NFL 2004 Season Wildcard Weekend 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.
 |  |  |  | |||||
| Rams 27 @ Seahawks 20 Sat, 1/8/05 3:30pm ABC
|
Seahawks
 |
Seahawks
|
Rams
 |
Rams
|
||||
| Giants 20 @ Chargers 17 Sat, 1/8/05 8:00pm ABC
|
Chargers
 |
Chargers
|
Chargers
|
Chargers
|
||||
| Broncos 24 @ Colts 49 Sun, 1/9/05 12:00pm CBS
|
Colts
 |
Colts
|
Colts
|
Colts
|
||||
| Vikings 31 @ Packers 17 Sun, 1/9/05 3:30pm FOX
|
Vikings
 |
Vikings
|
Vikings
|
Packers
 |
||||
| Week Record | 2 - 2 0.500  | 2 - 2 0.500 | 3 - 1 0.750  | 2 - 2 0.500 | ||||
| Season Record | 160 - 100 0.615 | 144 - 116 0.554 | 162 - 98 0.623 | 162 - 98 0.623 | ||||
| Lifetime Record | 493 - 300 - 1 0.621 | 436 - 357 - 1 0.549 | 478 - 315 - 1 0.602 | 484 - 309 - 1 0.610 |
Chargers
Colts
Packers
| Week: | 1 - 3 0.250 |
| Season: | 152 - 108 0.585 |
| Lifetime: | 477 - 316 - 1 0.601 |
Create an Account or Login to make your own picks!
Giants 20 @ Chargers 17
Jeremy: J E T S Jets Jets Jets. They are a good team, but San Diego is having that cinderella type season, and you have to ride that out.Matt: Curtis Martin was the steal of the draft
Jon: Here's the thing about the Jets. They've won every game that they should have won, namely, all the games against clearly lesser opponents. But not too many more. San Diego has a good denfense and will be playing at home. Tomlinson is pretty decent too.
Sarah: San Diego has been quite the team this year. I have been impressed. They have gone into some hard places and beat the other teams quite soundly. I am hoping that they at least advance past the first round. Go Bolts!
Broncos 24 @ Colts 49
Jeremy: Leading the team is Mr Inconsistancy himself, Jake "Stop calling the the next Joe Montana already" Plummer. Like above it's hard to go agaist the once in a blue moon rides and go against Manning.Matt: Indianapolis 34 - Denver 33
Jon: I think Denver wins this year's award for least predictable team from week to week. This team is one of those marginal teams that probably will get blown out against the Colts.
Sarah: Will Denver get beaten a million to zero again? It's hard to predict how Jake the Snake will act on any given Sunday. A lot of people have predicted that the Colts will win the Super Bowl. I don't buy that. Yea, they have a good offense, but their defense is not good.
Vikings 31 @ Packers 17
Jeremy: It's hard to have any faith left at this point. I'm not a fan of the phrase "backing in" because like I've said before I've never understood why people think week 17 is any more important in the end than week one. However the Vikes have been on a downward spiral since Moss and the entire offensive line, and their backups, got hurt. They crash landed somewhere in the vicinity of Washington DC last week. It's been a long time since I've been happy with them, and to be honest outside of the division rival "anything can happen" thing I don't see it happening. Like I'd pick against them though. I got harrassed by so many people over the last couple weeks and it would somewhat salvage the season if they got their commuppance. There is much Green and Gold on the high road with Denny Green, put it that way. Here's hoping.Matt: The Packers suck, and so does football
Jon: I don't know if I could be any less excited about this game. The Vikings are playing their worst football of the season lately and if the NFC weren't such a craps shoot, I'd predict a severe pummeling in the next round even if they did win. And it's actually hard for me to imagine them winning. Not because the Packers are far superior, especially head-to-head, but because Minnesota is just really bad way too often. Officially though, there's no way I'm going to pick the Packers. It's the Vikings, people. And actually, I like their chances now that I think of it.
Sarah: Ay Carumba! Why? Why????? I didn't think this was going to happen, but then last Sunday some strange events took place, and here we are. I am definitely not sure what to think about this game. The Packers just have to come out on top, no questions asked. I think they have the momentum and the team camaraderie to do that.
 | Scott - 2882 Posts 01/06/2005 @ 01:47:42 PM |
 |
|---|---|---|
|
i must say, there was heavy use of the phrase "backing into the playoffs" after last years situation with the Packers, but I don't like the idea even if it might apply to the Vikings. I have confidence in the Packers. But at this point, I am actually more confident in their abilities indoors than I am outside where toughness is key. This does not apply to the game against the Vikings, but this means if the Packers win, I am very confident in their ability to win in Atlanta. |
Yours:
 
Rated 0 times. |
|
 | Jeremy - No one's gay for Moleman 01/06/2005 @ 06:00:27 PM |
|
|---|---|---|
|
Yeah but last year the Vikings were in first place for litterally every second of the season, it was a bizzre, and much different, situation. I've said it this year about the Vikings too. However when you think about the fact that in week 16 they were playing for the division and the #3 seed it is kind of silly to say they "backed in". |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
|
| Sarah - 1859 Posts 01/06/2005 @ 06:51:38 PM |
|
|---|---|---|
| I wish I could say Matt's comments never get old, but I can't. |
Yours:
Total:  Rated 1 times. |
|
|
| Scott - 2882 Posts 01/06/2005 @ 07:16:53 PM |
|
|---|---|---|
|
The point I was trying to make is that no matter what the situation really, the term is pointless. In any situation, as long as you win enough games to make the playoffs, you make the playoffs. Enough talk of this. William Henderson is an all-pro. It's about time. I think he's deserved about 3 of these, but I'm happy and I'm proud of him. I do think a few of the packer o linemen got snubbed in not even being close in votes. What are you gonna do. St. Louis, Jets, Indy, Packers |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
|
| icbeast - Talk to me Goose 01/06/2005 @ 10:28:21 PM |
|
|---|---|---|
|
Stephen Jackson ran for 29 yards on 10 carries last week. In fact the Rams had a total of 47 rushing yards on 19 carries. And if you don't count the scrimmage against the Eagles JV team, Jackson has 29 yards in the Rams last 3 games. He is really "clicking". I'll take the Seahawks at home and looking to make up for their letdown last time St Louis was in town. The Jets beat the Chargers in San Diego in week 2. A repeat this week? I think not. The main reason the Jets won that game was because they forced 3 turnovers and gave up none of their own, and part of the reason for that was Brees was playing with a concussion. A clear-minded Brees, a running back who is actually "clicking", and the NFL's 3rd ranked rush defense will lead the SuperChargers to a win this Saturday. The Indianapolis Peyton Manning's will destroy the Denver Broncos. Actually it could be close if Plummer has a good game. Indy has the NFL's second worst pass defense in terms of yards. The problem for the Broncos is Indy is 9th in picks, 3rd in sacks, and they have some super-fast pass rushers who will be able to track down the Scrambling Snake. No chance. And then there's the game. The third matchup this season, the first ever playoff meeting. Current weather.com forecast says right around 30 and mostly cloudy. Advantage? That's right, fans attending the game. These two teams are very comparable, it's no surprise that the two meetings were decided by a total of 6 points. Grade A passing games, decent rushing attacks, no rush defense, no pass defense, no tackling skills, and ho-hum special teams. I expect the same thing this time as the last two. Biggest question for me? Will the Vikings be mentally prepared? As we all know, "90 percent of the game is half mental." Different sport, yes, but still there physical talents should have resulted in more than 8 wins. As too who wins the game, I'll remind you how the first two were won. Ryan Longwell field goals. Cold weather, solid kicker in his prime with a long of 53 who's 8 of 11 from 40+ or 44 year old with a long of 48 who's 4 of 6 from 40+? GB by 3. |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
|
| icbeast - The fastest way to a man's heart is with Chuck Norris's fist 01/06/2005 @ 10:48:45 PM |
|
|---|---|---|
| As discussions of who should be All-Pro or had the better season or breakdowns of matchups continue around the world, it annoys me to no end that people place any emphasis whatsoever or conference statistics. I don't care if some team had the 5th best offense in their conference, tell me where they stood in the NFL. This isn't baseball where each team plays a couple of interleague games and then each team in its own league at least oh I don't know for sure I think 6 or so times is about minimum. In the NFL, teams don't even play every other team in their conference. I just think using NFL rankings provides a better overall comparison than conference statistics. I'd try and do some mathematical mumbo jumbo but that would be too much work, and I graduated so I don't use math anymore. |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
|
| Matt - 1478 Posts 01/07/2005 @ 11:50:04 AM |
|
|---|---|---|
|
Sportsman of the Year Doug Mientkiewicz isn't acting very sportsman like. Sox 1B won't give up ball caught for last Series out |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
|
| icbeast - 2092 Posts 01/07/2005 @ 01:00:31 PM |
|
|---|---|---|
|
Quote of the day: "And how can you possibly make a case for wild-card opponents Green Bay and Minnesota when each plays worse pass defense than a floozie in a bar?" - Skip Bayless |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
|
| Jon - 1 bajillion posts 01/07/2005 @ 01:51:50 PM |
|
|---|---|---|
|
The Rams offense is clicking, not Jackson specifically. A close inspection of my comment will show that that was the message. Also, in each of the last two games, Jackson averaged more yards per carry than Faulk did, so yes I think my statement was perfectly valid and quite accurate also. |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
|
| Scott - 2882 Posts 01/07/2005 @ 02:43:36 PM |
|
|---|---|---|
| valeed |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
 | Micah - 367 Posts 01/07/2005 @ 04:40:08 PM |
|
|---|---|---|
|
Quality News Reporting of the Day The Milwaukee Journal-Sentinal has a front page, above the fold, 2-page article on Brett Favres advantage in hand size in the upcoming game. The writing is fantastic and I suggest you all check it out. Daunte Culpepper....very small hands. George Bush John Kerry Bill Clinton Packers Vikings lucky democrats republcians |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
|
| Sarah 01/07/2005 @ 05:47:34 PM |
|
|---|---|---|
| Oh that Dougie |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
|
| Scott - 2882 Posts 01/07/2005 @ 06:46:22 PM |
|
|---|---|---|
| well it's good to see that sports writers aren't running out of things to write about. |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
|
| icbeast - 2092 Posts 01/07/2005 @ 10:12:32 PM |
|
|---|---|---|
| The fact that Faulk is having the worst (maybe second worst, 96 wasn't so good either) season of his career means that Jackson is not doing anything special by averaging more yards per carry than Faulk. The stats for the Eagles game are in the books, so I guess you can make your statement and convince yourself by looking at them, but I for one place a big fat * next to those stats since the Eagles didn't really care or try. I'm not saying the Rams offense is playing badly, just that Jackson doesn't deserve much credit for Bulger throwing for 450 yards and 3 TDs last week in a game they won by 3 points after the Jets missed a game-winning field goal in OT. |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
|
| Scott - Dog fighting is sick. Don't be a Vick. 01/07/2005 @ 10:31:51 PM |
|
|---|---|---|
| but Faulk played in that game and did a lot worse than Jackson. Jackson averaged almost twice as many yards in that game. If faulk had not played at all then that would be different, but he did and got stopped by a team that apparently wasn't trying. I still support jon's claim. |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
|
| icbeast - 2092 Posts 01/07/2005 @ 10:45:41 PM |
|
|---|---|---|
|
Maybe I just don't understand the claim. Is it that Jackson is doing better than Faulk? I would agree with that. I wouldn't credit Jackson with much else though. He didn't even play in 2 of their last 4 games. He has 2 games with 65 yards or more. If the Rams are going to win it will take another 400+ yard game from Bulger. And if anyone thinks that the Eagles, as a team and organization on the whole, tried to win in their last 2 games, I suggest you seek professional help as soon as possible. |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
|
| Jon - 1353 Posts 01/08/2005 @ 05:01:28 AM |
|
|---|---|---|
|
The claim is that the Rams offense is doing well and especially so now that Jackson has a significant role in the offense. He brings a lot of talent to the table. I don't care what defense they play. Oh and I said that Jackson was the best running back to ever play and will singlehandedly beat the seahawks and all remaining playoff teams. |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
|
| Scott - No, I did not change your screen saver settings 01/08/2005 @ 09:39:01 AM |
|
|---|---|---|
| wait, Jon....I don't think that's what you said. |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
|
| Scott - 2882 Posts 01/08/2005 @ 11:41:14 AM |
|
|---|---|---|
|
get this.... The Mike Holmgren Packers were 5-9 against the Vikings. The Mike Sherman Packers are 7-3 against the Vikings. Interesting, considering most people will say that Mike Holmgren was the better coach. And if the Packers win, this will be the first 4 game winning streak for either team in the series since 1992-93 when the Vikings beat the Packers 4 games in a row. There's a lot at stake in this game. |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
|
| Scott - If you aren't enough without it, you'll never be enough with it. 01/08/2005 @ 11:45:32 AM |
|
|---|---|---|
| oh, and I've used the term "backing into something" on teams that I've played on before, youth hockey and such. It kinda made sense to me then, I think it has to do with momentum. If you are winning games at the end of the season, that means your team is clicking and playing well. If your team loses games at the end of the season and gets into the playoffs because other teams lose as well, it doesn't take away from the fact that that team made the playoffs, but there may be a reason why that team was losing at the end of the season. The Packers are also the 2nd hottest team in the league, behind only the Pittsburgh Steelers. |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
|
| Scott - Resident Tech Support 01/08/2005 @ 07:06:08 PM |
|
|---|---|---|
| talk about an evenly matched game. Too bad Seattle had 90 yards of penalties. I didn't see the game on tv however, I watched the last 8:00 over the internet, with the refresh button. Pretty thrilling |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
|
| Scott - Resident Tech Support 01/08/2005 @ 08:46:28 PM |
|
|---|---|---|
| what, people graduate and suddenly they have lives or something? Who'da thought that the first Vikings-Packers playoff game in history would only yield 20-some pregame comments? |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
|
| Jeremy - 5089 Posts 01/08/2005 @ 09:42:53 PM |
|
|---|---|---|
| I think we've said everything there is to say, and nobody is in a position to be cocky about anything. That and we're all apprehensive about it. The way I've been harrassed after a normal sweep I don't want to think about what will happen if there is a third, and I think on the other side they are thinking the first 2 don't matter if the Vikes get this one. I think everyone will be collectively holding thier breath until about 7ish tomorrow. |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
|
| Jeremy - 5089 Posts 01/08/2005 @ 09:47:10 PM |
|
|---|---|---|
| As for the Holmgren/Sherman thing have the Vikes even had a winning season, outside of last year, since he's been the coach? |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
|
| Scott - 2882 Posts 01/08/2005 @ 10:22:38 PM |
|
|---|---|---|
| how about the end of that chargers game. What do you think about that roughing the passer call to extend the chargers drive on 4th down? i think it was a good call. |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
|
| Matt - 1478 Posts 01/08/2005 @ 10:44:31 PM |
|
|---|---|---|
| It was a good call |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
|
| Jeremy - Interslice District Manager 01/08/2005 @ 10:58:16 PM |
|
|---|---|---|
|
Nate makes the FG and that is the BFR heard round the world. Now we'll see if it still is or if it's forgotten about in a week. I don't like calls changing the game so drastically, but there was no reason to take him down...but damn. |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
|
| Jeremy - The cake is a lie!! 01/08/2005 @ 11:01:52 PM |
|
|---|---|---|
| To clarify I meant I dont like calls on things that dont really affect the game to effect the game...if that makes any sense. |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
|
| Scott - 2882 Posts 01/09/2005 @ 12:23:58 AM |
|
|---|---|---|
| but did you not see the obvious blow to the head? If someone doesn't want to have a call affect the game, don't cheapshot the QB. That call is a MUST call. That could have been the last play of the Super Bowl, that is the definition of the call and absolutely has to be called. A good call is a good call. |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
|
| Jon - 1000000 posts (and counting!) 01/09/2005 @ 03:14:01 AM |
|
|---|---|---|
|
Sunday's Viking Packer game should be referred to as the Minnesota vs. Green Bay game brought to you by Herman Edwards and the Jets coaching staff. Let me explain. To harp on something that I know Jeremy and I feel strongly about (and I'm not quite sure how Matt and Sarah feel about it, so I won't implicate them either way), it all comes down to going for two after a touchdown. In week 17, the Jets scored a touchdown to go up 26-21 with 1:12 to go in the THIRD quarter. Instead of going for one to put them up by six, they went for two. And missed. St. Louis then scored a touchdown, went for two, made it, and the Jets needed a field goal to tie. Now, lets look at what may have happened if the Jets went for one rather than two. To do this, we'll assume a few things, which sometimes can be pretty dangerous, although in this case I don't think it's too implausible. If New York kicks the extra point, they go ahead by six. Now when the Rams score the touchdown with about five minutes to go in the game, they would tie. I'd assume they would then go for one, since a two point advantage wouldn't be worth the risk. The Jets would then kick the field goal to win the game as time runs out rather than to put it into overtime. Now obviously all these things aren't completely independent and maybe the play calls would have been different, blah blah, blah. But the scenario I presented probably wouldn't have changed the St. Louis play calling or time management strategy much. Obviously what if's are basically inherently flawed, but I don't think it's a big stretch by any means if you come to grips with that. Also, the thing about "presented by Herman Edwards, etc." really isn't accurate because it was only one of the many factors that got this matchup to happen. It just happened to be one of the more obvious ways it could have been easily avoided. Oh and if you didn't catch why it changes the matchup, it would have eliminated the Rams and then the Saints of New Orleans would have made the playoffs and been the sixth seed and played Green Bay. |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
|
| Sarah - 1859 Posts 01/09/2005 @ 09:32:08 AM |
|
|---|---|---|
| AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!! Today's the day! |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
|
| Scott - Prince Fielder, the largest vegetarian since Stegosaurus 01/09/2005 @ 09:40:51 AM |
|
|---|---|---|
| so, are you saying that going for 2 is always pointless? It seemed like it made decent sense in that game, but I could see the problem of which you speak. |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
|
| Jeremy - 5089 Posts 01/09/2005 @ 12:13:11 PM |
|
|---|---|---|
|
I didn't say they shouldn't have caled it. I just wish "punishment" calls, unlike calling PI or holding, which can actually effect the play, couldn't have such an impact on the game. Going for 2 is a last minute thing in a "must" situation. I don't know how many times I've seen a team go too early, miss it and have the 1 point be a huge difference in the end, or end up not needing the point anyway. It just isn't worth the risk until very late in the game. |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
|
| Scott - 2882 Posts 01/09/2005 @ 01:04:04 PM |
|
|---|---|---|
| ok, i see the point of the roughing the passer thing, and I kind of see your point. In that kind of situation, the refs hands are tied. In hockey, cheap shots after the whistle and stuff equivalent to something like roughing the passer are often treated as punishing just the player who committed the penalty. I'm not sure if that would work in football, but it is something that might merrit some thought. However, I will rarely defend a defensive player who roughs the passer. But I now understand the gripe. |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
|
| Scott - Prince Fielder, the largest vegetarian since Stegosaurus 01/09/2005 @ 01:07:15 PM |
|
|---|---|---|
| I went 2-0 yesterday. Nobody picked the jets. I'm probably the only one. None of the ESPN guys picked the jets, none picked the broncos, and none picked the vikings. |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
|
| Jeremy - Broadcast in stunning 1080i 01/09/2005 @ 01:16:23 PM |
|
|---|---|---|
| Watching the Colts it's hard to beleive the Vikings lost to them on a last second fg without Moss. |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
|
| Scott - Prince Fielder, the largest vegetarian since Stegosaurus 01/09/2005 @ 01:19:18 PM |
|
|---|---|---|
| referring to how good the colts are? |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
|
| Scott - Prince Fielder, the largest vegetarian since Stegosaurus 01/09/2005 @ 01:23:54 PM |
|
|---|---|---|
| dang |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
|
| Scott - Resident Tech Support 01/09/2005 @ 01:28:53 PM |
|
|---|---|---|
| when did Indy get a defense? |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
|
| Scott - 2882 Posts 01/09/2005 @ 01:41:45 PM |
|
|---|---|---|
|
you have to make this reference: I think Jake Plummer is actually a distant relative of Frank Reich. |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
|
| Scott - If you aren't enough without it, you'll never be enough with it. 01/09/2005 @ 01:57:35 PM |
|
|---|---|---|
|
Peyton Manning.....360 passing yards in the first half. Broncos Offense....103 total yards in the first half. |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
|
| Sarah - 1859 Posts 01/09/2005 @ 03:26:44 PM |
|
|---|---|---|
| Ok, let's go people! |
Yours: | |
Rams 27 @ Seahawks 20
Jeremy: Two teams going for a sweep + 1 this year. This would be an easy call if I had any faith in the Seahawks. But we'll see before the big one if the third time is the charm.Matt: Pass
Jon: Maybe the toughest call of all these games (excluding the "big" game this week), but in a sense I never really considered the Seahawks for any length of time. St. Louis is clicking offensively, especially with Jackson running the ball.
Sarah: Well, I am sure these two teams are really sick of each other. Seattle was not that impressive this year. (not like any of the NFC was, but whatever) Holmgren is just destined to never win another play off game. Nice comment by Shaun Alexander. Is the rushing title really that big of a deal? He lost out by one yard, big deal. When they went with the QB sneak, there was over 4:00 left in the game, Holmgren just assumed they would get it back and be in a position to run again.