NFL 2007 Season Week 2 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 3 @ Steelers 26 Final Sun, 9/16/07 12:00pm CBS
|
Steelers
 |
Steelers
|
Steelers
|
Steelers
|
||||
| 49ers 17 @ Rams 16 Final Sun, 9/16/07 12:00pm FOX
|
Rams
 |
Rams
|
Rams
|
Rams
|
||||
| Bengals 45 @ Browns 51 Final Sun, 9/16/07 12:00pm CBS
|
Bengals
 |
Bengals
|
Bengals
|
Bengals
|
||||
| Texans 34 @ Panthers 21 Final Sun, 9/16/07 12:00pm CBS
|
Panthers
 |
Panthers
|
Panthers
|
Panthers
|
||||
| Colts 22 @ Titans 20 Final Sun, 9/16/07 12:00pm CBS
|
Colts
 |
Colts
|
Colts
|
Colts
|
||||
| Saints 14 @ Buccaneers 31 Final Sun, 9/16/07 12:00pm FOX
|
Saints
 |
Saints
|
Saints
|
Saints
|
||||
| Falcons 7 @ Jaguars 13 Final Sun, 9/16/07 12:00pm FOX
|
Jaguars
 |
Jaguars
|
Jaguars
|
Jaguars
|
||||
| Packers 35 @ Giants 13 Final Sun, 9/16/07 12:00pm FOX
|
Giants
 |
Giants
|
Giants
|
Packers
 |
||||
| Vikings 17 @ Lions 20 F / OT Sun, 9/16/07 3:05pm FOX
|
Vikings
 |
Vikings
|
Vikings
|
Vikings
|
||||
| Cowboys 37 @ Dolphins 20 Final Sun, 9/16/07 3:05pm FOX
|
Cowboys
 |
Cowboys
|
Cowboys
|
Cowboys
|
||||
| Seahawks 20 @ Cardinals 23 Final Sun, 9/16/07 3:05pm FOX
|
Seahawks
 |
Seahawks
|
Seahawks
|
Seahawks
|
||||
| Raiders 20 @ Broncos 23 F / OT Sun, 9/16/07 3:15pm CBS
|
Broncos
 |
Broncos
|
Broncos
|
Broncos
|
||||
| Chiefs 10 @ Bears 20 Final Sun, 9/16/07 3:15pm CBS
|
Bears
 |
Bears
|
Bears
|
Bears
|
||||
| Jets 13 @ Ravens 20 Final Sun, 9/16/07 3:15pm CBS
|
Ravens
 |
Ravens
|
Ravens
|
Jets
 |
||||
| Chargers 14 @ Patriots 38 Final Sun, 9/16/07 7:15pm NBC
|
Patriots
 |
Chargers
 |
Patriots
|
Chargers
|
||||
| Redskins 20 @ Eagles 12 Final Mon, 9/17/07 7:30pm ESPN
|
Eagles
 |
Eagles
|
Eagles
|
Eagles
|
||||
| Week Record | 8 - 8 0.500  | 7 - 9 0.438  | 8 - 8 0.500 | 7 - 9 0.438 | ||||
| Season Record | 20 - 12 0.625 | 18 - 14 0.562 | 21 - 11 0.656 | 20 - 12 0.625 | ||||
| Lifetime Record | 862 - 504 - 1 0.631 | 781 - 585 - 1 0.571 | 841 - 525 - 1 0.615 | 831 - 535 - 1 0.608 |
Rams
Bengals
Panthers
Colts
Saints
Jaguars
Packers
Vikings
Cowboys
Seahawks
Broncos
Bears
Jets
Chargers
Eagles
| Week: | 7 - 9 0.438 |
| Season: | 17 - 15 0.531 |
| Lifetime: | 186 - 113 0.622 |
49ers
Bengals
Panthers
Colts
Saints
Jaguars
Packers
Lions
Cowboys
Seahawks
Broncos
Bears
Jets
Patriots
Redskins
| Week: | 11 - 5 0.688 |
| Season: | 22 - 10 0.688 |
| Lifetime: | 172 - 126 0.577 |
49ers
Bengals
Panthers
Colts
Saints
Jaguars
Packers
Lions
Cowboys
Seahawks
Broncos
Bears
Ravens
Patriots
Eagles
| Week: | 11 - 5 0.688 |
| Season: | 22 - 9 0.710 |
| Lifetime: | 153 - 85 0.643 |
Rams
Bengals
Panthers
Colts
Saints
Jaguars
Giants
Lions
Cowboys
Seahawks
Broncos
Bears
Ravens
Patriots
Eagles
| Week: | 9 - 7 0.562 |
| Season: | 21 - 11 0.656 |
| Lifetime: | 178 - 118 0.601 |
49ers
Bengals
Panthers
Colts
Buccaneers
Jaguars
Packers
Vikings
Cowboys
Seahawks
Raiders
Bears
Jets
Patriots
Redskins
| Week: | 10 - 6 0.625 |
| Season: | 19 - 13 0.594 |
| Lifetime: | 19 - 13 0.594 |
Rams
Bengals
Texans
Colts
Saints
Falcons
Packers
Lions
Dolphins
Cardinals
Broncos
Bears
Ravens
Chargers
Eagles
| Week: | 8 - 8 0.500 |
| Season: | 20 - 12 0.625 |
| Lifetime: | 20 - 12 0.625 |
![IMG_3063[1].jpg](/images/thumbnail.php?height=18&file=/uploads/IMG_3063[1].jpg)
Rams
Bengals
Panthers
Colts
Saints
Jaguars
Giants
Vikings
Cowboys
Cardinals
Broncos
Bears
Ravens
Patriots
Eagles
| Week: | 9 - 7 0.562 |
| Season: | 9 - 7 0.562 |
| Lifetime: | 9 - 7 0.562 |
Rams
Bengals
Panthers
Colts
Saints
Jaguars
Giants
Lions
Cowboys
Seahawks
Broncos
Bears
Ravens
Patriots
Eagles
| Week: | 9 - 7 0.562 |
| Season: | 20 - 12 0.625 |
| Lifetime: | 20 - 12 0.625 |
Create an Account or Login to make your own picks!
Vikings 17 @ Lions 20
Jeremy: Joey Harrington and the Lions. That used to just count as 1 win.Matt: I'm setting the over/under on number of weeks until A-Pete blows out a knee at 6.
Jon: It's possible that the NFC North is full of one-dimensional teams. This one should be exciting. But in a weird way. When Detroit has the ball, we get to see which squad is better. When Minnesota has the ball, we'll probably just see which team is worse. This early in the season, I'm probably way off on my assessment, but that's what it looks like.
Sarah: The Lions eeked out a win against an awful Raiders team. I just switched my pick to the Vikings. I hope that doesn't come back to bite me.
Chargers 14 @ Patriots 38
Jeremy: The football world is shocked by news that all the joking around was in fact real, Bill Belichick has indeed been stealing his wardrobe from homeless people.Matt: You know, I don't really like either of these teams, but I'll go with the Chargers, 24 - 22.
Jon: I really want to choose San Diego. Not really because I want them to win, but more because I don't want to assume New England is as good as we all think they are. Plus, with the whole video taping thing maybe Belichick is actually not focused like he usually would be. But their defense is always good. Almost always. And their offense obviously has talent. San Diego has a new coach. I won't be surprised unless it's a blowout, but I'll pick New England.
Sarah: O those Patriots make me so mad. LT was mad last year when the Patriots beat them in the playoffs, you don't think he's going to run all over those jerks now? Oh there will be some paybacks now bee's.
Redskins 20 @ Eagles 12
Jeremy: Someone should have informed the Eagles that they aren't really even required to have a punt returner.Matt: I pass.
Jon: One bad week isn't going to convince me the Eagles are bad. I think Washington could win this. But I'm leaning toward Philadelphia. Leaning Toward Philadelphia. Wasn't that the sequel to Sleepless in Seattle? No?
Sarah: Maybe the Eagles need some sort of special teams help, just offering some tips.
 | Jeremy - 5014 Posts 09/14/2007 @ 10:43:06 AM |
 |
|---|---|---|
Lots of variety in our picks so far.  |
Yours:
 
Total:  Rated 1 times. |
|
 | Scott - Ma'am, can you make sure your computer is turned on? 09/14/2007 @ 12:16:08 PM |
|
|---|---|---|
| Well I have personally been video taping everyone's picks. |
Yours:
Total:  Rated 1 times. |
|
|
| Alex - 2058 Posts 09/14/2007 @ 01:14:15 PM |
|
|---|---|---|
| You should make a picks distribution display. If you want to that is. |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
|
| Jeremy - Site Admin 09/14/2007 @ 02:28:20 PM |
|
|---|---|---|
| If I had any idea what that meant I could think about it. |
Yours:
Total: Rated 1 times. |
|
|
| Sarah - 1814 Posts 09/14/2007 @ 06:20:11 PM |
|
|---|---|---|
| It's Angels in the Outfield Jon |
Yours:
Total: Rated 1 times. |
|
|
| Alex - Refactor Mercilessly 09/14/2007 @ 06:39:53 PM |
|
|---|---|---|
|
Like on yahoo! I can lookup that only 22.8% of the pickers picked the Packers to win last week. Now that there's 10 people doing picks some computed numbers would be easier to look at then comparing everyone's picks to everyone else's picks. |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
|
| Jon - Nutcan.com's kitten expert 09/14/2007 @ 11:00:45 PM |
|
|---|---|---|
|
Exactly. I thought about referencing that too. Points for you. |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
|
| Jeremy - 5014 Posts 09/14/2007 @ 11:08:57 PM |
|
|---|---|---|
|
I thought there was an implied "angels in the outfield" reference but I thought it would cheapen it if I pointed it out. I demand points. |
Yours:
Total: Rated 1 times. |
|
|
| Jon - 1 bajillion posts 09/14/2007 @ 11:11:43 PM |
|
|---|---|---|
|
Yeah I suspected there might be a lot of similarity this week. For one just because the games seem to be set up that way, and as an offshoot of that, week 2 has us work mostly off of just last week. It gives matchups of 1-0 teams vs. 0-1 teams and it's hard for anyone to go out on a limb, even though it's not a big limb. And when it's a tie record situation usually one team still seems better. In short, it seems less cloudy even though after the week is played, we'll see it wasn't as cut and dried (past tense, props to micah) as it seemed probably. Of course, the most glaring disparity in the trend seems to be that most of us picked the winless rams against the 49ers, who won. But if you watched the monday night game that doesn't seem like such a stretch. Maybe I'll look back and see if week 2 has always meant similar picks, but I don't think I'll actually compute it relative to other weeks because that would be time consuming. |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
|
| Jon - 1000000 posts (and counting!) 09/14/2007 @ 11:12:02 PM |
|
|---|---|---|
|
Jeremy Wrote - 09/14/2007 @ 11:08:57 PM I thought there was an implied "angels in the outfield" reference but I thought it would cheapen it if I pointed it out. I demand points. I'm fresh out. Implied or implode? |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
| Jon perfected this at 09/14/2007 11:12:43 pm | ||
|
| Jon - 1321 Posts 09/14/2007 @ 11:22:07 PM |
|
|---|---|---|
| I looked. Week 2's have actually had pretty good variety. Maybe it's just the way these broke down. Maybe it's because we take it a bit more seriously than the first year or two, but then again, the recent years had variety. I guess my theory doesn't have a lot going for it. Of course, it's not a great sample size since it's only four of us for many years and we usually differ on the Minnesota and Green Bay games anyway, and I think matt did his picks blindfolded for the first four years. |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
|
| Jon - 1000000 posts (and counting!) 09/14/2007 @ 11:24:58 PM |
|
|---|---|---|
| To Jeremy's credit though, I think his comments are extra good this week. You know, if people actually ever read them. |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
|
| Matt - 1436 Posts 09/15/2007 @ 12:10:51 AM |
|
|---|---|---|
|
Jon Wrote - 09/14/2007 @ 11:22:07 PM and I think matt did his picks blindfolded for the first four years. Actually, I did (and still do) my picks based on my perceptions of the NFL circa 1996. |
Yours:
Total: Rated 1 times. |
|
|
| PackOne - 1134 Posts 09/15/2007 @ 12:32:50 AM |
|
|---|---|---|
Look for PackOne to take a slight edge this week.  |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
|
| Scott - Resident Tech Support 09/15/2007 @ 09:54:19 PM |
|
|---|---|---|
| Commet about last week's Packer game: Mason's Crosby's first career field attempt was a 53-yarder which he drilled. I wonder how many kickers have their first career attempt over 50 yards, and I wonder of those kickers, how many make that long debut. Anyone care to dig this one up? This is especially interesting because Should Crosby go on to have a long career, he could run the possibility of never kicking a longer field goal than his first ever attempt. I'm guessing that has never happened before, at least not in the "modern" era of kickers (meaning the soccer-style kicking). |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
|
| Jeremy - Pie Racist 09/16/2007 @ 12:16:58 AM |
|
|---|---|---|
| Hey Carl, pick your last game would you. You get to be the first person to use the new fangled picker. Let me know how it goes. (Also, don't feel pressured to make the pick if you are abstaining due to your covering of the game in the booth. I know those guys like to remain impartial until 9 seconds into the game, when they declare a favorite.) |
Yours:
Total: Rated 1 times. |
|
| Jeremy perfected this at 09/16/2007 12:23:21 am | ||
|
| Jeremy - 5014 Posts 09/16/2007 @ 10:12:53 AM |
|
|---|---|---|
| So how is that with the "computations" then, Alex? |
Yours:
Total: Rated 1 times. |
|
 | Micah - Even now in Heaven there are angels carrying savage weapons 09/16/2007 @ 12:06:56 PM |
|
|---|---|---|
|
Can I still make 1:00 game picks? Steelers 49ers Bengals Panthers Colts Saint Jags Packers |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
|
| Sarah - 1814 Posts 09/16/2007 @ 12:17:06 PM |
|
|---|---|---|
| You need to call them 12:00 games since the Nut is located in the CST location, so that negates your picks right away. Plus the timestamp shows you made them almost 7 minutes after the start of the games, which gives you a slight edge over the rest of us. |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
|
| Alex - Refactor Mercilessly 09/16/2007 @ 12:38:24 PM |
|
|---|---|---|
|
Winner! |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
|
| Micah - Even now in Heaven there are angels carrying savage weapons 09/16/2007 @ 01:26:41 PM |
|
|---|---|---|
| Games start at 1:05 |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
|
| Sarah - 1814 Posts 09/16/2007 @ 01:33:54 PM |
|
|---|---|---|
| they go to the games at 12. still late |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
|
| Jeremy - 5014 Posts 09/16/2007 @ 02:45:26 PM |
|
|---|---|---|
| So do other teams actively TRY to lose to the Packers? |
Yours:
Total: Rated 2 times. |
|
|
| Sarah - 1814 Posts 09/16/2007 @ 03:10:21 PM |
|
|---|---|---|
| What a weird wonderful wacky week so far. |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
|
| Scott - Dog fighting is sick. Don't be a Vick. 09/16/2007 @ 03:38:08 PM |
|
|---|---|---|
|
I'd say that was a rather dominating performance by the Packers in every aspect of the game. Hurt or not, Eli never seemed comfortable. I mean, sure, he did throw the ball directly to the packers defensive lineman at the end there, but man, what way to play on the road. For all you Thompson haters out there, the Packers are 2-0 because of their defense, which is what people seem to complain the most about in terms of his personnel decision making. Anyway, Favre looked brilliant despite only having 1 wide receiver out there. The Packers are 2-0 for the first time in a while. Bring on the Chargers. |
Yours:
Total: Rated 1 times. |
|
|
| Sarah - 1814 Posts 09/16/2007 @ 03:47:25 PM |
|
|---|---|---|
| You think Justin Harrell helped us out there? |
Yours:
Total: Rated 1 times. |
|
| Sarah messed with this at 09/16/2007 3:48:53 pm | ||
|
| Scott - You're going to have to call your hardware guy. It's not a software issue. 09/16/2007 @ 04:01:30 PM |
|
|---|---|---|
| Hey, a questionable (or downright bad) pick here and there is inevitable (and he still might turnout to be ok), but from my vantage point their defense looks as good as it has looked in a long time. |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
|
| Sarah 09/16/2007 @ 04:58:16 PM |
|
|---|---|---|
| But maybe if we're doing alright on defense, an offensive pick might've helped 10-fold? |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
|
| Scott - Ma'am, can you make sure your computer is turned on? 09/16/2007 @ 08:21:51 PM |
|
|---|---|---|
| My point is that while Justin Harrel may not have been the smartest pick (although who knows, he could be starting and dominating in 2 years), the alternative may very well also have been another defensive player. Anyway, the Packers are 2-0 and that's really all I care about at this point. And in my opinion, the Packers' success this year is going to come in large part because of their defense. |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
|
| Sarah 09/17/2007 @ 07:35:41 AM |
|
|---|---|---|
My point is we could've picked an offensive player.  |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
|
| Carlos44ec - 1204 Posts 09/17/2007 @ 09:20:03 AM |
|
|---|---|---|
|
Scott Wrote - 09/16/2007 @ 08:21:51 PM My point is that while Justin Harrel may not have been the smartest pick (although who knows, he could be starting and dominating in 2 years), the alternative may very well also have been another defensive player. Anyway, the Packers are 2-0 and that's really all I care about at this point. And in my opinion, the Packers' success this year is going to come in large part because of their defense. It also really depends if you feel both wins were truly wins, or if they were simply a decision of which team was lucky enough to be on top after the time ran out. I didn't get to see week 1 until the last 3 minutes and not much of week 2 either, but from what I hear, week 1 wasn't the best show in town. |
Yours:
Total: Rated 1 times. |
|
| Carlos44ec perfected this at 09/17/2007 9:20:32 am | ||
|
| Scott - 2820 Posts 09/17/2007 @ 12:13:1 |
|---|
Packers 35 @ Giants 13
Jeremy: Someone should have told the Giants to always guard your starters closely when Green Bay is due up soon....oh crap. Adriaaaaaan!!Matt: Yeah, the Packers won't get lucky 2 weeks in a row, even with half the Giants out with injuries.
Jon: I had to think about this one for a while. But here's the thing: The Packers can't get the game handed to them every week. I admit, they apparently had a good defensive week last week. But they still didn't do anything other than recover fumbles on special teams. I think I'm obligated to now say that the Hefty Lefty will overpower the Packers defense. Although it will probably be more like the Packers just not scoring.
Sarah: Last week's game was ugly, but it was a win. I thought we would be 2-2 after September, but now I see us being 3-1. Yay!! Brett Favre.