OK, I was terrible last week. I\u2019ll update standings later. Commentary on Week 2:<\/p>\n
* I was right, the Texans had no answer for Steve Smith. But they had answers for everything else, which amazed me.<\/p>\n
* Filed under \u201cplaces I\u2019m happy I wasn\u2019t:\u201d in any Bengals defensive meeting this week. How do you allow the Browns to score 51 points?<\/p>\n
* The Pats cheating thing just will not go away. Look, no excuses: the Pats broke the rules, they should be punished. I have no problem with that. But can we please move on? Seriously, I have yet to hear anything like an explanation of why this rule is even on the books. Yes, they were videotaping, but they were videotaping things which were happening in plain sight. It\u2019s legal to have coaches watch that with binoculars and a type into a laptop. It\u2019s not like they were breaking into fortified compounds and stealing nuclear secrets, sheesh.<\/p>\n
* Note to all fantasy football players: if you have guys playing QB or WR going vs. the Saints, start \u2018em. <\/p>\n
* No, Donovan, they aren\u2019t all over you because you\u2019re black. They\u2019re all over you for the same reason they\u2019re all over Rex Grossman: you\u2019re playing like crap right now. That is all.<\/p>\n
Sunday 1:00<\/strong> Bills @ New England(-16.5)<\/em> Lions @ Philadelphia(-6.5)<\/em> Colts @ Houston(+6)<\/em> Dolphins @ New Jersey Meadowlands(-3)<\/em> Vikings @ Kansas City(-2.5)<\/em> Chargers @ Green Bay(+5)<\/em> Niners @ Pittsburgh(-9)<\/em> Rams @ Tampa(-3.5)<\/em> Sunday, 4:10\u00b15<\/strong> Browns @ Oakland(-3)<\/em> Jaguars @ Denver(-3)<\/em> Panthers @ Atlanta(+4)<\/em> Giants @ Washington(-3.5)<\/em> Sunday NBC<\/strong> MNF<\/strong> OK, I was terrible last week. I\u2019ll update standings later. Commentary on Week 2: * I was right, the Texans had no answer for Steve Smith. But they had answers for everything else, which amazed me. * Filed under \u201cplaces I\u2019m happy I wasn\u2019t:\u201d in any Bengals defensive meeting this week. How do you allow … Continue reading NFL Week 3<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":[],"categories":[4],"tags":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","_links":{"self":[{"href":"http:\/\/byrneweb.com\/sunburn\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/165"}],"collection":[{"href":"http:\/\/byrneweb.com\/sunburn\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"http:\/\/byrneweb.com\/sunburn\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/byrneweb.com\/sunburn\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/byrneweb.com\/sunburn\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=165"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"http:\/\/byrneweb.com\/sunburn\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/165\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"http:\/\/byrneweb.com\/sunburn\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=165"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/byrneweb.com\/sunburn\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=165"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/byrneweb.com\/sunburn\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=165"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}
\nCardinals @ Baltimore(-7.5)<\/em>
\nSeems like too many; Baltimore\u2019s offense isn\u2019t exactly lighting up the world.<\/p>\n
\nThey beat both their first two opponents by more than that, and those teams are both better than the Bills. They\u2019ll cover this if they want to.<\/p>\n
\nObviously the guys setting the line didn\u2019t watch the same to games involving the Eagles that I did. McNabb can neither move nor throw, and nobody knows where the end zone is. Lions.<\/p>\n
\nI\u2019m starting to believe, I want to believe, but man, it\u2019s the Colts. I\u2019d be happy to be wrong the third week in a row on the Texans, but I\u2019m taking Indy here.<\/p>\n
\nCoin flip, the Jest get three points for being at home. Sure, Jets, why not?<\/p>\n
\nAgain, hunh? The Vikings I\u2019ve seen have looked pretty good on D and the Chefs have zero offense. The only way the Chefs win by 3 is if the score is 3-0. Vikings.<\/p>\n
\nFive? Seems like a lot, given how much the Chargers offense has struggled. I\u2019m actually going to take the Packers on the theory that Norv is just cursed. Or sucks. Or both.<\/p>\n
\nThe Stillers are firing on all cylinders right now, it seems, and the Niners are just staggering through. Stillers win here, but do they cover nine? That seems like a lot. Well, I\u2019ll give it anyway.<\/p>\n
\nHard to imagine the Rams 0-3 and the Bucs 2-1, isn\u2019t it? I\u2019m no sure what to do with this one. The Bucs appear to actually have an offense now, which is bad for St. Louis. Can the Bucs keep it up? I don\u2019t know. Because Al is going with Tampa, I\u2019m taking the points.<\/p>\n
\nBengals @ Seattle(-3)<\/em>
\nThe best part here is that the over\/under is a nice round fiddy (50). I\u2019m taking the over. Can I just take the over and not pick the winner? Can we do that? Grrr. Well, if not, uhh… the Bengals have the better offense, but the Seabags have the better D (not saying much). Seattle, I guess. I\u2019d much rather take the over.<\/p>\n
\nJust for a change of pace, I\u2019m going to actually pick the Raiders.<\/p>\n
\nThe most obvious spread in the world–Denver by a field goal. Probably as the clock expires, too. This will be a push, so why pick it? Oh, fine, I\u2019ll take Jax, but they lose on last-second field goal by only 1 or 2.<\/p>\n
\nOnly 4? Really? Sure, I\u2019ll give 4. The Falcons are really, really bad.<\/p>\n
\nThe Giants haven\u2019t shown me anything. The Redskins may actually have some life this year, so I\u2019m going with them.<\/p>\n
\nCowboys @ Chicago(-3)<\/em>
\nYes, Chicago has a great defense and all, but Dallas has enough defense (read: any) to stop the Bears and have enough offense to score a few. I like Dallas to win this outright.<\/p>\n
\nTitans @ New Orleans(-4.5)<\/em>
\nWeird. There\u2019s something seriously wrong with the Saints, besides the obviously horrible secondary. Something wrong on offense. I have to go with Ditka\u2019s analysis on this one: stop trying to spread the ball around and pound the rock with Deuce first, which will open up all the other stuff. Will they figure this out? Maybe, and maybe they\u2019ll eek out a win. But they won\u2019t cover ths.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"