NFL 2005 Season Week 5 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.
 |  |  |  | |||||
| Dolphins 14 @ Bills 20 Sun, 10/9/05 12:00pm CBS
|
Dolphins
 |
Dolphins
|
Dolphins
|
Dolphins
|
||||
| Buccaneers 12 @ Jets 14 Sun, 10/9/05 12:00pm FOX
|
Buccaneers
 |
Jets
 |
Buccaneers
|
Buccaneers
|
||||
| Saints 3 @ Packers 52 Sun, 10/9/05 12:00pm FOX
|
Packers
 |
Saints
 |
Packers
|
Packers
|
||||
| Bears 10 @ Browns 20 Sun, 10/9/05 12:00pm FOX
|
Browns
 |
Browns
|
Bears
 |
Browns
|
||||
| Seahawks 37 @ Rams 31 Sun, 10/9/05 12:00pm FOX
|
Seahawks
 |
Rams
 |
Rams
|
Seahawks
|
||||
| Titans 34 @ Texans 20 Sun, 10/9/05 12:00pm CBS
|
Titans
 |
Titans
|
Titans
|
Texans
 |
||||
| Ravens 17 @ Lions 35 Sun, 10/9/05 12:00pm CBS
|
Ravens
 |
Ravens
|
Ravens
|
Ravens
|
||||
| Patriots 31 @ Falcons 28 Sun, 10/9/05 12:00pm CBS
|
Falcons
 |
Patriots
 |
Patriots
|
Falcons
|
||||
| Colts 28 @ 49ers 3 Sun, 10/9/05 3:05pm CBS
|
Colts
 |
Colts
|
Colts
|
Colts
|
||||
| Redskins 19 @ Broncos 21 Sun, 10/9/05 3:15pm FOX
|
Broncos
 |
Broncos
|
Broncos
|
Broncos
|
||||
| Panthers 24 @ Cardinals 20 Sun, 10/9/05 3:15pm FOX
|
Panthers
 |
Panthers
|
Panthers
|
Panthers
|
||||
| Eagles 10 @ Cowboys 33 Sun, 10/9/05 3:15pm FOX
|
Eagles
 |
Eagles
|
Eagles
|
Eagles
|
||||
| Bengals 20 @ Jaguars 23 Sun, 10/9/05 7:30pm ESPN
|
Jaguars
 |
Bengals
 |
Bengals
|
Bengals
|
||||
| Steelers 24 @ Chargers 22 Sun, 10/9/05 8:00pm ESPN
|
Chargers
 |
Chargers
|
Chargers
|
Chargers
|
||||
| Week Record | 8 - 6 0.571  | 7 - 7 0.500  | 6 - 8 0.429  | 6 - 8 0.429 | ||||
| Season Record | 45 - 29 0.608 | 40 - 34 0.540 | 42 - 32 0.568 | 40 - 34 0.540 | ||||
| Lifetime Record | 542 - 332 - 1 0.619 | 477 - 397 - 1 0.545 | 525 - 349 - 1 0.600 | 530 - 344 - 1 0.606 |
Buccaneers
Saints
Browns
Rams
Titans
Lions
Falcons
Colts
Redskins
Panthers
Eagles
Bengals
Steelers
| Week: | 6 - 8 0.429 |
| Season: | 37 - 37 0.500 |
| Lifetime: | 519 - 355 - 1 0.593 |
Create an Account or Login to make your own picks!
Bengals 20 @ Jaguars 23
Jeremy: The Bengals are one of those "cinderella" teams that just start off so hot everyones talking about them so much that everyone will be rooting against them by the end of the year.Matt: Rudi Johnson better start scoring some TDs.
Jon: I could see this going either way. I'll stick with the "it" team right now over the inconsistantly good Jacksonville.
Sarah: Cincy is for real, better believe.
Steelers 24 @ Chargers 22
Jeremy: 24-14 Padres. LT accounts for 99% of the offense and kicks the field goal.Matt: I'll take the Chargers
Jon: Tough picks this week. San Diego looks decent.
Sarah: San Diego is awesome-o, Pittsburgh can't even get their officials to keep accurate time. It's quite the toss-up. But let's go with the sunny weather people.
 | Sarah - 1866 Posts 10/08/2005 @ 01:28:06 PM |
 |
|---|---|---|
| Sickening |
Yours:
 
Rated 0 times. |
|
 | Jeremy - 5109 Posts 10/08/2005 @ 04:18:29 PM |
|
|---|---|---|
|
This was my last post last week but I'll bring it over to here so people can see it. "About 3/4th of the way through the (badger) game something hit me I had to ponder. Why havent the page 3 faithful/well wishers ever gotten together for a Badger game? It makes too much sense to not happen, Madison is a Midway point between Alex, Bret, Scott, and the Staff and home to pretty much anyone else that has been here more than twice. Add to it that it's the only team in any sport at any level that we all root for in common and this needs to happen at some point." |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
|
| Jeremy - I hate our freedoms 10/08/2005 @ 04:22:11 PM |
|
|---|---|---|
|
Also the fantasy points are off a bit thanks to the never ending tweeking of the partial points by yahoo. If everyone could go through the weeks and find out where they are off that would help a lot. I know for example Scott is ahead of Sarah by a fraction of a point rather than down a point. |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
|
| Matt - 1482 Posts 10/08/2005 @ 06:42:53 PM |
|
|---|---|---|
| To answer something Sarah said in last weeks comments....... Rivas is gone too. |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
|
| Sarah 10/08/2005 @ 06:56:21 PM |
|
|---|---|---|
| oh |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
 | Anon. Nut Can Fan (Guest) 10/08/2005 @ 07:20:20 PM |
|
|---|---|---|
|
In last week's comments, Sarah said, "I mean I konw the Packers suck, but Favre=the Packers." If indeed favre equals the packers AND the packers suck, then favre sucks. Altogether..."Valeed". That one's for you scott. |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
|
| Jon - Nutcan.com's kitten expert 10/08/2005 @ 07:21:56 PM |
|
|---|---|---|
| That brilliant comment was by me. |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
|
| icbeast - The fastest way to a man's heart is with Chuck Norris's fist 10/08/2005 @ 11:21:19 PM |
|
|---|---|---|
|
lol (in an insanely scary way) at joe johnson and jamal reynolds counting 5.5 mil on the packers cap. sherman's legacy grows. i can't blame stocco for this one. he and the rest of the offense did more than their fair share. the defense was just pathetic today. and so ends any title chances for this year. i'm suprised no one took arizona or dallas. |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
|
| Scott - 2883 Posts 10/09/2005 @ 12:48:07 AM |
|
|---|---|---|
| robert furgeson is actually getting paid more than Donald Driver, does that confuse anyone? |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
|
| Scott - Dog fighting is sick. Don't be a Vick. 10/09/2005 @ 12:50:25 AM |
|
|---|---|---|
| Jon, your argument would only work if suck=packers. But as it is, it is simply "Packers suck". ESPN said at somepoint this week that the Vikings have a big advantage in the NFC North this week simply because they don't play. That's funny. |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
|
| Jeremy - I believe virtually everything I read. 10/09/2005 @ 03:02:26 AM |
|
|---|---|---|
| well so far both teams to earn 1st place outright in the north did so in their bye |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
|
| Matt - 1482 Posts 10/09/2005 @ 11:38:05 AM |
|
|---|---|---|
|
Since the Vikings have a bye this week, I figure people will need some way to pass the time, so here is your Official Week 5 Trivia Question: In 1976 this man became the highest ranked U.S. Military officer in the history of the United States. Who is he? First one to get it right gets to be honorary MBL for a day. |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
|
| Sarah - 1866 Posts 10/09/2005 @ 12:27:33 PM |
|
|---|---|---|
| 1st rushing td of the season - I feel good, anyone else? |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
|
| Sarah - 1866 Posts 10/09/2005 @ 12:35:14 PM |
|
|---|---|---|
| Al Harris loves picking off former Packer QBs, and I love to watch. |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
|
| Jeremy - 5109 Posts 10/09/2005 @ 12:35:47 PM |
|
|---|---|---|
| Sarah just went ultrasonic. |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
|
| Scott - No, I did not change your screen saver settings 10/09/2005 @ 12:44:45 PM |
|
|---|---|---|
|
12-4 BABY!!!! 12-4 and it is George Washington |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
|
| Matt - Ombudsman 10/09/2005 @ 12:47:47 PM |
|
|---|---|---|
| It is indeed George Washington, unfortunately since Scott is not an official Page 3 writer he is ineligible for the prize. |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
|
| Sarah 10/09/2005 @ 12:54:34 PM |
|
|---|---|---|
| 1976? How does that work? I was trying to find the answer. Man I love this game!!!! |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
|
| Matt - Nutcan.com's MBL 10/09/2005 @ 01:01:46 PM |
|
|---|---|---|
|
Your problem Sarah, is that you underestimate the power of Gerald Ford. "In 1976, by Act of Congress, Washington was posthumously appointed to the rank General of the Armies" and "By executive order of President Gerald Ford, it was also determined that George Washington would always remain senior and could never be outranked by any other officer of the U.S. military." |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
|
| Sarah 10/09/2005 @ 01:02:00 PM |
|
|---|---|---|
| Nevermind, I had it explained to me. GO PACK GO!!! |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
|
| Sarah - 1866 Posts 10/09/2005 @ 01:07:07 PM |
|
|---|---|---|
| Take that McKenzie |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
|
| Scott - Resident Tech Support 10/09/2005 @ 01:07:15 PM |
|
|---|---|---|
| He was named a 6-star general. Packers are the Best Team in the League!!! |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
|
| Jeremy - 5109 Posts 10/09/2005 @ 01:16:12 PM |
|
|---|---|---|
|
He wasnt actually. I'm pretty sure feet don't bend that way. |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
|
| Sarah 10/09/2005 @ 01:16:12 PM |
|
|---|---|---|
| I feel ill. |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
|
| Matt - 1482 Posts 10/09/2005 @ 01:18:23 PM |
|
|---|---|---|
|
I don't think that he is officially 6-stars. From what I've read, the ranks of General of the Armies (Washington, Pershing) and Admiral of the Navy (Dewey) are superior to 5-stars and equivalent to 6-stars, but its never been decided officially that they are 6-stars. If that makes any sense at all. |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
|
| Jeremy - 5109 Posts 10/09/2005 @ 01:29:00 PM |
|
|---|---|---|
|
Yes. > 5 but not >= 6 That was a 13 point hookup. |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
|
| Sarah 10/09/2005 @ 01:32:03 PM |
|
|---|---|---|
| So Davenport is hurt, Harris is hurt. |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
|
| Sarah - 1866 Posts 10/09/2005 @ 01:33:33 PM |
|
|---|---|---|
| Harrington sux |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
|
| Jeremy - 5109 Posts 10/09/2005 @ 01:33:47 PM |
|
|---|---|---|
| How long is Joey F. Harrington going to be allowed to destroy that team. |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
|
| Jeremy - 5109 Posts 10/09/2005 @ 01:41:34 PM |
|
|---|---|---|
| Ronde Barber threw a punch, missed, and hit a ref, and WASN'T ejected?!? |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
|
| Sarah - 1866 Posts 10/09/2005 @ 02:11:53 PM |
|
|---|---|---|
| When I spend my vacations in Green Bay, I spend at least 3 hours on Mike Holmgren Way, just wondering the street, looking at it in awe. Truly awesome. And don't get me started on Brett Favre Pass. Well, first of all, it took me like 4 hours to find it and then I spent 5 hours on it, just basking in its glory. |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
|
| Jeremy - 5109 Posts 10/09/2005 @ 02:17:41 PM |
|
|---|---|---|
| BF Rule! |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
|
| Sarah 10/09/2005 @ 02:32:11 PM |
|
|---|---|---|
| Rodgers on the 3 yard line, yea that doesn't spell trouble. |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
|
| Sarah 10/09/2005 @ 02:35:23 PM |
|
|---|---|---|
| Ok, Harrington has had 4 games this year, he's thrown for 500 yards, that's only 125 a game. That's not normal. |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
|
| Sarah - 1866 Posts 10/09/2005 @ 02:46:31 PM |
|
|---|---|---|
| I have that man's autograph! |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
|
| Scott - 2883 Posts 10/09/2005 @ 03:27:05 PM |
|
|---|---|---|
|
I really hope you're not serious about the Brett Favre rule when the defensive linemen actually shoved the qb well after the ball was gone. It wasn't like he was trying to slow down but couldn't, or that he just ran into Favre. I think according to some people, you can't actually call roughing the passer against the green bay QB. I'm actually going to start calling roughing the passer against Favre the "Viking Rule", because it is a rule that Viking fans will call it the Brett Favre rule no matter what. But, now that the Packers have an equal number of wins as the Vikings I can start to give good reason why the Packers the better team. 52-3 versus 33-16 is a start. Why would they bring in Rodgers in the beginning of the 4th quarter and have him throw the ball once? |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
|
| Jeremy - Super Chocolate Bear 10/09/2005 @ 03:44:33 PM |
|
|---|---|---|
|
To be fair: A) No most QBs will NOT get that call for just being ran into after letting the ball go. Watch Daunte, McNabb or Leftwich if you want to see what doesn't get called if the refs don't feel they have to protect them. Was it unnessisary? Sure Could he have not done it? Probobly. But that isn't the question. More often then not on any long pass the announcer will add "and look at the hit (fill qb name in here) took" and it will be something much worse. B) The Vikings didn't get to play the 2nd string Saints. |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
|
| Jeremy - Super Chocolate Bear 10/09/2005 @ 03:53:00 PM |
|
|---|---|---|
|
c) I posted that when the flag was thrown because I had a feeling it was coming. d) I'm sort of kidding on the square about the BF rule. e) I just posted it to get a rise. |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
|
| Jeremy - 5109 Posts 10/09/2005 @ 04:07:41 PM |
|
|---|---|---|
| f) They may have the same number of wins but the Vikings and Packers "non common" oppenents are Vikings: Atlanta(Away) and Cincinnati(Away), Packers: Lions(Away) and Browns(Home), Carolina(Away). Not really a comparison there. A combined 5-1 vs 1-6 headed into the week taking away the victories over the packers or vikings. |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
|
| Jon - 1359 Posts 10/09/2005 @ 05:09:37 PM |
|
|---|---|---|
|
first of all, the favre sucks comment does hold up because it wasn't favre = sucks. Second, "on the square"???? |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
|
| Jon - 1359 Posts 10/09/2005 @ 05:16:18 PM |
|
|---|---|---|
| third, if Joe johnson is counting that much against the packers' cap, imagine what he's counting against the cap for the Hawks. |
Yours: | |
Saints 3 @ Packers 52
Jeremy: Green Bay moves into a tie for first with everyone else, and the sky stops falling.Matt: The Vikings beat the Saints, the Saints will beat the Packers, therefore, by the transitive property the Vikings will beat the Packers this year. Q.E.D.
Jon: I'm going with Green Bay on this one. Their turnaround probably starts this week.
Sarah: Green Bay is for real, better believe. No, no, that's not the case. But if MN, who's been blown away in all their games, can beat NO, then we, who have lost our last 3 games by a combined pt total of 6 can beat NO. That's how these things work. Or that's how they better work damnit.