Week 2 NFL Picks

Well, that got ugly quick. Really, its what I get for getting so cocky about it. However, I did make it clear in the open that week one was the hardest week of all to pick. There's way to much random chaos out there to try to figure anything out definitively.

The good news is that you wont find me swinging from the rafters anytime soon. If anything, I am now more motivated to get this right.

Until then please enjoy this weeks entrance music:

* All regular season lines taken from CBSSports.com*

Broncos @ Chiefs (-3.5)

I wasn't wrong last week when I claimed that Peyton Manning should have retired. He looked done against the Ravens. I just underestimated how good the Broncos D was going to be. Similarly, I may have overestimated the Texans D v. the Chiefs. I also failed to take into account that nobody is better at multiple week game planning than Andy Reid. The Chiefs are unlikely to dominate the Broncos quite like they did the Texans, but they should be able to muster enough offense to get by Zombie Peyton Manning.

Pick: Chiefs

Titans @ Browns (-1.5)

Here's two teams I totally misread. I thought year 2 of Mike Pettine would mean a hungry, motivated Browns team, not one that rolled over and played dead against the Jets of all teams. I also failed to take into account the Marcus Mariota might be actually pretty good and that Ken Wisenhunt can be successful when is QB is pretty good. I think Vegas made a huge mistake with this line and wouldn't be surprised if the Titans are 2-3 pt favorites by game time. But CBS locked it in when they did so...

Pick: Titans

Buccaneers @ Saints (-10.5)

I think my Bucs pick last week was nothing but wishful thinking. I wanted to see Jameis Winston play well, but he was so far above most of his college competition (talent wise) its going to be a major "frame of mind" adjustment for him at the pro level. The guys he's playing against are really, really good. And the guys drafting game-plans against are also really, really good. That's why they are professionals. But 10.5 pts spread in the second week of the season? This is usually at least a week 10 spread.

Pick: Bucs

Patriots @ Bills (.5)

A basically pick game against the Patriots in week 2 for the Bills? That's a lot of respect. Or a lot of misplaced love. Rex Ryan had a history of upending the Patriots early on in his tenure with the Jets, but after that? Not so much. Plus for as much pressure as Buffalo threw at Indy last week it was always with 5-6-7 rushers. That's not how you beat Tom Brady. Especially not when he has a weapon like Gronk to create nightmare matchups all over the field. If you can't bring consistent pressure against Brady with only four rushers then you can't win. The Bills front four is very, very good, but will Sexy Rexy step outside of himself and trust his players to get the job done? I'm betting no. Its that whole "White Whale" complex.

Pick: Patriots


Cardinals @ Bears (2.5)

The Bears were extremely close to covering last week and would have if not for Jay Cutler doing Jay Cutler things. The Cardinals demolished the Saints out in the desert. Its hard to tell exactly how good the Saints are going to be, but the Cardinals could well give the Seahawks a run for their money in the NFC West. If this was December I might feel differently about how the Cards would fair on the road in Chicago. But in September? They aught to be able to cover a field goal.

Pick: Cardinals

49ers @ Steelers (-6.5)

This is another curious line. The 49ers were kind of a left for dead team and they went out rolled up the Vikings in a big way, while the Steelers put up a decent fight against the Pats. But I guess the odds makers aren't sold of on the 49ers (& after 1 week that is more than fair) and are also looking for the Steelers to rebound big in their home opener. Also, I think there's some science behind West Coast teams struggling in East Coast games. Or maybe its the other way around...

Pick: 49ers

Rams @ Skins (3.5)

The NFC West may be the best division top to bottom in all of football. The Skins are terrible and they deserve to be.

Pick: Rams

Chargers @ Bengals (-3.5)

Two (of the many) teams I picked against last week. But these two in particular stand out because I used some intangibles to go against them. Like I know what's really going on with these teams. So its like my grandfather's uncle's friend's cousin used to say: "When you're lost in the woods, just go home"

Pick: Bengals

Texans @ Panthers (-3.5)

Panthers beat a bad team like they were supposed to last week while the Texans got roughed up by Andy Reid's Chiefs who had been game planning since the schedule game out in April. And now it sounds like the Texans are going with Ryan Mallet this week? So the question on this game is: Do I really believe Ryan Mallet on the road is the answer? I say no.

Pick: Panthers

Falcons @ Giants (-2.5)

Isn't it just like the Giants to lose, but to cover? I hate the Giants.

Pick: Falcons

Lions @ Vikings (-3.5)

I picked both these teams last week and both teams let me down. For all I care it can snow 10 feet in the greater Minneapolis area and the game can be moved to the home stadium of the Saskatchewan Rough Riders.

Pick: Vikings

Ravens @ Raiders (7.5)

Next

Pick: Ravens

Dolphins @ Jaguars (6.5)

NEXT!!!

Pick: Dolphins

Cowboys @ Eagles (-5.5)

The Eagles really let me down last week, but I'm afraid that without Dez Bryant the Cowboys are a much worse team. I might be wrong about that, but like the Giants, I hate betting on the Cowboys.

Pick: Eagles

Seahawks @ Packers (-3.5)

A rematch of that ridiculous NFC Championship game from last season. Packers might eek this one out, but will they do it by more than a field goal?

Pick: Seahawks

Jets @ Colts (-7.5)

Do you believe in Ryan Fitzpatrick? Because as a Bills fan, I do not.

Pick: Colts


So there they are. I know I've got a lot to prove. As always if you disagree, you know where to find me.

Season Record: 4-12

NFL Week 1 Picks

After last season's 8-2 playoff run I am officially crowning myself the king. Now, heavy is the head that wears the crown, so if you want to try and knock it off I'm right here. Until then enjoy my Week 1 entrance music:

No doubt about it, Week 1 of the NFL season is by far the hardest one to pick. That's why somewhere between 1/3-1/2 of your suicide pool will be done by Tuesday of next week. We really don't know what we have with these teams yet.

We know what last year's team looked like and by and large their weren't too many major overhauls save the Buffalo Bills. That's not how football works anyway. You can't trade your way out of anything. You can cut players, sign other's castoffs, occasionally make a big free agent signing, but nothing like the 2015 Padres will every happen in the NFL. Its just not built that way.

The only major ways to change a team is to change the QB and change the coach. That's about it. Both of those changes will result in minor tweaks elsewhere, but its hard for teams to improve dramatically unless they do so from within.

So when making Week 1 picks you just have to go with information that you know, rely a little on what you think and cross your fingers. Everyone else is just as lost as you are. Also, preseason means nothing.

*Regular Season lines are taken from CBSSports.com

Steelers @ Patriots (-7.5)

With all do respect to the Steelers who are one of the NFL's model franchises, New England will be hell bent in 2015 on destroying every team in their path. Belichick is pissed. Brady is pissed. Patriot Pat is pissed. The NFL tried to sell out THE model franchise and got exposed in the process. The 2015 Pats may not win every game, but teams that play them will not be the same afterwards.

Pick: Patriots

Packers @ Bears (+6.5)

I think the Bears have a new coach and I think that the Packers under-performed last year. Aaron Rodgers better be motivated to take down the league this year, but I can't guarantee that. I feel like his life is too good to be worried that much about football. Also (after some research), a John Fox coached Bears team will not be taking beat-downs of a touchdown or more at home.

Pick: Bears

Chiefs @ Texans (-1.5)

This might be one of the more intriguing games of the week. Andy Reid does some amazing things with offenses while JJ Watt does some amazing things to offenses. On the whole I feel like the Chiefs are probably the better team here, but the Texans front 4 ought to be able to totally disrupt any sort of rhythm the Chiefs try to establish on offense. Plus, who is the Chiefs' QB? Oh right, its Alex Smith.

Pick: Texans

Browns @ Jets (-3.5)

I can't even bring myself to conjure up any reason to how this game will end.

Pick: Browns

Colts @ Bills (+2.5)

These two teams are almost polar opposites. The Bills have talent  up and down their roster with a serviceable line (if healthy) and a huge question mark at QB. The Colts have a once in a generation talent at QB, a serviceable line (if healthy) and a dearth of talent everywhere else. Put Andrew Luck on the Bills and that team somehow wins 20 games. Put Tyrod Taylor, EJ Manuel, Matt Cassell, the ghost of Tim Couch or any other warm body in camp with the Bills at the helm for the Colts and that team wins a negative amount of games. Plus, the Ralph is going to be INSANE on Sunday.

Pick: Bills

Dolphins @ Skins (+3.5)

(Editors Note: Daniel Snyder has every right to name his football team anything he wants. However, I don't have to use that name and neither does anybody else. Therefore, consider them the Washington Skins on this blog.)

I don't know if this line is more about how good people believe the Dolphins will be or how bad people expect the Skins to be. And other than having the courage to sit down RG3, I can't really say what the Redskins have done this offseason. The Dolphins did sign one of the baddest men on the planet (between the lines anyway) and everyone seems to love Ryan Tannehill for some strange reason.

Pick: Dolphins

Panthers @ Jaguars (+3.5)

I want to pick the Jaguars here, but Cam Newton is just too damn good. If only Carolina could get some nice complementary pieces... Or if the Panthers would just trade him to the Bills. Does anyone have Terry Pegula's email?

Pick: Panthers

Seahawks @ Rams (+4.5)

This would be the ultimate test of the "Super Bowl" hangover effect if not for the unflappable Russel Wilson and the indomitable Pete Carroll. Nothing that happens with Seattle makes sense to the layperson and that's OK. When you win games you don't have to explain anything. Also, Nick Foles was a nice story, but I'm not so sure he's going to thrive with the Rams.

Pick: Seahawks

Saints @ Cardinals (-2.5)

The Cardinals are hard team to figure this season. For like 1/2 of 2014 they were one of the best teams in the league. Bruce Arians is a great coach and Carson Palmer is a good enough QB. However, after Palmer got hurt the Cardinals let Jesus take the Wheel and that truck careened right into oncoming traffic. It was ugly and sad. But Palmer's back and the Saints just seem to get a little worse every year.

Pick: Cardinals

Lions @ Chargers (-3.5)

Chargers never play well early in the year.

Pick: Lions

Titans @ Buccaneers (-3.5)

Lovie Smith is a good coach who got a bit of a raw deal in Chicago. But then again, I kind of think that being a NFL coach is a bit of a raw deal. What other job has you working 80 hour weeks and forces your family to move to a new city every 2 years. I don't get it. You know what I do get? When two rookie QB's match up, take the one playing at home.

Pick: Bucs

Bengals @ Raiders (+3.5)

This is the upset of the week. Things have to turn around in Oakland eventually. Could this be the year? Also, Marvin Lewis Bengals teams, while typically solid are known for mental lapses. This is a mental lapse waiting to happen.

Pick: Raiders

Ravens @ Broncos (-4.5)

Peyton Manning should have retired.

Pick: Ravens

Giants @ Cowboys (-5.5)

I know the Giants had a bit of an unlucky season in 2014, but I don't see how they plan on turning it around. Honestly, they feel a bit like the Mets of like 3 or 4 years ago: no plan, no vision, no money (although, that's not really an issue in the NFL) and no hope. Well, apparently the Mets did have a plan or they sold their souls. I don't know which and I'm not here to judge. But, it means nothing for the Giants. They don't even play in the same state.

Pick: Cowboys

Eagles @ Falcons (+2.5)

Put me in the camp of those who believe that this is going to be Chip Kelly's year. He finally has the roster he wants and the QB that he wants. Hell, he won games when he didn't have those things. Couple that with a Falcons team that seems to perpetually lack identity. This is an easy one.

Pick: Eagles

Vikings @ 49ers (+2.5)

I don't get the 49ers as an organization. They let Jim Harbaugh build a winner and then bought his tickets out of town when they found out he was a bit of a meanie. How do you think that football games are won? Through negotiation and tact? No, you smack a guy in the mouth over and over again until they quit. Its not a pretty game. It never has been.

Pick: Vikings


There you have it. As always if you don't like my picks or my method let me know. I'm always happy to be told why I'm wrong.

Fear & Loathing in Fantasy Football

First of all, let me welcome myself back to the game. MoBettaBaseball went on hiatus for bit due to people and organizations paying me for my time where as the internet and by extension this blog just sucked up time. I don't regret that time, but a meaningful life is all about setting priorities. 

This time of year always means a realignment of time and priorities. After Fantasy Baseball's long slog its finally time to get serious, and that loathsome exercise known as Fantasy Football bubbles back up from its frothy abyss to dominate 3/4 of the conversations regarding football that you will have for the next 4 months. I know its not exactly a popular point of view to be "anti-fantasy football", but I am here's why:

1. As a male football fan in America it feels mandatory.

There used to be a day and time where getting drawn into a Fantasy Football conversation with someone not in your league was like a dirty little secret that you could share with a new friend. No one else really understood why you were giggling about 3rd wide receivers and kickers with your cousin's boyfriend at a wedding, but you did. And it was fun.

Now my boss is emailing me asking me if he should start Tampa's D against the Texans or roll with Bills' D. You know what? I don't care about your team. I barely care about mine. Why don't you start Tim Tebow in your Defense/Special Teams spot and see what happens?

2. Like having to start 3 closers in your Fantasy Baseball league? Imagine having to start closers at ever position...

Its already been been documented on this blog about how closers are the effin' worst part about Fantasy Baseball. They are incredibly unpredictable. At their best the provide only the smallest amounts of stats and/or points and at their worst they can absolutely blow up your week in only a handful of pitches. It sucks and its stupid. 

That's every position in Fantasy Football. Counting on Tom Brady to get you some big time numbers? Oh sorry, some fat-ass rolled up his knee in the first series of the season and he's done for the year. Thought you had a solid no. 1 overall pick in Adrian Peterson? Nope, his 4 year old son spilled some milk so he had to whip him bloody with a switch. Figured you had a sure bet with Calvin Johnson in your league championship? Too bad Matthew Stafford decided that he would try to use the football to pierce holes in the roof of Ford Field this week, The point is that each and every one of your players can crater, no-show, or get suspended for wiping their ass the wrong way and total eff you in the process. 

There is literally no rhyme or reason to it. Its chaos every week. Now, I don't mind some chaos here and there. There's a certain beauty to it, but don't expect me to spend hours on draft prep and chunks of my work week scouring the waiver wire for a lottery ticket. The beauty of the lottery is that its something for nothing. I'm not about to put in a bunch of work for the overwhelming odds of nothing.

3. People who talk trash and Fantasy Football do it like they playing kickball in Grade 5 gym class.

You know who I'm talking about. Hell, it might even be you. Regardless, its pathetic.

"Check the scoreboard loser. I'm gonna dominate this match-up just like I dominated the conciliation round last season!"

Ugh... I could go into some rant here accusing the offending party of bestiality or equate their interest in Fantasy Football to an obsession with girls pooping in diapers porn, but not today. Those things are best left in private.

4. Every year it gets harder to like football. 

This is not necessarily Fantasy Football's fault, but it does go a long way to keep us all distracted from the very real problems that football incurs. I've long espoused that professional sports and pro wrestling are not all that different. Well, no sport draws a stronger parallel to pro wrestling than the NFL. Both were once a haven for ne'er-do-wells and scoundrels, but made efforts to move to a family friendly environment. Although pro wrestling has been more forward thinking and successful on this front. Both treat their talent like disposable products and recognize that "the show must go on". And both have a disturbing pattern of losing retired athletes early on in their post performance lives.

Like I said before, this is not Fantasy Football's fault. If anything, the NFL seems to be in tune with fans' interest in Fantasy Football and have adjusted rules accordingly. These rule changes have also been better for player safety, but has done relatively little for those interior lineman who are the ones paying the greatest price. It just doesn't make me feel good knowing what is being sacrificed for the sake of entertainment, however that entertainment is delivered.

If you're still reading, I'm done with that. I do still play in one Fantasy Football league and by no means should you stop. I just have a forum to preach and I did. I'm done. Picks will be up by Wednesday or Thursday morning.

Now I've Got Some Time for Baseball

A Visit to the Mound

Baseball fans over-analyzing an over-analyzed game

So um... Listen. My wife is friggin' pissed about the last road trip. I'm in no hurry to get home.

A Visit to the Mound is regularly updated series of emails touching on a wide range of baseball subjects. 

Josh

It appears as if pace of play rules are working: http://deadspin.com/mlbs-attempts-to-speed-up-the-game-appear-to-be-working-1697688811

Taking off an average of 8 minutes and getting under the 3 hour mark is huge.  I have no problem watching a 5 hour slog with multiple pitching changes in an inning, but things like that will always keep baseball a somewhat nichey, regional sport.  As a lifelong hockey fan I've grown weary of not being able to discuss my favorite sport when I travel to certain parts of the US.  I am all for growing the game.  I never got why people become "sports hipsters" about stuff.  Hockey fans love to be insular and act like they've been hiding something from the world, some secret sport.  I'd much rather the NHL be in the public consciousness for more than just fights or extreme injuries, which is about the only time the NHL gets the truly national stage.  Same with baseball. Red Sox v Yankees and similar big market games will always drive ratings, but is Joe Six pack gonna watch a late september game with wild card implications between the Pirates and the Rockies?  Unless said Mr Six pack lives in Colorado or Pittsburgh, probably not.  Meanwhile, people watch the NFL scouting combine just to see 20 year olds do shuttle runs.  

Uncle Bones

There's a couple of things to unpack as they pertain the new, shorter baseball games. One that you definitely hit right on the head was the comparison between the NFL and MLB. The NFL really occupies a strange space right now in American sports landscape. There's a war going on for the sport's soul and one side is winning. 2 years ago you heard an awful lot about how discouraging the vicious hits on defenseless receivers would take "toughness" out of the game. Well, now that veterans football players are turning up dead at a rate only seen in Pro Wrestling and Fantasy Football numbers going through the roof, no one is complaining any more. Despite protests, it made the game a better viewing experience.

You'll some similar protests to baseball's pace of play changes. These arguments that emerge from the idea that "baseball shouldn't have time limit" usually come from grumpy old men and the "sports hipsters". These opinions don't matter much as grumpy old men (always knowledgeable & entertaining) are not the future and "hipsters" of any ilk are fairly transient in their interests and will move on to something newer soon anyway.

Getting games under 3 hours is very important to the long term health of the game. Especially when you consider the amount of TV money currently bolstering incomes. We are more or less conditioned around the idea of a 3 hour sporting events. NFL, NBA, NHL all wrap their games up under 3 hours. Its really all we can spend on a single sporting event. I mean really, how many other things do we 3 solid hours to in our day or even week? Other than work? 3 uninterrupted hours? I can't think of anything, yet we expect fans to tune in night after night after night to a 4 hour baseball game featuring multiple mound conferences, throws over, pitching changes, and batters adjusting their gloves? Not when I've got my tablet here and I can check Twitter for some game commenta... Oh look, 13 ways to lose weig... Wait, the Bills just traded for Phil... Huh, whats that? A shiny new penny?

A short, crisp 3 hour baseball game with a solid rhythm will grow the game nationally. It might not happen right away, but I'll be curious to see how the playoff numbers look. I hear a lot from people about how they only get into playoff hockey, but don't care much for the regular season. Well, what if people started getting into playoff baseball? As it stands now just about every playoff baseball game is a 4 hour commitment that doesn't end until 11:00 or 12:00 at night. That's no way to attract new fans even if that midnight drama is as thick as a hipster's mustache wax.

Click-Bait Worthy MLB Predictions pt.3

A Visit to the Mound

Baseball fans over-analyzing an over-analyzed game

But Coach, I only sent that pic to one girl.

A Visit to the Mound is regularly updated series of emails touching on a wide range of baseball subjects. 

Josh

I think on a very direct player for player, in a vacuum style of evaluation, the Dodgers won this trade.  The 2 big prizes for the Sox in that trade, Webster and De La Rosa, were turned into Wade Miley, a guy expected to be a serviceable #4 and nothing else.  A Gon is in the heart of the Dodgers order and a huge key to their success.  However, things don't exist in a vacuum and the Sox won this trade in the big picture purely for the financial relief it gave them. The Carl Crawford signing was a black eye on the Theo Epstein era, it was as if The Eagles decided to end their career on a salsa covers album.  Despite all the amazing things they accomplished, recency effect is a real thing and people only remember the beginnings and ends of things.  This trade got the team out from under the majority of that contract.  As much as all Sox fans love Josh beckett for 2007, his surly attitude only works when he's pitching well. He had worn out his welcome in Boston.  The biggest benefit of this trade was of course the financial bailout that came with it, the scale of which we haven't seen since the financial crisis. With the Dodgers playing the role of the federal government,the money saved allowed the Sox to go on a unique spending spree, one of value and volume, that lead to the 2013 World Series....and then finishing last place in 2014.  The Ben Cherington era has been all or nothing so far, and this year it appears as if he's going all in on the "all" part again.  

Uncle Bones

In the end it would seem to me that the "Great Dodgers-Red Sox Swap of 2012" was one of those odd baseball trades where every one was a winner, but for different reasons. It shows how much the financial aspects of the game are as much of a factor when it comes to roster building and player movement as the actual talent of the player. Basketball has it to a certain extent, but now have a system in place for bailing out owners and GM's who lose their minds on contracts. I'm sure hockey has something... I mean the shut down the whole sport because ownership thought players were making too much... And the NFL, my God. Those players make peanuts compared to what baseball players make, can be cut at a moments notice AND football the most profitable sport in America.

But none of that in baseball. You sign a contract and that money is guaranteed and you typically stay on a roster until the contract is over (although sometimes a team will each money for a year). Thats one of the things that makes the Red Sox current approach to roster building so fascinating. They clearly have a plan and they are sticking to it.

Without rehashing the Red Sox moves of the last the years I'm gonna hone in on the recently announced Rick Porcello deal. Understanding this whole deal starts with Jon Lester around this time last year when he had turned down what seemed to be a low ball offer from the Sox for something around 4yrs/$70 mil. I believe that Red Sox when they say that this was just a starting number, but I also don't blame Lester's team for tabling the whole thing. He knew he'd make way more money than that and even if he blew his arm out on Opening Day, the Sox would still likely sign him for that.

So on it went, with the Sox falling out of contention and ultimately dealing an age 30 Lester to Oakland for Yoenis Cespedes who I also believe that the Red Sox were interested in retaining (at the right price). I also think that they were curious in feeling out Cespedes with the impending bidding wars for other Cuban players like Rusney Castillo, Yosmany Thomas, and Yoan Moncada on the horizon. They had just missed out on sensation Jose Abreu and they didn't want to be left holding the bag again. Then by the offseason w/ Ramirez and Castillo in the fold, Betts on the horizon, and Victorino still kicking about, the Red Sox traded Cespedes for Rick Porcello. Porcello who has great peripheral numbers and who thrives with a great defense behind him. Porcello who will be 26 this season with the kind of easy delivery that typically avoids the DL.

The Red Sox then gave Porcello the same money they wanted to give Lester except now they are paying for all of his years up to age 30 instead of all of the years after 30. And while that seems like a shocking number at first, watch what Jordan Zimmermann (30 in 2016), Johnny Cueto (30 in 2016), Ian Kennedy (31 in 2016), Jeff Samardzija (31 in 2016), David Price (30 in 2016), Mat Latos (28 in 2016) get next off season. The list is huge, I could go on. The Red Sox already have 3 rotation spots locked up for next year (assuming they pick up Buchholz's option and that Joe Kelly isn't starting next year; either way) with atleast 2-3 pitchers at Triple A who could fill the void. Or they could take a short term plunge on any of the starting FA's who miss out next year's on bonanza.

The Yankees have no such options. They are already down one starting pitcher, the 35 year old Chris Capuano, are stuck with a broken CC Sabathia, and a more than likely TJ bound Tanaka. Then again they've got Pineda & Nova, 2 pitchers under 30 who have yet to pitch a whole season. Oh and Nate Evoldi who might want to just sign baseball's before he throws them as they could make great collector's items as they fly over the right field wall at Yankees stadium. They are going to have to sign at least one or two of the marquee pitching FA's if they are serious about contending and they will probably pay sticker only to be left to 2 broken down 35 year old pitchers 5 years from now.

Josh

All valid points.  The Yanks have been in "should have rebuilt" mode for a few years, and now are definitely in that mode. That is not a fanbase that is necessarily comfortable in a rebuild.

ICYMI

Part 1

Part 2