NFL 2008 Season Divisional Playoffs 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 2023 Season Super Bowl Picks.
 |  |  |  | |||||
| Ravens 13 @ Titans 10 Final Sat, 1/10/09 3:30pm
|
Titans
 |
Ravens
 |
Ravens
|
Titans
|
||||
| Cardinals 33 @ Panthers 13 Final Sat, 1/10/09 7:15pm
|
Panthers
 |
Panthers
|
Panthers
|
Panthers
|
||||
| Eagles 23 @ Giants 11 Final Sun, 1/11/09 12:00pm
|
Giants
 |
Giants
|
Giants
|
Giants
|
||||
| Chargers 24 @ Steelers 35 Final Sun, 1/11/09 3:45pm
|
Steelers
 |
Chargers
 |
Steelers
|
Steelers
|
||||
| Week Record | 1 - 3 0.250  | 1 - 3 0.250 | 2 - 2 0.500 | 1 - 3 0.250 | ||||
| Season Record | 168 - 95 0.639 | 169 - 94 0.643 | 168 - 95 0.639 | 163 - 100 0.620 | ||||
| Scotttime Record | 500 - 297 0.627 | 480 - 317 0.602 | 494 - 303 0.620 | 494 - 303 0.620 | ||||
| No-Pack-Vike Record | 3291 - 1921 0.631 | 3206 - 2006 0.615 | 3319 - 1893 0.637 | 3206 - 2006 0.615 | ||||
| Lifetime Record | 1177 - 687 0.631 | 1091 - 773 0.585 | 1164 - 700 0.625 | 1153 - 711 0.619 |
Panthers
Giants
Steelers
| Week: | 1 - 3 0.250 |
| Season: | 155 - 107 0.592 |
| Lifetime: | 481 - 311 0.607 |
Panthers
Giants
Steelers
| Week: | 1 - 3 0.250 |
| Season: | 150 - 97 0.607 |
| Lifetime: | 319 - 195 0.621 |
Panthers
Giants
Steelers
| Week: | 2 - 2 0.500 |
| Season: | 144 - 117 0.552 |
| Lifetime: | 308 - 220 0.583 |
![IMG_3063[1].jpg](/images/thumbnail.php?height=18&file=/uploads/IMG_3063[1].jpg){kind=small}
Panthers
Eagles
Steelers
| Week: | 2 - 2 0.500 |
| Season: | 152 - 103 0.596 |
| Lifetime: | 288 - 190 0.603 |
Panthers
Eagles
Steelers
| Week: | 3 - 1 0.750 |
| Season: | 162 - 99 0.621 |
| Lifetime: | 284 - 182 0.609 |
Panthers
Eagles
Steelers
| Week: | 3 - 1 0.750 |
| Season: | 169 - 94 0.643 |
| Lifetime: | 257 - 129 0.666 |
Create an Account or Login to make your own picks!
 | Cardinals 33 @ Panthers 13 | |
 | JeremyCardinals should lose this game big, which means you shouldn't be surprised if this is the only game with any amount of drama near the end at all. |
 | MattAgain, I'm picking against them, but I think I'll be pulling for the Cardinals to win. |
 | SarahFrankly, the Cardinals shocked me last week by winning. That doesn't mean I'll try picking them this week. |
 | JonEasiest pick right? Like Indianapolis last week! |
 | Eagles 23 @ Giants 11 | |
| JeremyThe Eagles may have won against the Vikings, but it was hardly impressive. Save for one busted play they really didn't do a whole lot. Once again though, would anyone really be that shocked by Eagles 30 Giants 10? How about Eagles 3 Giants 30? |
| MattI'll take the Giants. |
| SarahIs anyone else already tired of all those Turbo Tax/H&R Block commercials? I am, they're driving me crazy! |
| JonI just like New York better. The team, that is. |
| Chargers 24 @ Steelers 35 | |
| JeremyPhillip "F-Bomb" Rivers' team seems to be pretty hot right now, and I'm not so sure the Steelers are all that great. Still, the Steelers seem to find ways to win, and the Chargers' mediocre record wasn't the complete aberration people are making it out to be. They layed more than their share of eggs this year. |
| MattI feel like the Chargers can pull the upset here. Plus, I am kind of sick of the Steelers. |
| SarahMaybe the Chargers will get in because they were only 8-8 this year instead of their usual 14-2 or whatever it is that they usually are. I may change this pick depending on the status of Big Ben. |
| JonDarren Sproles is the greatest thing since Darren Sproles! |
  | Jeremy - 1.21 Gigawatts!?!? 01/06/2009 @ 11:44:55 AM |
 |
|---|---|---|
|
You know what I'm getting a little sick of? (besides being sick) People need to stop with the whole "so-and-so finished 2nd in MVP voting" when the "election" was a complete landslide. It's factually accurate that Brett Favre "finished second" last year, and Chad Pennington "finished second" this year, but there's also an implied closeness by making that statement that is intellectually dishonest. In Favre's case he was the lone dissenting (completely preposterous) vote, in Pennington's there were more votes cast for non-winners, but it was still a landslide, and he didn't even get second outright. Maybe this is just me nitpicking again, but I feel like a lot of the time the writers are almost intentionally trying to deceive the readers who might not know the actual results. If you just want to get across that Pennington must have had a good year, because he received a handful of MVP votes, then just say that. If you want to use as an example Favre must have done something right last year because he was the lone Non-Brady vote, then just say that. |
Yours:
 
Rated 0 times. |
|
| Jeremy screwed with this 2 times, last at 01/06/2009 12:26:37 pm | ||
 | Jeremy - Robots don't say 'ye' 01/06/2009 @ 12:11:48 PM |
|
|---|---|---|
| Also, the feed we've been using for live scoring went away for the playoffs, in case anyone noticed that hasn't been working. Maybe I'll look into another feed, but I don't know how much work I want to put into the code I'm going to have thrown away by next season. |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
  | Scott - Get Up! Get outta here! Gone! 01/06/2009 @ 12:13:48 PM |
|
|---|---|---|
| I noticed that the live scoring didn't. I just assumed that Clint Howard stopped working for free and we weren't willing to pay him. |
Yours:
Total:  Rated 1 times. |
|
|
| Scott - 6225 Posts 01/06/2009 @ 12:16:06 PM |
|
|---|---|---|
|
speaking of which, did anyone realize that Chad Pennington won the NFL comeback player of the year for the 2nd time, and the previous time was just two years ago. Does that really qualify as "being away"? And, how many chances do we give people these days? (Kerry Collins and Jake Delhomme came in 2nd and 3rd respectively, so they clearly are the 2nd and 3rd best players were categorically sucked last year or in previous years). edit: Also, does a player have to have been good in the past to win comeback player of the year? What if Gus Ferrotte becomes starter for the Vikings next year and has a great year. Does he qualify for comeback player? I mean, honestly, can you "go away" if you were never "here" to begin with? Edit2: Collins and Delhomme received the same number of votes. |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
| Scott edited this 3 times, last at 01/06/2009 12:22:37 pm | ||
|
| Jeremy - 9475 Posts 01/06/2009 @ 12:22:39 PM |
|
|---|---|---|
|
Yeah, that's weird. First of all, is it something to be proud of, or is it a backhanded complement in trophy form? He probably deserves it seeing as he was thrown under the bus, left for dead, and picked up by a 1-15 team, who he then took to the playoffs. Still, seems like you should have to be good for a while, then suck for a while, then comeback, and having 2 of them can't be a great thing. There are no hard-and-fast rules, I assume, but would Tom Brady be "eligible" for this next season? |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
|
| Jeremy - As Seen On The Internet 01/06/2009 @ 12:33:23 PM |
|
|---|---|---|
|
Scott Wrote - Today @ 12:16:06 PM Also, does a player have to have been good in the past to win comeback player of the year? What if Gus Ferrotte becomes starter for the Vikings next year and has a great year. Does he qualify for comeback player? I mean, honestly, can you "go away" if you were never "here" to begin with? In general I would say yes, you have to be good at some point. Let's say someone with high expectations who sucked, like McFadden, has a good season next year. I don't think he should be in the running, since he's not "coming back" from anything. However, if you were a perpetual slightly above-average journey man like Gus, and you had a sudden Renaissance of sorts, I think you could be in the mix. |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
|
| Scott - If you aren't enough without it, you'll never be enough with it. 01/06/2009 @ 12:41:52 PM |
|
|---|---|---|
| I didn't mean to pick on Gus, I just couldn't think of a good example. |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
|
| Scott - Resident Tech Support 01/06/2009 @ 12:58:28 PM |
|
|---|---|---|
| As for Brady being a candidate, if Pennington can get it with just one year off, I think Brady will probably be considered. |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
|
| Jeremy - As Seen On The Internet 01/06/2009 @ 01:04:37 PM |
|
|---|---|---|
| Yeah, but Brady didn't struggle this season, he just didn't play because he got hurt. |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
 | Alex - 3619 Posts 01/06/2009 @ 01:10:48 PM |
|
|---|---|---|
| It's a dumb award. The end. |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
 | Alex - Ignorance is bliss to those uneducated 01/06/2009 @ 01:15:28 PM |
|
|---|---|---|
|
Jeremy Wrote - Today @ 11:44:55 AM You know what I'm getting a little sick of? (besides being sick) People need to stop with the whole "so-and-so finished 2nd in MVP voting" when the "election" was a complete landslide. It's factually accurate that Brett Favre "finished second" last year, and Chad Pennington "finished second" this year, but there's also an implied closeness by making that statement that is intellectually dishonest. In Favre's case he was the lone dissenting (completely preposterous) vote,... Hold up! You've been ranting all season about how much the loss of Favre made the Packers suck this year, but you don't think an MVP vote for him last year was fair? The Pats went 11-5 without Brady (5 less wins), the Packers went 6-10 without Favre (7 less wins). If anything, they should retroactively give him the award for 2007.  |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
|
| Jeremy - 1.21 Gigawatts!?!? 01/06/2009 @ 01:15:54 PM |
|
|---|---|---|
| Indeed it is. |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
| Jeremy messed with this at 01/06/2009 1:17:26 pm | ||
|
| Jeremy - 9475 Posts 01/06/2009 @ 01:24:30 PM |
|
|---|---|---|
|
Alex Wrote - Today @ 01:15:28 PM Jeremy Wrote - Today @ 11:44:55 AM You know what I'm getting a little sick of? (besides being sick) People need to stop with the whole "so-and-so finished 2nd in MVP voting" when the "election" was a complete landslide. It's factually accurate that Brett Favre "finished second" last year, and Chad Pennington "finished second" this year, but there's also an implied closeness by making that statement that is intellectually dishonest. In Favre's case he was the lone dissenting (completely preposterous) vote,... Hold up! You've been ranting all season about how much the loss of Favre made the Packers suck this year, but you don't think an MVP vote for him last year was fair? The Pats went 11-5 without Brady (5 less wins), the Packers went 6-10 without Favre (7 less wins). If anything, they should retroactively give him the award for 2007. Well, for one thing I'm not a huge fan of the notion that you have to be the lynch pin of the team, or even on a good team, to be eligible. It should be a nod to the person who had the statistically best season. How good/bad your team would be without you should be a tie breaker, if anything at all. Secondly, it was ridiculous at the time, and we didn't know the Packers were going to go on to be stupid. |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
| Jeremy perfected this at 01/06/2009 1:24:44 pm | ||
|
| Alex - You've got to trust your instinct, and let go of regret 01/06/2009 @ 01:29:05 PM |
|
|---|---|---|
| Well, ok, if that's your criteria I'll let you off the hook. I guess I'd personally vote for the most important lynch pin, as subjective as that is. Offensive Player of the Year is for straight stats, which is why Brees won this year. |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
 | Sarah - How do you use these things? 01/06/2009 @ 06:20:59 PM |
|
|---|---|---|
|
http://www.theredzone.org/absolutenm/templates/template.asp?articleid=1011&zoneid=1 Offensive or Defensive? |
Yours:
Total: Rated 1 times. |
|
 | Carlos44ec - Tater Salad? 01/06/2009 @ 07:18:26 PM |
|
|---|---|---|
|
Sarah Wrote - Today @ 06:20:59 PM http://www.theredzone.org/absolutenm/templates/template.asp?articleid=1011&zoneid=1 Offensive or Defensive? hilarious! |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
  | RUFiO1984 - Go Lions!!! 01/06/2009 @ 10:09:49 PM |
|
|---|---|---|
| FLAAACCCCOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!! |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
|
| Scott - Get Up! Get outta here! Gone! 01/08/2009 @ 10:31:45 AM |
|
|---|---|---|
|
I do not make my picks with some sort of strategy for beating other NutCanners With that said, there could potentially be a shift of powers at the top of the Picks leaderboard. Jeremy and Scott are 1 win behind Matt, but Scott and Jeremy have 2 picks that differ from Matt. Let the games begin! |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
|
| Carlos44ec - 2079 Posts 01/08/2009 @ 11:20:56 AM |
|
|---|---|---|
| ooh, a shakeup! |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
 | Sarah - So's your face 01/10/2009 @ 08:28:34 PM |
|
|---|---|---|
| My whole plan is to go 0-11 in the playoffs. |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
|
| Scott - 6225 Posts 01/11/2009 @ 07:16:25 AM |
|
|---|---|---|
| It's like we've become the detroit lions of picks (some of us anyway). |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
|
| Sarah - How do you use these things? 01/11/2009 @ 07:42:34 PM |
|
|---|---|---|
| There goes my perfect streak... dang you Steelers for winning! |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
|
| Alex - I don't need to get steady I know just how I feel 01/11/2009 @ 10:10:03 PM |
|
|---|---|---|
|
Haha, I am invincible! |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
  | jay6666 01/12/2009 @ 08:13:37 AM |
|
|---|---|---|
|
Yours:
Total:  Rated 2 times. |
||
| jay6666 screwed with this at 01/12/2009 12:52:39 pm | ||
|
| Carlos44ec - 2079 Posts 01/12/2009 @ 08:17:06 AM |
|
|---|---|---|
| I am 2 for 354023846098569234 in the playoffs. |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
|
| jay6666 - 29 Posts 01/12/2009 @ 06:37:47 PM |
|
|---|---|---|
 |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
Leave a Comment of your very own
| Name: | |||
| Comment: | |||
| |||
Sign up, or login, to be able to upload files for Nutcan.com users to see.
Fetching Nutcan Content....
Ravens 13 @ Titans 10
Jeremy
Both of these teams are good, and yet I wouldn't trust either of them for some reason. I'll take the Vet and the home team.Matt
I have no idea what to think about either of these two teams.Sarah
All home teams, all the time.Jon
I think I'm falling into the trap of watching a team one week and being impressed and then disregarding a team that is clearly really good. I just want to pick Baltimore.