Week 7 Picks

Well, coming off my epic 11-3 showing in week 6, I'm feeling none too confident when I look at the week 7 slate. There are some genuinely tough games to call in there, including division match-ups like Minnesota at Chicago and New Orleans at Carolina, plus some genuine head-scratchers like San Diego at Buffalo, Baltimore at Miami, Indianapolis at Green Bay, and Denver at New England. Right now, I have half a mind to just pick a bunch of home teams and move on. We'll see.

Baltimore @ Miami
The Line: Miami by 3
This is a tough one. Baltimore's defense has been outstanding, but Miami's defense hasn't necessarily been much of a slouch, either. On the one hand, the quality of Baltimore's defense is persuasive, but on the other, they haven't faced anything like the Wildcat yet. That actually does mean something. Also, Baltimore is on a three-game losing streak and their offense is headed in the wrong direction. Miami, on the other hand, came within a crazy last few seconds of pulling off yet another quality win on Sunday. I guess I have to go with the Dolphins here. I see the Dolphins pass-rush swarming Joe Flacco, putting a few hits on him, and causing a few turnovers. I imagine Tony Sparano will lean heavily on his talented backfield tandem to try to pound out some tough yardage and maybe keep field position on their side.

All of a sudden, Miami really is a force to be reckoned with. I mean, seriously, they came within a Matt Schaub quarterback draw with 3 seconds on the clock of heading into this match-up at 3-2 and in the fight for the wild-card! That's amazing. They've got a chance to reel off some wins here, too, with 5 of their next 6 games at home, and then a road date in St. Louis! They could very well be in the thick of the playoff chase, or even in the divisional race, in the last few weeks of the season! Holy hell, I can't believe I just typed that.

On the other hand, the Ravens are desperate for a win, and need I remind you, they are the team that suffered Miami's only win in 2007. There's got to be at least a little revenge factor for the Ravens, and they play 5 of their next 7 games on the road. Things could go from not very good to really, really ugly in Baltimore if they don't find a way to win some games against middle-of-the-pack teams like Miami.

It should be close, it could be a lot of fun to watch, and I like the Dolphins. I do.
Dolphins over Ravens, 20-17

San Francisco @ New York Giants
The Line: New York Giants by 10.5
I love this match-up. Of all the games that have ever taken place in NFL history, this could be my favorite. I need it to go one way, and there's every chance it will actually go that way.

New York just got embarrassed on the road in Cleveland. They were out of sync offensively, they gave up a lot of big plays, they turned the ball over, and they were no match for the spirit and enthusiasm of Cleveland's fans and players. It would be all too easy to chalk it up as a stinker and let it go, and it's true, it was a stinker, but I'm not sure the best team in the NFL gets pounded like that by anybody, let alone a 1-win Cleveland Browns team that was previously ranked at the very bottom of the NFL in scoring offense. If nothing else, New York's defense should be feeling quite anxious to get back out on the field and beat up on an offense, to earn back a little of their lost respect. At home, coming off that kind of a loss, well . . . let's just say I'm glad it's not the Redskins traveling to New Jersey this Sunday.

As for San Francisco, don't you kind of feel like the wheels are very nearly all the way off? Mike Nolan is probably in a full panic right now. He thought he'd bought himself a little time by "upgrading" the offensive system and turning the quarterback position over to an unknown quantity with a little experience running it. Maybe, in so doing, people would be so distracted by the play of J.T. O'Sullivan, they'd forget how this guy ruined the career of the team's number one overall pick, or how his team was taking big steps in the wrong direction every season. It's funny, actually: folks kind of have forgotten about the whole Alex Smith thing, and they kind of are letting Nolan off the hook for seasons past, so in a sense, the plan worked. On the other hand, his 2008 49ers team is so disappointing, and his offensive line has regressed so significantly, and his defense is underachieving so badly, that you'd have to think about firing the guy even without considering how he flushed the investment of a number one overall pick down the tubes. And for me, the really funny part of the whole fiasco is that by turning the offense over to Mike Martz and the quarterback position over to J.T. O'Sullivan, he's actually set the team back even further than if he'd just continued to suck with the same cast of characters. What a mess.

So I'm hoping we'll see a bloodbath. With New York's pass-rush, J.T. O'Sullivan will be lucky to make it out of the first quarter. I've got nothing against the guy, I really don't, but I can't deny being sadistically giddy at the thought of the pounding he's about to take in this one. I hope he comes out of it alive and okay, but as a reference point for the failures of both Mike Nolan as a head coach and Mike Martz as an offensive coordinator, you can't do much better. In a way, they need this test; a good team with a good coach and a sound offensive system will find a way to protect the quarterback, run the ball, and play respectable football in this game. If they want to be taken seriously as a legitimate contender, not just as a sideshow or an also-ran, but as a legitimate contender, they should be able to show up and compete in this game.

And they won't.
Giants over 49ers, 27-13

Minnesota @ Chicago
The Line: Chicago by 3
This is a super tough game to call, mostly because you never know how these games will play out. Both teams are supposed to be able to run the ball, manage the field in their passing game, and play dominant defense. You'd expect it to be a close, low-scoring game. Except, well . . . last season, in Chicago, these teams totaled 64 points in an effing barn-burner. You never know.

Chicago looks okay right now. They played the Falcons as well as anybody has in Atlanta, only losing on some miracle shit in the last few seconds. They are who they are, you know? They're a .500 football team that will make it tough on anybody. If Chicago wins this game, they likely won't do it by a lot. Similarly, if they lose, it'll be close. They probably have the superior passing game in this match-up, that could mean something. Plus, they're at home. Either of these teams can still dream of winning the division, so everything is on the line here.

As for Minnesota, they looked like sorry garbage in Detroit on Sunday. Now they're on the road again, in another divisional contest, in another dome, against a stiffer foe with a better defense. Adrian Peterson still hasn't broken out yet this season, and I'm starting to wonder if it'll happen at all. It's a shame Brad Childress is the head coach of this team, and here's why: I have a hunch AP is still recovering from the injuries and the workload of 2007. If the Vikings had a coach with a bit more clout, someone like Jeff Fisher, it'd be reasonable for me, as a fan, to start talking about whether the Vikings should significantly scale back Peterson's workload for the rest of the season, and if they're out of contention or don't look like a legitimate Super Bowl team by maybe week 10, to shut him down the rest of the way. Nothing scares me like the thought of Adrian Peterson spending the rest of his career slowed and trying to bounce back from taking a significant workload on a bum knee in his rookie season. This guy has no ceiling, none. If he's healthy, he could absolutely destroy every record we've ever seen at his position. I just have this lingering fear that, because Brad Childress might be coaching for his job this season, that he's not giving Peterson enough rest to be at full strength. I hope I'm wrong.

Anyway, all that is secondary to picking the game. So I don't think Peterson's going to bust all the way out . . . that doesn't mean Chester Taylor can't chip in a big contribution, does it? But will it happen against the NFL's fifth ranked rushing defense? Not likely. I guess the game goes something like this: one team is going to get enough pressure on the opposing quarterback to force more turnovers than their own quarterback is responsible for, and that team will win. Because I think Minnesota has both the better offensive line and the better defensive pass rush (thanks to Kevin Williams, a monster if ever there was one), I'm picking the Vikings. I know they're on the road, I know they sucked against Detroit. Sometimes teams play down to the level of competition (see Rams @ Redskins, week 6).
Vikings over Bears, 20-18

Pittsburgh @ Cincinnati
The Line: Pittsburgh by 9.5
How in the hell can the Bengals win this game, even at home, with Ryan Fitzpatrick at quarterback? Jesus, just throw the guy out in the road and run him over with a steamroller.

Bengals fans are apparently dumping their tickets left and right now that they're officially the worst team in the NFL, record-wise. Funny thing: I don't actually think they're the worst team in the NFL, just the most joyless, depressing team. If I were a Bengals fan and I had expensive tickets to this game, I'd be dumping 'em too, because the economy is in the tank, because this Bengals team is an atrocity, because the franchise is an embarrassment, and because it might mean something to Cincinnati's ownership to see that there's an actual penalty for fielding something this horrendous on a weekly basis. If I were Ryan Fitzpatrick, I'd be talking to a lawyer about my options for suing the pants off this organization. Talk about rail-roaded: the Bengals cut one of the most productive, beloved, hard-working players in franchise history, cut the franchise runningback and turn over the ground game to a guy without fingers, fail to dump the obnoxious malcontent at receiver, who then openly half-asses it during games, bring back the asshole criminal slot receiver against the wishes of the head-coach, do virtually nothing to upgrade their piss-poor defense, and then hand the whole fucking mess over to me when the aloof, butter-soft quarterback decides there's no way he's going down with this awful ship. Great. Now Ryan Fitzpatrick gets to be the butt of a million jokes every Sunday between now and the time when his NFL career comes to an unceremonious end, probably not longer than 10 weeks from now. Raw deal, son.

And this might be one of only a few teams in the NFL that Pittsburgh can both run all over and pass protect against, even with their terrible offensive line and depleted backfield. So I guess I like the 9.5 points. There's nobody left on Cincinnati's roster with enough pride to bother showing up for a home contest against the division champs. Or, at least, nobody that matters.
Steelers over Bengals, 35-17

New Orleans @ Carolina
The Line: Carolina by 3
Eventually, one of these two teams is going to fall away from contending in the division. Either that, or the division is going to implode and the winner will walk away with it at something like 8-8 or 9-7. Either way, the Saints and Panthers can't hope to make a serious run if they keep playing so up and down. Either a team asserts itself this Sunday, starts putting some things together, and strings together enough wins to take command of the division, or they go away. It seems like every week for the past two seasons the Saints have been just a win away from climbing above .500 and "making a run". As for the Panthers, look, it's pretty clear to me anyway that they're an improved team with the same flaws as previous years: they tend to inexplicably not show up for certain games, and they're turnover prone. I'm not sure it'll kill them this season, but I do think if they come off a discouraging road blow-out in Tampa and drop another division game at home, well . . . it won't be a good thing, now will it?

Carolina has the defense to win this game, and they have the running game. As with most Carolina games, it'll come down to winning the turnover battle and finishing drives. In fact, I wouldn't even say necessarily that they need to win the turnover battle, they just need to limit their own turnovers. If they don't turn the ball over too much, they should be able to sustain drives, and if they finish their drives with a few scores, they should be in position to win. But they managed to do what is almost never done in a game between two competent division rivals last week: they were blown out. That never happens. Competent teams simply do not get blown out by division rivals. Especially when they're at least as good as the Bucs on paper. That's puzzling. I picked the Panthers in week 6 because I wanted to believe they'd gotten over that maddening tendency to sleepwalk through games. They're at home and favored in week 7, but now I have even less confidence in them, also in part because I'm still goofily optimistic that maybe New Orleans will get serious down the stretch.

And those Saints . . . what the fuck. The difference between a win and a loss for the Saints is basically whether they can keep an opponent below 30 points. This team averages over 28 points a game, how in the hell can they be 3-3? Well, they gave up 29 points to the Redskins (a season-high), 34 to Denver, and 30 to Minnesota (also a season-high). So I guess the question is, can Carolina put 30 on the board at home? Against this New Orleans defense, anything is possible.

I'm talking my self in circles here. I'm loathe to pick a team like New Orleans on the road in a divisional game against a tough defense with a committed run-first offense, but on the other hand, the Panthers did get absolutely dumped in Tampa in an equally important division game.

Know what? My gut says the Saints pull it off.
Saints over Panthers, 31-26

Dallas @ St. Louis
The Line: Dallas by 7
Mind you, now, this line came out after Romo's injury, after Pacman's suspension, after the Rams won in Washington, after the Cowboys lost in Arizona. Apparently, Vegas was quite confident the same team that got owned in Arizona would handle the same team that won in Washington, even without their quarterback or a key part of their already fragile secondary. I'm cocking an eyebrow at that line.

Now, of course, the Cowboys have added Roy Williams, yet another mercenary me-first asshole for Wade Phillips to fail to manage. He's a huge talent, for sure, but a volatile situation just got a lot more . . . well . . . volatile.

This game comes all the way down to how for-real the Rams are with Jim Haslett as head coach. Frankly, they didn't play even nearly well enough in Washington to have earned a road win. Instead, they benefited from some horrendously poor-timed miscues by the Redskins. That happens. So they didn't really earn the win, but a win is a win, and sometimes even a bogus win like that can restore some confidence and get some weight off a team's backs. Now they're going home to a grateful, relieved St. Louis crowd, to face a traditional powerhouse team on one leg. This one is ripe, ripe for an upset.

On the other hand, Brad Johnson is a pro, and Dallas's offensive line isn't nearly as bad, nor have they played anywhere near as poorly, as the national sports media is making it sound. There's very little chance the Cowboys will look past any opponent with the current state of the team, but there's a significant chance that a week absolutely bursting with off-field distractions could . . . um . . . distract them from the task at hand. This Dallas team has that exact weakness, too: they're far too aware of themselves off the field.

So here it is: the Rams have a talented tailback, one good wideout, an iffy quarterback, a suspect offensive line, and a defense that just might have found a little confidence. They seem somewhat rejuvenated by the transition to Jim Haslett. All that, plus homefield, plus what might pass for momentum in win-starved St. Louis, would not be enough to topple a healthy Cowboys team, even one playing like crap. Against this exact Dallas team, as banged-up and dysfunctional as they are, as distracted, insecure, and vulnerable as they might be at this exact moment . . . well, maybe. I don't think I can pick it that way, but let's just say I'll be watching this game very closely on Sunday.
Cowboys over Rams, 24-14

Tennessee @ Kansas City
The Line: Tennessee by 8
One (1) team has officially given up on the NFL season through 6 weeks, and it's the Detroit Lions. One other team has unofficially but pretty clearly given up: the Oakland Raiders. And then there's the one team that really ought to give up on the 2008 season, and probably the 2009 season, too: your Kansas City Chiefs. Unlike, say, Detroit, the Chiefs don't have any offensive firepower at all. Unlike, say, Oakland, the Chiefs don't have a deep backfield at all. Unlike, say, the entire rest of the NFL, the Chiefs have no reason to expect that they'll be able to compete for anything more than maybe 3 or 4 wins this season. They're that bad.

That this game is in Kansas City is what makes it so funny. Can you imagine anything funnier than the Kansas City Chiefs coming off their bye week at home against the only undefeated team in the NFL? The team with the best head-coach in the business? Hahahahahaha! Seriously, that's so funny to me I almost typed LOL just now.

Right now, banish any thoughts you ever had about Kansas City even hoping to move the ball in any direction but backwards in this game. Forget it. It almost doesn't matter at all whether or not Tennessee musters any offense against the Chiefs. If Tennessee can find a way to go up by 7 or more in the first half, this one will be completely over after half-time.
Titans over Chiefs, 17-0

San Diego @ Buffalo
The Line: Even
What a hugely disappointing loss this will be for, really, either team. Buffalo is the anti-San Diego. First, it's cold as Clay Aiken's balls in Buffalo. San Diego is warm and wonderful.

In football terms, Buffalo could be called an overachiever. They've got a second-year tailback and a second-year quarterback. They're undersized at most skill positions. Their defense could be called a no-name unit. Their head coach, Dick Jauron, is about as straight-forward and humble as they come. They were picked by just about everybody to finish third in their division and miss the playoffs.

San Diego, now they're the big stars of the AFC, aren't they? Some people still have this team in the AFC title game and beyond. When they pounded the living shit out of the same New England Patriots team that got humiliated at home by the Dolphins, some shitehawk on ESPN.com said they looked unbeatable. Seriously, how many chances does this team get? Last season, they were this close to total meltdown 3 weeks into the season. This season, they've sucked their way to 3-3, but they're still "unbeatable"? They're still the favorite in the AFC? Why? Because they're good enough to sit in second place in the AFC West, football's second weakest conference?

And what happens if they lose this game? Certainly, nobody will blame them for going on the road and losing to a 4-1 Bills team coming off their bye week, but again, how many chances? At 3-4 entering week 8, are they still the favorite? Next week, they go to New Orleans. Do we forgive them for that one, too? See, at some point, a team that's supposed to be Super Bowl material can't be forgiven for dropping a division game because of a bum last-second call, or dropping a road game across the country, or opening the season with a loss on a miracle last-second catch. You either win enough games to get to the playoffs, and then win those games to get to the Super Bowl, or you don't. I can't shake the feeling that the 2008 San Diego Chargers have already been given a big pass for the 2008 season. They are who the Philadelphia Eagles want to be: they don't actually have to win anything to be considered an elite team. Well, not in my book. In my book, an elite team goes on the road in week 7 at 3-3 and cleans the clock of another playoff hopeful in their conference, then goes on the road and cleans the clock of another middling playoff hopeful in week 8, and bullies around their division, and puts the AFC West in a bag by week 11. And the Chargers aren't that team. No free passes in my book.

Now, as for this game: first of all, at 1pm this Sunday in Buffalo, it's going to be a bit chilly. We're not talking Arctic wind here, we're talking low 50s. In San Diego, all week it's going to be upper 70s to lower 80s. So there's that. Second of all, Buffalo had the bye week to get ready for this one. Buffalo's defense (get this) is ninth in the NFL; 8th against the pass, 18th against the run. Now there's this: in their first three games, including their only two home games, the Bills have allowed 85, 66, and 97 yards to opposing runningbacks, and we're not talking about any slouches there, either: the 66 yards were to the Jaguars and the 97 yards were to the Raiders, two teams that are much, much more dedicated to the ground game in their offense than the Chargers.

So here's what I think: I think the Chargers need to run the ball well to win this game. In order for that to happen, they'll need LT to break out in a pretty big way, on the road, across the country, in cool weather, against the 8th ranked defense in the NFL, coming off a bye week. Mmmmmmmm . . . not gonna happen.
Bills over Chargers, 28-24

Detroit @ Houston
The Line: Houston by 8.5
This is exactly what the doctor ordered for the Texans; a post-win visit from the only team in the NFL that has officially given up on the 2008 season. Let's not kid ourselves here, the Texans aren't making a run at the playoffs, not without a few miracles, but there's a chance here for them to string together a modest run and make something respectable out of this season. They friggin' deserve it, after the shit they endured at the outset.

Detroit . . . yeesh, talk about waving a white flag. Look, I understand the economics of trading Roy Williams, and frankly, if Roy Williams had it in him to elevate this team to playoff-contender status, it would have happened already. On the other hand, you dumped one of two legit NFL-grade talents on your offense the same week you try to trade your banged up starting quarterback before dumping him on IR. And it's not like you're auditioning the future, either; I think we can rule out the possibility that Dan Orlovsky will be leading the Lions in any direction but the gutter. Maybe Drew Stanton turns out to be the guy, but he's hurt and down at the moment. So you dump your veteran quarterback and trade one of two assets on the whole team in the same week, that means you've given up. Do I blame them? Not necessarily. Look at the Williams deal: they scored two big-time draft picks (a first and a third), and turned a seventh into a sixth. They've jettisoned Matt Millen (finally), so what they've really done is stocked the draft cupboard for the next front office, and that's a good move, even if it means completely folding on the 2008 season only six weeks in. The Lions aren't old, but they need a rebuilding. They need a complete reversal of culture. There might be a few pieces on this current team worth keeping, but the direction around town needs to be towards solidifying the front office situation. Look at the two most surprising turnaround teams from 2007 to 2008: the Miami Dolphins and the Atlanta Falcons. The first order of business was finding the right structure in the front office, then putting a solid, no-nonsense head coach in place with the blessing of that front office. The Lions situation might have looked bleak 2 weeks ago, not exactly the kind of place you want to land if you're an NFL executive looking for a new home, but now they've got 2 first-round picks, including what will likely be the first overall, they've got 2 third-round picks, and 2 sixth-round picks. They've got one elite receiver locked into a deal of decent length. They've got a young quarterback who might turn out to be the guy. You can make a winner out of that if you've got the right office and the right coach.

What the hell does any of that have to do with picking this game? You're right, nothing. I like the Texans at home.
Texans over Lions, 35-10

Indianapolis @ Green Bay
The Line: Indianapolis by 1
The Colts got a great mojo win at home against Baltimore in week 6, but it's too early to be completely sold on them. In fact, I'm a bit surprised to see them getting the edge in Lambeau over a Packers team that just won on the road. Both teams have disappointed so far this season, this is a very important game.

It's funny, of all teams in the NFL, I feel like the Colts and Packers are near the top of the list of teams I feel like I don't actually know a damn thing about. With the Colts, I haven't yet doubted this season whether they're the kind of team that can blow up and demolish any given team in any given week, but I really don't feel like I know whether or not they have it in them to string anything together. They're still pretty thin along the offensive line at the moment, and the defense still hasn't convinced anybody they can play without Bob Sanders. Beating up the feisty Ravens is something, I give them credit; by any stretch of the imagination, that doesn't indicate that they've necessarily put everything together. A win in Lambeau a week later? A convincing win? That'll go a long way towards piecing this puzzle together.

And the Packers, it's just really hard to know what they're capable of. I don't think it's too early to say that they made a good draft pick in Aaron Rodgers and that he's ready to be a quality starting quarterback in the NFL. Clearly, they've got a great set of receivers in Donald Driver and Greg Jennings. It kind of looks like a broken ship right now, doesn't it? Held together by duct-tape? The defense is banged-up and hasn't looked like last year's unit at all. The offensive line hasn't been much, and I have a well-documented skepticism of Ryan Grant, the Marc Bulger of NFL runningbacks. They need big plays, lots of big plays, and they're lucky to have at least a trio of players in their passing game that can get 'em.

As far as this game goes, this might be the toughest game to pick of the entire season to this point. On a neutral field, I'd still probably lean towards Peyton Manning and the Colts. I'd probably feel comfortable picking them by 10, especially since, though I do think their defense is porous enough to let even a glorified scrub like Ryan Grant bust loose for some steady gains, I don't see them giving up many big-plays - owing to their use of the Tampa-2 defense. Then there's the Lambeau advantage, such as it is: it's about as outdoors as stadiums get in the NFL, and we're talking about upper 50s and showers on Sunday. They play on grass, the crowd will be heavily in favor of the home team and probably quite amped up for the challenge, and the Packers need this game.

Shoot, almost forgot, the Packers have a disturbing history under Mike McCarthy of bailing on their strengths early against especially fearsome opponents. If the Packers still think it would take a special effort to topple the Colts, you might see an overly "up" Packers team self-destruct early in this one. And is the Lambeau crowd worth 1o points this season? Not so far. It looks like I'm taking another road team, for Christ's sake.
Colts over Packers, 30-28

Cleveland @ Washington
The Line: Washington by 7
The Redskins have already played more fearsome opponents than the Browns, and they'll play more fearsome opponents after week 7, but there is not a more important game on their 2008 regular season schedule than this one. Not even close.

We'll learn virtually everything there is to learn about the Redskins based on the outcome of this game. They showed a lot of toughness and professionalism in going on the road in two straight games against division rivals and coming home 2-0. They also showed a lack of explosiveness, a relative inability to step on a lesser foe, and a disturbing return to their recent history of playing down to the level of competition, last week against the woeful Rams. There are a few things we think we know about the Redskins, and one ugly, embarrassing home loss isn't enough to disprove any of them: they're tough, they're competitive, they're sharp, they're capable of beating any team in the league, they have an ability to bounce back and recover, even on the road, and they have a scheme and a play for almost any circumstance in a game. I feel comfortable identifying those attributes in this Redskins team through 6 weeks, even after that fiasco. Another fiasco? Well, I won't feel quite the same anymore.

These are games good teams have to win. Every NFL team will lose some games. Bad and middling NFL teams might lose a few times a year when they ought to win, and they'll lose a few other times a year because they're just not as good as their opponent. Good NFL teams will go on the road and lose a game or two because they weren't as good as their opponent, maybe a game or two at home for the same reason, and then they'll lose one game where they can't stay out of their own way and they should have won. The Redskins just had that game. They're seven point favorites over the Browns because they're at home, they should be the better team, and they should win. Another fiasco, and we'll have to start re-thinking whether or not the Redskins are a good team. Maybe they're a middling team.

And here's what bothers me: the Cowboys have lost two games, both against teams that were just better at the moment. The Giants have lost a game in which the other team was just better. The Redskins have lost two games, and one of them was already their brain-fart game. Now they get to host the team that was just plain better, if for only one day and only in that stadium, than the Giants, the same team that was just better for a day than the Redskins.

This is exactly the kind of circular nonsense that keeps me up at night Monday to Saturday.

Here's what I'm saying: the Redskins can be forgiven for tossing away a prime opportunity against the Rams if that's all it was. Now they need to step up and prove that, in fact, that's really all it was. They need a win on Sunday, a convincing win, to prove to themselves, their fans, the rest of the league, and the national media that they're actually legit and are actually ready to contend for the NFC East this year. Maybe that sounds a little spooky, but I really believe in such things. I don't believe this Redskins team is ready to rebound from dropping 2 straight home games to weak teams, I don't think they're the kind of team that can throw away home games when they've got a second-half stretch of home games against division foes, none of which will be easy wins.

The Browns looked good Monday night. At home, after the bye week, in a desperate situation, they pounded the crap out of a very good team in very convincing fashion. That result couldn't have been much more decisive. Now they've got a short week to travel to Washington. Has Cleveland put it all together? Did they really go from being the worst overall scoring offense in the NFL to the kind of team that can travel to a hot NFC East team's home turf and take down a pissed-off 4-2 team? On a short week? I'm not convinced, but needless to say, I'm afraid of this game. I was afraid last week, and I'm afraid this week. Pittsburgh and San Diego are two teams that have no problem getting up for super-tough conference foes, then flatten-out against weaklings and play down to competition, both teams give me indigestion despite me not really giving a shit about them, and I don't want the Redskins to be in that class.

So here's my pick: the Redskins win a squeaker. A low scoring, ugly squeaker that won't make me feel a whole lot better about them entering week 8, and won't keep me from being afraid of the goddamn Detroit Lions, who, for the sake of ruining my health and sanity, will probably dump 45 on Houston.
Redskins over Browns, 17-13

New York Jets @ Oakland
The Line: New York Jets by 3
Wouldn't this just be the perfect game for the Jets to piss away? At Oakland? 3,000 miles from home, against a horrifyingly bad Oakland team with nothing to play for, in front of their gut-punched-to-the-point-of-oblivion fans?

I just have a hunch about this game. I don't know why. Something to do with the fact that Brett Favre has never had to travel the way he's had to travel with the Jets, and the last time he did it, his Jets were absolutely demolished in San Diego. I'm not saying the Raiders will win (not yet), but I have a hunch this one will be closer than maybe a lot of people think. Apparently Vegas feels the same way, otherwise how do you explain the slim points spread between an Oakland team that pretty clearly bottomed out against New Orleans and a Jets team coming off consecutive wins?

But I kinda feel like the Jets are due to have a defensive meltdown, they're due to have an opposing backfield go completely off on them to the tune of 300 yards rushing. O, that Lane Kiffin were still running the Raiders! I'd have no trouble picking Lane's boys to lay an upset on the Jets.

Can I do it? Can I? Can I pick Tom Cable in only his second game as head coach? I don't see how, I really don't. I'd love to, and rest assured, if the Jets come up short, I will wish I'd picked the Raiders so I could lay a triumphant "Told y'all" in my week 7 recap.

It's tempting, it really is. And it won't happen again this season, an opportunity to be right about the awful Raiders beating the fake Jets in Siberia. Damn.
Jets over Raiders, 21-20

Seattle @ Tampa Bay
The Line: Tampa Bay by 10.5
All this talk about Cleveland having too many primetime games? Yeah, check out this flea-bag, between perhaps the most boring team in the NFL (the Bucs) and the most surprisingly irrelevent (the Seahawks), then tell me you wouldn't rather watch the Browns/Skins match-up. Seriously, even with what we thought we knew about these teams 10 weeks ago, I couldn't have cared less for this game. Now? Yuck. You definitely have both an unhealthy love of NFL football and no life at all if you're tuning in during primetime for this mess.

Here's a positive note, and I mean it: Carnell Williams is apparently close to coming back from the PUP list for Tampa Bay. I really do care about that. I loved this guy before his gruesome injury, I really hope he can find a way to battle back and restore his once-promising NFL career. I hope they don't rush the guy. Once upon a time, this guy was not only NFL Rookie of the Year, he was in the discussion of best tailbacks in the NFL. If he can make it back, he alone could be reason enough to give a damn about the Bucs. Good luck, Cadillac!

As for the Seahawks, who gives a damn. Then there's the fact that this team was the only thing keeping Seattle sports fans from lighting themselves on fire. Not only did they lose their NBA team to (huhuhuhuh) Oklahoma City, but the goddamn Mariners are a friggin' joke. Now the Seahawks are abysmal! Man!

I don't think it'll be as bad as the points spread, especially if Seneca Wallace starts at quarterback. What most people don't know about the guy is he can really play. Just ask Corey Chavous's corpse.
Bucs over Seahawks, 20-17

Denver @ New England
The Line: New England by 3
The Patriots can either pretend to keep hanging around, or they can go into full-blown we're-outta-here mode. I'm running out of steam on these picks, so here it is: Brandon Marshall might blow up, and if he does, this one is a laugher, I don't care where they play it. New England has no explosiveness whatsoever on either side of the ball, they ain't coming back on anybody.

But Denver sucks on the road, and this is a long way from home. I think they'll psych themselves out of this one and embarrass themselves. Or maybe not. Either way, I'm picking the home team by the spread.
Patriots over Broncos, 24-21

There you have it. I can barely even remember how I picked most of these games, and I'm too lazy to look back and tell you whether I feel confident in the lineup. Ummmm . . .

Go Skynards!