NFL 2012 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 2018 Season Super Bowl Picks.

Jeremy's PicksMatt's PicksJon's PicksSarah's Picks
Bengals 13 @ Texans 19
Final
Sat, 1/5/13 3:30pm
7 Picks - 39% 11 Picks - 61%
Texans
Texans
Texans
Texans
Texans
Texans
Bengals
Bengals
Vikings 10 @ Packers 24
Final
Sat, 1/5/13 7:00pm
4 Picks - 22% 14 Picks - 78%
Vikings
Vikings
Vikings
Vikings
Vikings
Vikings
Packers
Packers
Colts 9 @ Ravens 24
Final
Sun, 1/6/13 12:00pm
9 Picks - 50% 9 Picks - 50%
Ravens
Ravens
Colts
Colts
Ravens
Ravens
Colts
Colts
Seahawks 24 @ Redskins 14
Final
Sun, 1/6/13 3:30pm
10 Picks - 56% 8 Picks - 44%
Seahawks
Seahawks
Seahawks
Seahawks
Seahawks
Seahawks
Redskins
Redskins
Week Record3 - 1
0.750
2 - 2
0.500
3 - 1
0.750
1 - 3
0.250
Worst Place
Season Record169 - 90
0.652
162 - 97
0.625
165 - 94
0.637
171 - 88
0.660
Scotttime Record1164 - 696
0.626
1123 - 737
0.604
1159 - 701
0.623
1182 - 678
0.635
No-Pack-Vike Record2517 - 1476
0.630
2447 - 1546
0.613
2530 - 1463
0.634
2492 - 1501
0.624
Lifetime Record1841 - 1086
0.629
1734 - 1193
0.592
1829 - 1098
0.625
1841 - 1086
0.629
click me!
Other Nut Canner Picks
scott.jpg
Texans
Packers
Ravens
Seahawks

Week:4 - 0
1.000
Season:172 - 86
0.667
Lifetime:1182 - 672
0.637
2887.gif
Bengals
Packers
Colts
Redskins

Week:1 - 3
0.250
Season:163 - 96
0.629
Lifetime:1151 - 707
0.620
images.jpg
Texans
Packers
Colts
Seahawks

Week:3 - 1
0.750
Season:83 - 69
0.546
Lifetime:966 - 650
0.598
vignette.bmp
Texans
Packers
Colts
Redskins

Week:2 - 2
0.500
Season:53 - 38
0.582
Lifetime:608 - 388
0.610
skull full.jpg
Texans
Packers
Ravens
Seahawks

Week:4 - 0
1.000
Season:154 - 103
0.599
Lifetime:300 - 185
0.619
question_mark.gif
Bengals
Packers
Ravens
Seahawks

Week:3 - 1
0.750
Season:115 - 67
0.632
Lifetime:532 - 319
0.625
question_mark.gif
Bengals
Packers
Ravens
Redskins

Week:2 - 2
0.500
Season:172 - 70
0.711
Lifetime:633 - 316
0.667
Me at sams.jpg
Bengals
Packers
Colts
Redskins

Week:1 - 3
0.250
Season:165 - 88
0.652
Lifetime:438 - 261
0.627
hambone.jpg
Texans
Packers
Colts
Seahawks

Week:3 - 1
0.750
Season:168 - 91
0.649
Lifetime:512 - 281
0.646
077.JPG
Bengals
Packers
Colts
Redskins

Week:1 - 3
0.250
Season:169 - 90
0.652
Lifetime:433 - 257
0.627
IMG003.jpg
Bengals
Packers
Ravens
Seahawks

Week:3 - 1
0.750
Season:176 - 83
0.679
Lifetime:429 - 218
0.663
ColorTouch.jpg
Texans
Packers
Ravens
Seahawks

Week:4 - 0
1.000
Season:158 - 88
0.642
Lifetime:302 - 178
0.629
krystal.jpg
Texans
Packers
Colts
Redskins

Week:2 - 2
0.500
Season:168 - 91
0.649
Lifetime:182 - 105
0.634
one-piece 01.jpg
Texans
Vikings
Ravens
Redskins

Week:2 - 2
0.500
Season:122 - 90
0.576
Lifetime:122 - 90
0.576
Create an Account or Login to make your own picks!

Bengals 13 @ Texans 19

sarah.jpg
Sarah
Damn these are some good games, too many tough choices. I reserve the right to change my mind.
jon.jpg
Jon
A lot of people would like the Texans to be as bad as their record's been lately. I'm not ready to knock them down that far. They may not be the superpower they looked like, but they should be able to take care of Cincinnati.

Vikings 10 @ Packers 24

jeremy.jpg
Jeremy
I have it on good authority that the Packers didn't try to win their last game because they wanted to avoid playing the Bears in the playoffs, and because they didn't want the bye.
sarah.jpg
Sarah
But not with this game. Cobb was the missing ingredient on Sunday, things will be alright.... please please please.
jon.jpg
Jon
The Vikings went 10-6 this season.

Colts 9 @ Ravens 24

jeremy.jpg
Jeremy
How about those Colts? Hard not to pull for them.
sarah.jpg
Sarah
I don't know what "it" is, but the Ravens haven't had it for a few weeks. #ChuckStrong
jon.jpg
Jon
Strange teams. The Ravens had some close outcomes this year. Eight of their regular season games were decided by 3 points or fewer. Half their games! They were 5-3 in those games if you care. I care more about the home/away numbers for these teams. Baltimore is 6-2 at home and the Colts are 4-4 on the road. The Colts were also outscored on the season as a whole. Now, I think the Giants actually had that accomplishment last year and still went on to win the Super Bowl. But I wouldn't predict it will happen again.

Seahawks 24 @ Redskins 14

jeremy.jpg
Jeremy
I predict a combined 10 minutes of game time of QB running. (Not necessarily down field, mind you.)
sarah.jpg
Sarah
Super tough call, but I want the Redskins to win.
jon.jpg
Jon
Too bad this has to be a first round matchup. Now, the Seahawks are much better at home than on the road. But I think they're good enough at this point of the season to win this on the road. Washington has won seven straight, but I don't think they've faced a defense like Seattle during that time. If this were in Seattle, the pick would be easier. But it's in Washington. I still think they win.
fry6beeu9.jpgJeremy - 8953 Posts
01/02/2013 @ 08:35:36 PM
 Quote this comment
It's up!
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
scott.jpgScott - You're going to have to call your hardware guy. It's not a software issue.
01/03/2013 @ 08:23:33 AM
 Quote this comment
I figured I'd point this out here rather than start a new thread. I was in Florida right before Christmas and we visited with some of our friends from down there. Anyway, one of them is a native Floridian with no ties whatsoever to Wisconsin or Green Bay (well, except for me, I guess), and he certainly isn't a Packer fan. I found out that he bought Packer stock the last time it was available because he thought it was about the coolest thing to be able to say he owned a pro sports team. So it's not just Packer fans, apparently.

Alas, I missed out, and still lament my missed opportunity.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
Scott edited this at 01/03/2013 8:24:47 am
fry6beeu9.jpgJeremy - As Seen On The Internet
01/03/2013 @ 08:29:23 AM
 Quote this comment
There are idiots everywhere.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
scott.jpgScott - If you aren't enough without it, you'll never be enough with it.
01/04/2013 @ 08:21:54 PM
 Quote this comment
Jeremy Wrote - Yesterday @ 08:29:23 AM
There are idiots everywhere.


Tell me about it...the Vikings are staying in Neenah tonight.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
2887.gifAlex - 3618 Posts
01/05/2013 @ 08:13:37 PM
 Quote this comment
@$%% the fullback dive. It's the worst play in the playbook. Get a clue McCarthy.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
jeremy.jpgJeremy - I believe virtually everything I read.
01/05/2013 @ 10:09:36 PM
 Quote this comment
I wonder if Frank Gore and Patrick Willis will survive the head on collision they'll have with one another on the way to the game next week.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
Jeremy messed with this at 01/05/2013 10:10:19 pm
sarah.jpgSarah - 4091 Posts
01/05/2013 @ 11:00:12 PM
 Quote this comment
Alex Wrote - Today @ 08:13:37 PM
@$%% the fullback dive. It's the worst play in the playbook. Get a clue McCarthy.

Seconded. It works once every 100 attempts.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
scott.jpgScott - 6225 Posts
01/06/2013 @ 06:59:15 AM
 Quote this comment
I'm just glad the packers have never had to deal with injuries to pro bowl players of theirs. That would make winning a Super Bowl pretty hard I suppose.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Total:

Rated 1 times.
jon.jpgJon - infinity + 1 posts
01/06/2013 @ 12:50:58 PM
 Quote this comment
This Colts Ravens game is full of interesting relationships, for lack of a better term. Pagano was recently part of the Ravens' coaching staff, Andrew Luck used to play for John Harbaugh's brother, and as I began writing this post, I was reminded that former Colts coach Jim Caldwell is now the Ravens' offensive coordinator. Plus, there's the whole thing where the Colts used to play in Baltimore and left in the middle of the night back all those years ago.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
jon.jpgJon - 2847 Posts
01/06/2013 @ 04:00:20 PM
 Quote this comment
Looking back, I'm a little surprised the NFL changed the pushout rule. Seems like they've generally made rules to benefit the offense. Or at least that's what the narrative has been. Just a thought as I watch the Washington/Seattle game. Don't want to wear twitter out with every uninteresting thought I have.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
jon.jpgJon - many posts
01/06/2013 @ 04:08:23 PM
 Quote this comment
One thing basketball has over baseball and football is the consistent playing conditions. The day to day weather changes make things interesting and all, but it's also really odd to have the cold weather turn the playoffs of a sport into a different game than it was most of the rest of the season.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
jon.jpgJon - 1 bajillion posts
01/06/2013 @ 04:18:57 PM
 Quote this comment
Washington sure looks good early. (The team, not Leon. Though he's done ok so far.) Games don't generally continue in the way the first few drives play out, so I'm not rushing to conclusions. But coming in the winners of 7 straight and starting out like this sure does make you wonder.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
scott.jpgScott - Get Up! Get outta here! Gone!
01/06/2013 @ 04:37:46 PM
 Quote this comment
Jon, I find all your thoughts interesting.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
jon.jpgJon - infinity + 1 posts
01/06/2013 @ 04:43:30 PM
 Quote this comment
Scott Wrote - Today @ 04:37:46 PM
Jon, I find all your thoughts interesting.


Ha. Thanks Scott.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
jeremy.jpgJeremy - Cube Phenomenoligist
01/06/2013 @ 06:34:22 PM
 Quote this comment
Scott Wrote - Today @ 06:59:15 AM
I'm just glad the packers have never had to deal with injuries to pro bowl players of theirs. That would make winning a Super Bowl pretty hard I suppose.


The Packers weren't without a top 10 position player, at their weakest position, and their starting QB, in the biggest game of their season, so I can only assume this was alluding to Jeff Saturday.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
Jeremy screwed with this 2 times, last at 01/06/2013 6:48:02 pm
scott.jpgScott - Ma'am, can you make sure your computer is turned on?
01/06/2013 @ 07:52:56 PM
 Quote this comment
More it was alluding to 2010 when the packers set an nfl record for most opening week starters on ir by seasons end (starting rb, te, MLB, safety, numerous others) then losing their reigning defensive MVP in the biggest game of the season. Besides, were the Vikings without a player of the stature that you described? Plus, the packers this season have been playing at about 75% health most of the season. Basically, you seem to bring up the injuries of the Packers opponents without acknowledging the fact that they themselves deal with the same things. Greg Jennings missed most of the season, Matthews missed 25% of the season, I could go on, but I won't.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
2887.gifAlex - Who controls the past now controls the future
01/06/2013 @ 08:15:36 PM
 Quote this comment
1-3? I guess that's what I get for copying Sarah's picks...
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
fry6beeu9.jpgJeremy - 8953 Posts
01/06/2013 @ 10:14:34 PM
 Quote this comment
Those guys seemed to be out there Saturday.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
scott.jpgScott - 6225 Posts
01/07/2013 @ 12:50:35 PM
 Quote this comment
Sarah Wrote - 01/05/2013 @ 11:00:12 PM
Alex Wrote - 01/05/2013 @ 08:13:37 PM
@$%% the fullback dive. It's the worst play in the playbook. Get a clue McCarthy.

Seconded. It works once every 100 attempts.


For the record, I don't think either of the FB handoffs in the 2nd qtr goalline drives were technically dives. {nutcannitpickyoveranalyzer}One was from shotgun, so Kuhn wasn't even the "up-back", and the other was a trap play where the packers left guard didn't get around the center fast enough to make the block. {/nutcannitpickyoveranalyzer}. In other words, it's possible that even if the 2nd example i mentioned had been a handoff to the tailback, the play still would have been blown up. Still, I would support an overall moratorium on up-back handoffs. Somehow the defense seems to always always know exactly when it's coming.

Some slight digging suggests that the up-back handoff really hasn't worked, at least for the packers. On 3rd or 4th down with 2 or less yards to go, John Kuhn (I'm assuming lined up in the FB position) has 4 attempts for 6 yards, or a 1.5 yard average. (on 3rd, he's 3 carries for 1 yard, 4th down 1 carry for 5 yards). I have no idea how often they actually run the FB handoff (he only had 23 carries for the entire season), the short yardage late down plays don't seem to work. Although I'd be interesting to see some data that actually looks at upback handoffs and what kind of results they produce, given a more appropriate sample size.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
Scott messed with this 2 times, last at 01/07/2013 1:00:51 pm
newalex.jpgAlex - 3618 Posts
01/07/2013 @ 01:30:46 PM
 Quote this comment
Scott Wrote - Today @ 12:50:35 PM
Somehow the defense seems to always always know exactly when it's coming.


That's the thing, on a goal line stand I imagine at least one of the defensive players is probably thinking, "I'm blowing up the up back, whether he's the ball carrier or not". There's no deception type benefit to the offense, as opposed to say running that play on 2nd and 1 from midfield.

And whether or not a handoff to the tailback from that same play would have worked or not is irrelevant. If they didn't think a "regular" tailback run was going to work then they should've called something else.

Also the trap play run was the play I was referring to in my original complaint.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
scott.jpgScott - 6225 Posts
01/07/2013 @ 02:57:37 PM
 Quote this comment
I'm guessing they did think it was going to work. Otherwise they would run it. Tey didn't anticipate the NT blowing through the line. That's why I said that particular play may have failed either way. Plus, I think Rodgers has some liberties with who ends up getting the ball on a play like that.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
scott.jpgScott - Ma'am, can you make sure your computer is turned on?
01/07/2013 @ 03:02:44 PM
 Quote this comment
Although, I guess I see your point with not thinking it would work. You'd think the tailback would be the better option, so if it would work with the tailback, why not just give it to the tailback.

This brings up another issue about fb handoffs, being the lack of perspective a back has line up 2 yards behind the line va a tailback lined up 5 yards behind the line. The tb can see more just by virtue of starting further away, plus he can get some momentum, and has more time to read the holes and make cuts or adjustments if necessary. A fb handoff has to be open for the runner no matter what, otherwise he gets stuffed, at least on runs inside the guards.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
scott.jpgScott - On your mark...get set...Terrible!
01/07/2013 @ 03:25:18 PM
 Quote this comment
The only reason I can think of for why the fb handoff would be ok is simply to let the defense know that you might do it every once in a while. Like keeping them honest. But even then, when it works so infrequently (seemingly, but then again, maybe we are only just noticing the bad plays), maybe the defense does a decent job stopping that play even if they don't expect it to happen, and thus there is no need to "keep them honest". Maybe there are other reasons, but until I start seeing it work more consistently, the reasons to run it seem to be far outweighed by the reasons not to run it.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
hoochpage.JPGSarah - So's your face
01/07/2013 @ 05:04:19 PM
 Quote this comment
Alex Wrote - Yesterday @ 08:15:36 PM
1-3? I guess that's what I get for copying Sarah's picks...


This is never a wise decision. Although did you watch the games? Cincy made a point of turning the ball over against Houston, so Houston reluctantly accepted the win. Colts converted 3rd downs like it was nobody's business but could never find the endzone. Washington scored 14 points easily before RGIII lost his leg and Shanahan couldn't bear to take him out after that even though he couldn't even make a decent throw and then ended up losing his other leg and a fumble in the 4th. In other words, I demand a recount!
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
thumbnailCAW1I0O3.gifMatt - Washington Bureau Chief
01/07/2013 @ 05:07:43 PM
 Quote this comment
I'm still crushing all you guys in VORP (Value Over Replacement Picker). emoticon
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
fry6beeu9.jpgJeremy - 8953 Posts
01/07/2013 @ 05:37:40 PM
 Quote this comment
Scott Wrote - Today @ 03:25:18 PM
Maybe there are other reasons, but until I start seeing it work more consistently, the reasons to run it seem to be far outweighed by the reasons not to run it.


Plus it's almost always ran in do-or-die situations, which magnify matters.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
scott.jpgScott - 6225 Posts
01/08/2013 @ 03:23:52 PM
 Quote this comment
Jeremy Wrote - Yesterday @ 05:37:40 PM
Scott Wrote - Yesterday @ 03:25:18 PM
Maybe there are other reasons, but until I start seeing it work more consistently, the reasons to run it seem to be far outweighed by the reasons not to run it.


Plus it's almost always ran in do-or-die situations, which magnify matters.


For one thing, the times it's run in do-or-die situations are probably the ones that stick out the most, and the other times are hardly remembered.

In this regard, though, it's a little bit like the axiom of using your best players in critical situations. For one thing, any teams fullback probably isn't their best runner, let alone their best player. If they think he's good enough, line him up at tail back. But that might then negate the supposed "element of surprise" that they are going for in the first place. In Saturday's game, the play in question regarding Kuhn took place on 2nd down (I believe), so in this case it wasn't do or die. And they then lined Kuhn up as the tailback on the next play with Rodgers in the shotgun with similar results, so clearly Kuhn isn't that good of a runner from that position (at least, not getting the ball via handoff). Kuhn can catch when thrown to, but his biggest claim to fame in my opinion is that fans seem to think that there is inherent magic in shouting the name "KUUUUUUUUUUHN!", and I think sometimes McCarthy succumbs to the hypnosis. (although I'm really not sure if they call the upback handoff anymore than other teams. Really, I have no idea)
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
Scott perfected this 2 times, last at 01/08/2013 3:26:31 pm
fry6beeu9.jpgJeremy - 8953 Posts
01/09/2013 @ 12:56:28 PM
 Quote this comment
Well, that's just it. I mean, I'm sure he's a nice guy, and decent at his position, and there is *some* potential for surprise, but I have to imagine every defense that has ever lined up across from the Packers 2 yards outside the endzone, is praying they give the ball to Kuhn.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
Leave a Comment of your very own
Name:
Comment:
Verify this code
Verify the Code in this box, or sign in, to post a comment.
click me!
There's an emoticon for how you feel!
click me!
My Files
Sign up, or login, to be able to upload files for Nutcan.com users to see.