A nice 3-0 sweep this week, but the best part was none of them were ever in much jeopardy. We'll have a free play here at some point and the obligatory 3* - which we have already bet - and we love several games.
Bengals/Patriots: Not at all surprised this line opened more than a TD and climbing, since the Brady effect in conjunction with the Bengals being dominated in a game most people watched is worth a couple of points. If Eifert isn't back there is little chance of me taking Cincinnati, since not only does their Red Zone offense suck, but they are one of the worst teams in the NFL at third down conversions, a huge reason why we took Dallas yesterday. The Bengals played in Foxboro two years ago and were destroyed, and that may happen again.The value here may lie in the total - it's climbing a bit since it opened and just like the Cleveland game, it might end up being a tad high. New England has nothing to prove against the Bengals, so they may (assuming they're ahead enough) simply rest Brady again. However, the defense has everything to prove, and the Patriots have allowed the least amount of points in the AFC - something many might overlook.
Baltimore/Giants: So the Ravens have fired Marc Trestman, but the rub here with me is that they still have the same players and I said weeks ago that Baltimore simply doesn't have go-to players on offense, so IMO nothing is going to change. Yes, Smith and Wallace CAN be good, but they cannot run the ball and their o-line just isn't that good and with two rookies on the left side of the center they're going to struggle for a while. The Giants continue to beat themselves in many ways, but the early bettors like them a bit. If you want the Ravens, sooner is probably better than later since I do think it closes at less than the +3 that is out there now. Right now, there are too many variables for me to look at side - the total of 44.5 seems about right.
Carolina/New Orleans: No line as the Panthers still have the Monday night game to play, and we can only assume Newton will back. Obviously the betting markets like the Saints and dislike the Panthers a lot more a month into the season than they did - so the "value" might be on the Panthers, if one were so inclined. The "markets" and the bye week for New Orleans will also inflate this line a bit, and with all the points New Orleans has been giving up (to everyone BUT the Giants) it'll be a big total, perhaps too big. New Orleans played them tough both games last season, losing 27-22 at Carolina and 41-38 at home (another reason for a big total that won't dissuade many bettors, so early is better than late IMO if you like the over). There are a couple of books with lines out - probably with limits, but the Saints +3 is a gift.
Pittsburgh/Miami: I told people yesterday that the Dolphins were not bettable, almost falling into the category I put the Giants in of a team that finds new ways to lose. That didn't change Sunday, and with the Steelers putting away the lowly Jets - this line will (should) stay over the +7 mark for the week. I do think that total of 48 might be too high. One thing Miami CAN do on occasion is play defense. It opened at 48 and is starting to creep down, a trend I think continues. A total, that early in the betting cycle, that's being bet DOWN is hardly going to be the bettors at the end of the bar moving it, and IMO not likely to be an early setup.
Jacksonville/Chicago: The Jags played well in London, and had the bye week, they may well be the betting darling among touts this week. I'd have a hard time swallowing either team at this point, but Hoyer looked great Sunday, but let's not forget it was against a Colts defense that has serious issues, especially in the back end. But, Hoyer has now thrown for 300+yards in three straight games, Howard ran for over 100 the last two games, and in the last two games they've had two separate receivers have 100+ yards. That would make me take a hard look at the over here, and at 47 it's not likely to come down. The Jags haven't had a receiver go for 100 yards this season, and have had three different leading receivers in four games, none of them over 75 yards. There are likely better games - but the Bears' stock relative to this line might be as good as it gets since they seem to be on a bigger (and quieter) uptick than the Jags.
San Francisco/Buffalo: The Bills's stock might not have been any higher since Thurman Thomas retired after beating New England and the Rams on the road. That Rams game was perhaps closer than the final score indicated as Rams simply dominated time of possession and first downs, but also turnovers, including a pick-six. Taylor only had to attempt 23 passes. The 49ers have the extra rest from playing the Cardinals last Thursday - but what probably precludes from taking SF even in the better spot is the fact that they've allowed 140 points this season, and without a defense it's hard to take a team on the road, even getting 7-8 points. The total has dropped a bit, and that's one I don't necessarily agree with and COULD be a setup move.
Rams/Lions: Another case where taking the Rams might not be an option, inasmuch as I am certainly not one to think the Lions are any better with Caldwell than they were with Schwartz. If the Rams can dominate that TOP again and eliminate the turnovers, then perhaps, but the same can be said about every team in the NFL - and at this point I am questioning whether Jeff Fisher really has the respect of this team and the backing of ownership. He's made some really questionable in-game decisions as well, so Lions or nothing here. The only team LA has been able to score on is the Bucs - who arguably have one of the worst defenses in the league. The Lions -3 is available right now, but I doubt it will be later (or sooner). Indeed the Lions played the Eagles tougher than most thought they would - but both teams were "due" to head in the opposite direction(s). I don't think the Rams defense is as solid as either it was or that the perception IS - so right now this game is a clear pass for me - but falling back on the "Lions or nothing" thought.
Cleveland/Tennessee: As bad as the Browns are, it might have been tough to think of the Titans as a 7 point favorite. Given the Browns QB situation I'm actually surprised there's a line, but then again how much worse could it get for them and how much lower could their stock be? I do know that sooner or later they might win a game, and/or cover a number - but at this point it won't be with my money on them. With DeMarco Murray running the ball well, Mariota hasn't had to do much, which is a good thing because the Titans haven't shown the ability to stretch the field and Mariota has already fumbled the ball three times this season - and thrown five picks. With all that in mind, I'd like to think this is a lower scoring game (which mathematically favors +7.5) and at 45.5 lean to the under a bit.
Eagles/Redskins: The bettors, at least early on, seem to remember the Eagles team from the first few weeks and not the one that lost at Detroit. Washington actually opened as slight favorite, now it's Eagles -2 most places. A quick take on that is that people will STILL bet the Eagles even if it goes higher, then the "wiseguys" will take the +2.5 and barring something unforeseen, it will never go (and stay) at +3. Either way, I do like the home dog here. The only hesitation is the the Redskins have beaten Philadelphia three straight times, all as an underdog. Four of their last five meetings have seen 51+points, twice over 60 points - so I'm a little surprised to see that total come out at 45, let alone come down early on. Yes, I know the Eagles have statistically got a great defense, but the first two games they played were against the Browns and the Bears, two teams that had struggled to score, and clearly they were motivated in the intrastate game against the Steelers. Lean Skins and over here regardless.
Raiders/Chiefs: I have to agree this afternoon that the Raiders might be the "don't overthink bet" of the week. I know their defense has had some issues - and I know that the Kansas City offense has been less than great - and I also know that the Chiefs had a bye and that Reid coming out of a bye is probably a solid bet. Especially against a division foe, albeit on the road. I guess the question is "when is the Raiders' good fortune going to end?" They beat the Saints in New Orleans on a a ballsy two point attempt, beat the Ravens in the waning seconds, and of course beat San Diego on a botched snap by the Chargers that would have a least pushed that game into OT. Early bettors might be thinking the very same things, since Oakland opened -1.5 here and it's a PK in many places. The total opened at 48 and is drifting down, perhaps a good sign for KC since they won't fare well in an old-fashioned AFL shootout. So, let's overthink the obvious and consider Kansas City.
Atlanta/Seattle: Perhaps one of the more anticipated games of the week. What has impressed me about Atlanta, and something I said would happen months ago, is that under Quinn their defense would improve. Let's not forget where Quinn came from (Seattle) and why he was hired by the Falcons. So the question is this - did Seattle right the ship after the close call with Miami and the loss to the Rams? Or is it a matter of the competition they faced, and is a bye week going to really benefit a team that might not have needed it? I tend to think that's too many points to give the Falcons, even in Seattle -
Dallas/Green Bay: I have loved Prescott and honestly think (and have thought) that Romo has thrown his last pass in a helmet with a star on it - all reasons we made Dallas our Max Bet last week and won handily. Green Bay is simply vulnerable, and although I think they (the Packers) might be able to score on Dallas, a mobile QB like Prescott will negate any sort of defensive improvement Green Bay might make. Although I am not one to keep going to a well that's eventually going to run out of water - I STILL think the markets think this game is Lynn Dickey against Quincy Carter - I like the over here as well and think it closes higher than 47.