We swept out NFL bets Sunday - another Max winner (8-1) and haven't lost an NFL 3* yet this season. We'll have another one next Sunday we just don't know what to call it yet. I've left a few off, and clearly many of these are dependent on injury reports, weather, and general "changing my mind".
New England/Houston: Everyone know the NE QB situation - or the lack of. It's interesting the free agents that are being thrown around - Vick, Matt Flynn, and if I'm Bill, Matt Flynn of TJ Yates. Flynn has the experience and Yates SOMEWHAT knows the Texans having spent time there. And of course as most know, the majority of the Texans coaching staff either played for of coached with Belechik, so Houston actually has to be feeling pretty good about a game that most had penciled as a loss, twice. I'd expect the total to come out quite low for a NE game but this could be a game NE tries to win with defense. or WTH, Edleman was a QB in college. Some books have the Texans up a slight favorites -
Denver/Cincinnati: I do think the Broncos greatly benefited from the opposition, or perhaps played to it's level against the Colts. Siemian didn't look as good as he did against the Panthers, some of which I might attribute to the Colts having ten tens to look at film on him. The Bengals won at the Jets in week one - a win that looks pretty good to me - then of course lost at Pittsburgh in a game the Steelers more or less controlled throughout. Big Ben had a couple of picks, and the Bengals had more first downs - so it WAS a winnable game for Cincinnati. Right now the Bengals opened -3.5 but I expect that not to last long (it'll go to 3 so Denver now or the Bengals later) - I do like Cincinnati here. Sieman's first road start and clearly Denver's defenses' biggest test.
Oakland/Tennessee: The Raiders did what many thought was the unthinkable - losing to the Falcons. Oakland has 450 yards and lost - the Falcons had 500+ and had to hang on. It's clear, and it has been to me, that the Raiders aren't quite as good as the pundits thinks, and the Falcons may not suck as bad as the pundits thing. Given the Titans win at Detroit - I suspect they'll be an early week trendy bet - but let's remember, the LIONS aren't as good as perhaps people saw on National TV a while back. The game opened a PK most places, some have the Raiders -1. I don't think the Raiders are good enough to back on the road yet - let's see what the total comes out at.
Arizona/Buffalo: The Bills get an extra few days to lick their Jet's wounds, while the Cardinals did what they are expected to do, score. It really does show how far the Bucs still have to go - I'm afraid this could be the beginning of the end for Rex without a win here - and if a mobile QB like Winston can't move the ball on the Cardinals it's not likely someone like Taylor can, either. I hate laying points on the road, but unless lake-effect snow is expected Sunday - that'll have to be the play. I honestly don't think, as of now, that even teasing Buffalo to more than +10 is something I am ready to jump on - many will, however. Arizona -4/-4.5 early, and given that -5 USED to be REAL dead - if it goes to -5 it could go to -6, point is - the Cardinals now or the Bills later, IMO.
Baltimore/Jacksonville: I know that the Chargers are SOMEWHAT better than they've been under Turner, and Rivers isn't getting younger, and of course the WR challenge they face - so I did expect J'ville to give them a better fight, or a FIGHT, period. The Ravens fall behind and have the huge comeback against the Browns, so who really are the Ravens. They're the most ugly 2-0 team in the NFL. They fell that far behind the Browns and struggled at home against the Bills, which at the time didn't look bad - but does now. Jacksonville is probably the play, although I swore I'd take teams that could play defense, not turn it over, and stay clean with penalties. They don't do any of those - however - they're seemingly begging people to take the Ravens at pk/-1. I gotta wait this one out.
Miami/Cleveland: So who is who here - the Fish that went to Seattle and almost won, against a Seattle team that couldn't beat the Rams - and are the Fish as bad as New England made them look before Garopollo went down, or as good as them team that made a game of it. It DOES show they won't quit, which is the kind of team I can back, but are they really good enough to be laying -7 points to anyone? I don't think so. Can I bet on Cleveland without taking a long look? No, but I THINK eventually this game closes less than -7. Eventually. It IS the first Fish home game - but they ARE 0-2.
Washington/Giants: I'm a little annoyed at myself for not taking Dallas over the 'Skins - and as I said LAST Sunday, the Saints aren't as bad as the team that lost to Oakland in brutal fashion and the Giants are as good as the team that won in Dallas. Washington opened -3.5 and is now at -4/-4.5 which you'd expect. But, it's a division game and the 'Skins at 0-2 are going to be a very desperate team. The can't seem to stop anyone, and I don't have a TON or respect for the Giants defense yet - so right now I do like the over here, provided it comes out at a decent # and the weather isn't a factor.
San Fran/Seattle: If this game is already at -10, and given how poorly the Seahawks have looked (remember, the barely beat the Dolphins at home) then I don't care how bad the 49ers have looked, I won't pass up double digits. They caveat here is that they did travel to the East Coast and and back - now to Seattle - but they did score some points on the Rams AND Carolina, so perhaps over and the dog.
Los Angeles/Tampa Bay: So we're not sure if the Rams are "for real" and we're not sure which Bucs team we're going to get - the one that beat the Falcons, who beat the Raiders on the road, or the one Arizona whipped. I can't take the Rams on the road (yet), and of course I worry about LA travelling to the East Coast to play an early game in the heat. My instinct simply says to take Tampa Bay here, but I do like the under. The Rams can play SOME defense and can't score, but -4 in the NFL is more than we think sometimes, and it IS the NFL. The Rams teased, perhaps.
Kansas City/Jets: One would think this line, based solely on perception, would be higher than -3. But, I am actually higher on the Jets than many, and still not sure what Kansas City is. Their comeback against the Chargers might have been more of a result of the Chargers being horsesh*t than the Chiefs being good, and the Jets already have a road win at Buffalo and played the Bengals tough. I love the under here - and this could be the public disaster of the day.
Colts/Chargers: I was quite surprised Denver didn't pick on the Colts defensive secondary more than they did, and because of the Colts seemingly one-dimensional offense it's going to make it hard to take them anytime soon. That may be the early week trend, too, since +3 is almost gone. I thought immediately that I'd like this over because I don't trust the Chargers defense and the Colts defense could be in trouble. However, at 51 (give or take) that MAY be inflated. That mean to LOSE an under bet here you need MORE than seven touchdowns. I can't look at a side here yet - and probably better sides.
Atlanta/New Orleans: The Saints played well enough to win on the road at the Giants after gagging to the Raiders at home. Atlanta was given up for dead after the Tampa Bay game, then of course beat the Raiders on the road. So, there's a common opponent - It appears the Raiders defense isn't as good as I thought it might be - and likewise for the Falcons. I thought that perhaps in his second year that Dan Quinn would have Atlanta playing better defense, but perhaps not. Obviously a big total, especially for a stand alone weekday game, and the Saints are essentially -3 for home field, meaning they think these teams are even. But, that looks like it COULD go to -3.5 since it's shaded that way. If I had to right now I'd tease Atlanta up (trying to get more than +10) and perhaps look at taking the Saints ML if we hit the first leg.