NFL 2004 Season Week 13 Picks
Create an Account or Login to make your own picks!These are not our most current picks!
Our freshest batch of picks are the NFL 2007 Season Super Bowl Picks.
 |  |  |  | |||||
| Bills 42 @ Dolphins 32 Sun, 12/5/04 12:00pm CBS
|
Bills
 |
Dolphins
 |
Bills
|
Bills
|
||||
| Cardinals 12 @ Lions 26 Sun, 12/5/04 12:00pm FOX
|
Lions
 |
Cardinals
 |
Lions
|
Lions
|
||||
| Panthers 32 @ Saints 21 Sun, 12/5/04 12:00pm FOX
|
Saints
 |
Panthers
 |
Panthers
|
Panthers
|
||||
| Falcons 0 @ Buccaneers 27 Sun, 12/5/04 12:00pm FOX
|
Buccaneers
 |
Falcons
 |
Buccaneers
|
Falcons
|
||||
| Vikings 14 @ Bears 24 Sun, 12/5/04 12:00pm FOX
|
Vikings
 |
Vikings
|
Vikings
|
Vikings
|
||||
| Giants 7 @ Redskins 31 Sun, 12/5/04 12:00pm FOX
|
Giants
 |
Giants
|
Giants
|
Giants
|
||||
| 49ers 6 @ Rams 16 Sun, 12/5/04 12:00pm FOX
|
Rams
 |
Rams
|
Rams
|
Rams
|
||||
| Titans 24 @ Colts 51 Sun, 12/5/04 12:00pm CBS
|
Colts
 |
Colts
|
Colts
|
Colts
|
||||
| Texans 7 @ Jets 29 Sun, 12/5/04 12:00pm CBS
|
Jets
 |
Jets
|
Jets
|
Jets
|
||||
| Bengals 27 @ Ravens 26 Sun, 12/5/04 12:00pm CBS
|
Ravens
 |
Ravens
|
Ravens
|
Ravens
|
||||
| Patriots 42 @ Browns 15 Sun, 12/5/04 12:00pm CBS
|
Patriots
 |
Patriots
|
Patriots
|
Patriots
|
||||
| Chiefs 34 @ Raiders 27 Sun, 12/5/04 3:05pm CBS
|
Chiefs
 |
Chiefs
|
Chiefs
|
Chiefs
|
||||
| Broncos 17 @ Chargers 20 Sun, 12/5/04 3:05pm CBS
|
Chargers
 |
Broncos
 |
Broncos
|
Chargers
|
||||
| Packers 17 @ Eagles 47 Sun, 12/5/04 3:15pm FOX
|
Eagles
 |
Eagles
|
Eagles
|
Packers
 |
||||
| Steelers 17 @ Jaguars 16 Sun, 12/5/04 7:30pm ESPN
|
Steelers
 |
Steelers
|
Steelers
|
Steelers
|
||||
| Cowboys 43 @ Seahawks 39 Mon, 12/6/04 8:00pm ABC
|
Seahawks
 |
Seahawks
|
Seahawks
|
Seahawks
|
||||
| Week Record | 11 - 5 0.688  | 8 - 8 0.500  | 11 - 5 0.688 | 10 - 6 0.625  | ||||
| Season Record | 115 - 77 0.599 | 106 - 86 0.552 | 117 - 75 0.609 | 116 - 76 0.604 | ||||
| Lifetime Record | 448 - 277 - 1 0.617 | 398 - 327 - 1 0.548 | 433 - 292 - 1 0.596 | 438 - 287 - 1 0.603 |
Lions
Saints
Falcons
Vikings
Giants
Rams
Colts
Jets
Ravens
Patriots
Raiders
Chargers
Eagles
Steelers
Seahawks
| Week: | 9 - 7 0.562 |
| Season: | 111 - 81 0.578 |
| Lifetime: | 436 - 289 - 1 0.601 |
Create an Account or Login to make your own picks!
Packers 17 @ Eagles 47
Jeremy: Philly beat Green Bay twice last year, yet leave it to Packer fans to say that not only were they the better team but that had it not been for 4th and 26 they would have won the Super Bowl.Matt: I feel like there is something I'm supposed to say here, but I can't remember what it is...... Oh yeah, 26th and 4!!!! Is that right?
Jon: I wear the belt! around my waist!
Sarah: eeee. 4th and 26. Payback. Please.
Steelers 17 @ Jaguars 16
Jeremy: This year two "it" quarter backs face off. It will be interesting to see if either of these guys is a one year wonder.Matt: Football sucks.
Jon: I was thinking about picking Jacksonville for this game, but there's really not much reason to.
Sarah: Go Pittsburgh! Jacksonville looked craptastic at Minnesota, so I am thinking the Steelers can pull this off.
Cowboys 43 @ Seahawks 39
Jeremy: I never understood why everyone thought so highly of the Seahawks going into the season.Matt: Football still sucks.
Jon: If Shaun Alexander doesn't touch the ball on 75% of the offensive plays, then the offense isn't doing it's job. In the spirit of full disclosure, he is on my fantasy team...but I do think they need to give him the ball more in order to win. I think this game will be close. Advantage Seattle cause they have the best offensive player on the field and because they're at home.
Sarah: Seattle got it handed to them last week. Ouch.
 | Scott - 2883 Posts 12/01/2004 @ 03:02:35 PM |
 |
|---|---|---|
| I'll save everyone the trouble before anything even gets said....."4th and 26". There, no need to talk about anymore (yeah right) |
Yours:
 
Rated 0 times. |
|
|
| Sarah - 1866 Posts 12/01/2004 @ 08:20:43 PM |
|
|---|---|---|
| They just showed the play on tv and it got a little dusty in here. stupid freddie mitchell |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
|
| Sarah - 1866 Posts 12/01/2004 @ 08:21:14 PM |
|
|---|---|---|
| Did Matt just say bitch? |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
 | Matt - 1482 Posts 12/01/2004 @ 09:20:31 PM |
|
|---|---|---|
| I did. |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
|
| Scott - 2883 Posts 12/01/2004 @ 11:41:36 PM |
|
|---|---|---|
| this is a tad late, but "random number generator" jokes never get old. |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
|
| Scott - 2883 Posts 12/01/2004 @ 11:43:36 PM |
|
|---|---|---|
| and yes, we would have won the Super Bowl if it wasn't for that one play, but ironically enough, there were many other small plays that would have made that play not even have occurred. |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
|
| Sarah 12/02/2004 @ 07:14:13 AM |
|
|---|---|---|
| OMG. It's OWENS! OWENS! OWENS! and 4th and 26 all wrapped in one package. What does it all mean??? |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
|
| Scott - 2883 Posts 12/02/2004 @ 01:29:45 PM |
|
|---|---|---|
|
This is how close the Packers and Eagles really were last year. The Eagles beat the Packers twice by a total of 6 points. The Total offensive yards totals favored Green Bay 690 to 645, and time of possession was only 3 minutes different in favor of Green Bay. Turnovers were 4-1 in favor of Philly, but one of the green bay turnovers was on the last play of the game, so really, it's more like 3-1, either way it's pretty close. McNabb averaged 223 yards per game while favre only averaged 144 yards per game, but Ahman Green averaged 174 yards on 6.4 yards per carry. Both teams punted 14 times each game. Green Bays defense outsacked the Eagles 10-5. Philly won both games last year, there is nothing taken away from that, but these were two very evenly matched teams then; one play in both games could have completely changed the outlook of the entire season for both teams. (and yes, the packers would have gone to super bowl and won=) ). These are not the same teams that met last year, however, mainly because Philly did some adjusting in the offseason. TO will be tough to handle, no doubt, and their defense could give the packers some trouble (15th in the league in yards but first in the league in points against and turnover ratio) Green Bay, however, has a few things to brag about too. They are 3rd in the league in total offense (ahead of the Vikings;)), a 4-1 road record, and probably some other good things. Ok, so maybe Philly has a few things in their favor, but really, this is a toss up in my head. I could see this being the same type of game as last year. I am a tad worried about this game, but for some reason the Texans game 2 weeks ago was the most worried I've been about a game all season. |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
|
| Scott - If you aren't enough without it, you'll never be enough with it. 12/02/2004 @ 01:30:22 PM |
|
|---|---|---|
| when I said 6 points I meant 3 points in each game. |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
|
| Jeremy - 5109 Posts 12/02/2004 @ 06:09:18 PM |
|
|---|---|---|
|
The point is that if you can claim something absurd like a team that backed into the playoffs would have won the NFC championship and the Super Bowl had it not been for one play then I think it is perfectly fair to say Green Bay would have lost had the refs not taken a td off the board with like under 2 mins to go in the Skins game and given you the ball on that kick off in the Vikes game, which you seem to think is unfair. And as long as we're having one play redo's the Cardinals bs call going our way means you dont go. The Tillman INT in Chicago getting caught by Moss means you don't go. There are many games that come down to one play. At least you had a chance to redeem the 4th and 26. One sack (and there were many hands on McNabb along the drive) and it's over. You had many many chances to redeem that. We had ref arms go out, ref arms go up, season over. |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
|
| Jeremy - 5109 Posts 12/02/2004 @ 06:10:12 PM |
|
|---|---|---|
| By the way one of those Eagle wins was in Green Bay in what was "Green Bay" weather. |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
|
| icbeast - You've got to trust your instinct, and let go of regret 12/02/2004 @ 06:44:08 PM |
|
|---|---|---|
| What happened last year hardly matters in the NFL. It should be a good game. The Packers have won their last two games without Green, thanks to the offensive line. The defense gives up yards, but has made big plays. Farve has been consistent, Walker is having a breakout year, and Driver has played well of late. On the other hand, the Eagles have won without Westbrook and now he's back. They've also won their last 2 games without TO doing much (although, at least for the short time I was watching, that was mostly do to McNabb not playing well). Their defense is also solid. Probably another close finish. |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
|
| Scott - 2883 Posts 12/02/2004 @ 10:59:35 PM |
|
|---|---|---|
| Who says we're having one play redo's? apparently you missed point. I don't remember really making much of claim other than jokingly saying the Packers would have gone on to win, that's kinda what the ":)" was for. All I was pointing out was that the 2 teams were very evenly matched last year. But apparently everything we say now from both sides is taken differently, or something like that. Oh yeah, and the Vikings always have it worse than the Packers, I forgot about that. I never actually said that one specific play would have changed things. there were many times during the playoff game where decisions to go or not to go for it on fourth down cost the packers, I think 3 times in all (and that doesn't even include the 4th and 26 play). The Packers lost that game, they didn't deserve to win. But seeing as how they didn't deserve it and still almost won it (notice i'm not blaming anyone but the packers) says to me that they could have gone on to beat Carolina the next week, which would have brought them to the Super Bowl. That's how much confidence I had in that team. If they would have won that game, they would have won 6 in a row going in to the conference championship game. They were hot. Now trust me, none of this actually matters because they lost that game, so it's almost pointless even to bring it up. But I did anyway, so cue the additional useless comments on this topic. |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
|
| Jeremy - Site Admin 12/02/2004 @ 11:08:08 PM |
|
|---|---|---|
|
The thing is when you look at things like "they were hot" your looking at "in the stars" stats, and it wasn't "in the stars" for anyone like it was for Carolina. Plus the Pats would have rocked you like Piston Honda. |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
|
| scott - Ma'am, can you make sure your computer is turned on? 12/02/2004 @ 11:15:07 PM |
|
|---|---|---|
| the thing also is, no matter how much you or I want to admit it, this is all the same speculation about the same thing in the opposite way. If the "any given sunday" thing is true, than you can't say the Packers would have lost any more than I can say they would have won, because they didn't play. But saying they were hot isn't that much of an "in the stars" stats (i've never heard that term). I mean, it doesn't mean much, but momentum helps. |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
|
| Jeremy - As Seen On The Internet 12/02/2004 @ 11:26:55 PM |
|
|---|---|---|
| No I cant say they would lose for sure, I didn't say they would lose (other than the Piston Honda comment), but every packer fan I heard talking about last season made it sound like playing the championship game and the super bowl was a formality if they didnt lose to the eagles. |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
|
| Scott - You're going to have to call your hardware guy. It's not a software issue. 12/03/2004 @ 02:00:25 AM |
|
|---|---|---|
| ic, we are on the same page then. I didn't see it as a formality, but I was confident in their ability to win after that. With that said, the Packers are going to dominate. |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
|
| Scott - 2883 Posts 12/03/2004 @ 02:01:00 AM |
|
|---|---|---|
| eeear(pirate thing) I have no life. |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
|
| Scott - 2883 Posts 12/03/2004 @ 04:57:43 PM |
|
|---|---|---|
| The Philadelphia sports writer isn't too confident about the Eagles' ability. That's cool. |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
|
| Scott - 2883 Posts 12/03/2004 @ 05:03:40 PM |
|
|---|---|---|
| New Orleans, Houston, Minnesota, New England, Tampa Bay, Detroit, Indianapolis, Baltimore, St. Louis, Miami, San Diego, Kansas City, Green Bay, New York Giants, Pittsburgh, Seattle. |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
|
| Jeremy - The cake is a lie!! 12/03/2004 @ 09:31:16 PM |
|
|---|---|---|
| Is it common for cabinet members to evacuate a staff like rats from a sinking ship between terms? |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
|
| Matt - Nutcan.com's MBL 12/03/2004 @ 09:47:02 PM |
|
|---|---|---|
| Actually, it is. |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
|
| Matt - Washington Bureau Chief 12/03/2004 @ 10:06:37 PM |
|
|---|---|---|
|
Clinton made quite a few changes during his two terms as well. Clinton's Cabinet Clinton replaced 7 of 14 in the two months after his re-election, Bush is 8 of 15 right now (The relativly new Dept. of Homeland Security being difference). |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
|
| Matt - Ombudsman 12/03/2004 @ 10:08:37 PM |
|
|---|---|---|
|
being the difference Sorry |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
|
| Scott - 2883 Posts 12/03/2004 @ 10:18:59 PM |
|
|---|---|---|
|
I think it is pretty common too. and matt, are you going to do anything about that "relativly" mistake. I mean, you corrected one mistake, but not the other. |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
|
| Matt - 1482 Posts 12/03/2004 @ 10:39:21 PM |
|
|---|---|---|
| In a homage to Jeremy, I'll leave that one as is. |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
|
| Jeremy - Pie Racist 12/03/2004 @ 11:29:31 PM |
|
|---|---|---|
| Clinton replaced or they left? |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
|
| Matt - Ombudsman 12/03/2004 @ 11:50:29 PM |
|
|---|---|---|
| I'm not sure on whether they left or were forced out. I suspect though that on most occasions when the President wants to replace someone, the two parties come to an "agreement" where the person leaves due to whatever reason so that all sides involved can save a little face. |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
 | Bretx0r uses Firefox (Guest) 12/04/2004 @ 02:26:58 AM |
|
|---|---|---|
| The blog this week wouldn't be the same without HL2 being mentioned, so now it is complete. HL2DM is the best next to CS, and Jeremy - I found out how to switch teams, so we could play on just about any server and just switch to the same team. You going to be around at all Saturday Alex? If so, get on AIM or I'll give you a call, I'm trying to round up some peeps to play HL2 deathmatch on the coyote server in the afternoon. (provided the admin turned FF off like I requested) |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
|
| Jeremy - I hate our freedoms 12/04/2004 @ 03:13:45 AM |
|
|---|---|---|
|
In case any of you are wondering ESPN Classic is doing 11 hours of Brett Favre tomorrow. Packer Yearbooks from 92 on, a special thing on him, and a half hour for the superbowl you didn't choke in. I can't wait until they have 5 hours of Daunte next week. ;) |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
|
| Sarah 12/04/2004 @ 12:08:20 PM |
|
|---|---|---|
| This is so freakin' awesome. I don't know how I am going to get anything done this afternoon. |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
|
| icbeast - 2098 Posts 12/04/2004 @ 01:21:04 PM |
|
|---|---|---|
| I just spent almost two hours cleaning my computer. Got rid of about 12 processes. Stupid new printer and graphics card. I should see if hl2 runs better now. |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
|
| Sarah 12/04/2004 @ 01:39:32 PM |
|
|---|---|---|
| Jeremy is a jerk |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
|
| Sarah 12/04/2004 @ 03:56:09 PM |
|
|---|---|---|
| Mckenzie looks so cute and young with short dreadlocks. :) i know he screwed us over this year, but in his rookie year he was so innocent. :) |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
|
| Jeremy - Corduroy pillows are making headlines 12/04/2004 @ 07:00:27 PM |
|
|---|---|---|
| Yes, I'm such a jerk that I let her watch 5 hours of Brett Favre. |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
|
| Matt - 1482 Posts 12/04/2004 @ 08:37:03 PM |
|
|---|---|---|
| So normally you tell her what to watch? |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
|
| Jeremy - Always thinking of, but never about, the children. 12/04/2004 @ 11:11:15 PM |
|
|---|---|---|
| No, but it was my TV. |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
|
| Scott - 2883 Posts 12/04/2004 @ 11:47:14 PM |
|
|---|---|---|
| yeah, and Nathan Poole made a wonderful catch to win a game last year. Who did they play again? Oh yeah |
Yours: | |
Vikings 14 @ Bears 24
Jeremy: A stomach punch from last season which is often forgotten about due to the debacle in Arizona is that the Vikes were mere inches from the arizona game being a non factor on a last second jump ball int in Chicago. The Vikes always always always do bad against QB's that there is no game film of, and they might see two of them in this game. There really is no conceivable way the Vikings lose this game, or it even be close, which of course means that it will come down to making or surviving a last second play.Matt: J-Wig for MVP!!! Twins 43 - Bitch Sox 21
Jon: Daunte Culpepper is an excellent quarterback. Randy Moss is the best wide receiver in the NFL.
Sarah: I hope Chicago kicks the you know what out of Minnesota, but in case that doesn't happen, I'm picking Minnesota.