n
\nSo let’s imagine, just for the sake of argument, that adding Shawn Merriman<\/a> immediately improves the Buffalo defense by a factor of 50 percent (yes, I know that’s ridiculous; this is the point). That would move them from, what, horrific all the way up to mostly incompetent? That seems meaningful. Chicago by four.<\/p>\n
\nPete Carroll<\/a> loves Charlie Whitehurst<\/a>. That’s nice an all, but it doesn’t change the fact that a guy who has thrown zero passes in four and a half seasons in the NFL, will be attempting to get it done against a Giants pass defense that has logged 24 sacks this season and that gives up just 178 yards per game and 6.2 per completion. Those aren’t ideal conditions for a first start. Giants by a touchdown.<\/p>\n
\nThe Monday Night Football<\/a> crew might believe that Peyton Manning <\/a> can win games all by himself, but apparently Vegas disagrees. I do, too. Particularly when I look at a seriously banged-up Colts team traveling to Philly on a short week to face an Eagles squad that features one of the best pass Ds in the league. I’m gonna take Philadelphia and give the points.<\/p>\n
\nIt’s possible, I acknowledge, that after this weekend I’ll have to concede that the 2010 Raiders are for real. For now, what I see is an unbalanced team that can run the ball, but not pass it, and that can’t stop much of anything. The Chiefs, meanwhile, are a team that can run the ball on offense and stop the run on D. So, yeah, I’m going with Kansas City. Can’t honestly tell you I feel like I have much choice. Chiefs by a field goal.<\/p>\n
\nIs there any surer sign that a team in disarray is gonna fire its head coach than when the owner comes out and swears he isn’t<\/a>? Packers by six.<\/p>\n
\nJust what the Bengals need: Angry Steelers<\/a>. Pittsburgh by a touchdown, maybe more.<\/p>\n