NFL 2012 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 2023 Season Super Bowl Picks.
 |  |  |  | |||||
| Bears 10 @ Packers 23 Final Thu, 9/13/12 7:20pm
|
Packers
 |
Bears
 |
Packers
|
Packers
|
||||
| Cardinals 20 @ Patriots 18 Final Sun, 9/16/12 12:00pm
|
Patriots
 |
Patriots
|
Patriots
|
Patriots
|
||||
| Saints 27 @ Panthers 35 Final Sun, 9/16/12 12:00pm
|
Saints
 |
Saints
|
Saints
|
Panthers
 |
||||
| Texans 27 @ Jaguars 7 Final Sun, 9/16/12 12:00pm
|
Texans
 |
Texans
|
Texans
|
Texans
|
||||
| Buccaneers 34 @ Giants 41 Final Sun, 9/16/12 12:00pm
|
Giants
 |
Giants
|
Giants
|
Giants
|
||||
| Ravens 23 @ Eagles 24 Final Sun, 9/16/12 12:00pm
|
Ravens
 |
Ravens
|
Ravens
|
Ravens
|
||||
| Vikings 20 @ Colts 23 Final Sun, 9/16/12 12:00pm
|
Vikings
 |
Vikings
|
Vikings
|
Colts
 |
||||
| Chiefs 17 @ Bills 35 Final Sun, 9/16/12 12:00pm
|
Bills
 |
Chiefs
 |
Chiefs
|
Bills
|
||||
| Browns 27 @ Bengals 34 Final Sun, 9/16/12 12:00pm
|
Bengals
 |
Bengals
|
Bengals
|
Bengals
|
||||
| Commanders 28 @ Rams 31 Final Sun, 9/16/12 3:05pm
|
Commanders
 |
Commanders
|
Commanders
|
Commanders
|
||||
| Cowboys 7 @ Seahawks 27 Final Sun, 9/16/12 3:05pm
|
Cowboys
 |
Cowboys
|
Cowboys
|
Cowboys
|
||||
| Raiders 13 @ Dolphins 35 Final Sun, 9/16/12 3:15pm
|
Raiders
 |
Raiders
|
Raiders
|
Raiders
|
||||
| Titans 10 @ Chargers 38 Final Sun, 9/16/12 3:15pm
|
Chargers
 |
Chargers
|
Chargers
|
Chargers
|
||||
| Jets 10 @ Steelers 27 Final Sun, 9/16/12 3:15pm
|
Steelers
 |
Jets
 |
Steelers
|
Jets
|
||||
| Lions 19 @ 49ers 27 Final Sun, 9/16/12 7:20pm
|
49ers
 |
49ers
|
49ers
|
49ers
|
||||
| Broncos 21 @ Falcons 27 Final Mon, 9/17/12 7:30pm
|
Falcons
 |
Broncos
 |
Falcons
|
Falcons
|
||||
| Week Record | 9 - 7 0.562  | 5 - 11 0.312  | 8 - 8 0.500 | 10 - 6 0.625  | ||||
| Season Record | 19 - 13 0.594 | 14 - 18 0.438 | 17 - 15 0.531 | 20 - 12 0.625 | ||||
| Scotttime Record | 1014 - 619 0.621 | 975 - 658 0.597 | 1011 - 622 0.619 | 1031 - 602 0.631 | ||||
| No-Pack-Vike Record | 3291 - 1921 0.631 | 3206 - 2006 0.615 | 3319 - 1893 0.637 | 3206 - 2006 0.615 | ||||
| Lifetime Record | 1691 - 1009 0.626 | 1586 - 1114 0.587 | 1681 - 1019 0.623 | 1690 - 1010 0.626 |
Patriots
Saints
Texans
Giants
Ravens
Vikings
Bills
Bengals
Commanders
Seahawks
Dolphins
Chargers
Steelers
49ers
Broncos
| Week: | 10 - 6 0.625 |
| Season: | 22 - 10 0.688 |
| Lifetime: | 1032 - 596 0.634 |
Patriots
Panthers
Texans
Giants
Ravens
Vikings
Bills
Bengals
Commanders
Seahawks
Raiders
Chargers
Jets
49ers
Falcons
| Week: | 10 - 6 0.625 |
| Season: | 19 - 13 0.594 |
| Lifetime: | 1007 - 624 0.617 |
Patriots
Saints
Jaguars
Giants
Ravens
Vikings
Chiefs
Browns
Commanders
Cowboys
Raiders
Titans
Steelers
49ers
Falcons
| Week: | 5 - 11 0.312 |
| Season: | 14 - 18 0.438 |
| Lifetime: | 897 - 599 0.600 |
Patriots
Saints
Jaguars
Giants
Ravens
Vikings
Bills
Browns
Commanders
Cowboys
Dolphins
Chargers
Jets
49ers
Broncos
| Week: | 6 - 10 0.375 |
| Season: | 14 - 18 0.438 |
| Lifetime: | 569 - 368 0.607 |
Patriots
Saints
Texans
Giants
Ravens
Vikings
Bills
Bengals
Commanders
Cowboys
Raiders
Chargers
Steelers
Lions
Falcons
| Week: | 8 - 8 0.500 |
| Season: | 19 - 13 0.594 |
| Lifetime: | 806 - 488 0.623 |
Patriots
Panthers
Texans
Giants
Ravens
Colts
Bills
Bengals
Commanders
Cowboys
Raiders
Chargers
Jets
49ers
Falcons
| Week: | 10 - 6 0.625 |
| Season: | 21 - 11 0.656 |
| Lifetime: | 581 - 336 0.634 |
Patriots
Saints
Texans
Giants
Eagles
Colts
Bills
Bengals
Commanders
Cowboys
Raiders
Chargers
Jets
49ers
Broncos
| Week: | 9 - 7 0.562 |
| Season: | 9 - 7 0.562 |
| Lifetime: | 511 - 310 0.622 |
Patriots
Panthers
Texans
Giants
Ravens
Vikings
Bills
Bengals
Rams
Cowboys
Raiders
Titans
Steelers
Lions
Falcons
| Week: | 8 - 7 0.533 |
| Season: | 15 - 16 0.484 |
| Lifetime: | 574 - 369 0.609 |
Patriots
Saints
Texans
Giants
Ravens
Vikings
Bills
Bengals
Commanders
Cowboys
Raiders
Chargers
Steelers
49ers
Broncos
| Week: | 8 - 8 0.500 |
| Season: | 17 - 14 0.548 |
| Lifetime: | 163 - 96 0.629 |
Patriots
Saints
Texans
Giants
Eagles
Vikings
Chiefs
Bengals
Commanders
Cowboys
Raiders
Chargers
Steelers
49ers
Broncos
| Week: | 8 - 8 0.500 |
| Season: | 16 - 16 0.500 |
| Lifetime: | 511 - 321 0.614 |
Patriots
Saints
Texans
Giants
Ravens
Vikings
Chiefs
Bengals
Commanders
Cowboys
Raiders
Chargers
Steelers
49ers
Falcons
| Week: | 8 - 8 0.500 |
| Season: | 18 - 14 0.562 |
| Lifetime: | 435 - 266 0.621 |
Patriots
Saints
Texans
Giants
Ravens
Vikings
Bills
Browns
Commanders
Cowboys
Raiders
Chargers
Steelers
49ers
Falcons
| Week: | 7 - 9 0.438 |
| Season: | 7 - 9 0.438 |
| Lifetime: | 468 - 255 0.647 |
Patriots
Saints
Texans
Giants
Eagles
Colts
Bills
Bengals
Commanders
Cowboys
Raiders
Chargers
Steelers
49ers
Broncos
| Week: | 9 - 6 0.600 |
| Season: | 23 - 8 0.742 |
| Lifetime: | 296 - 181 0.621 |
Patriots
Saints
Texans
Giants
Ravens
Vikings
Chiefs
Bengals
Commanders
Cowboys
Dolphins
Chargers
Jets
49ers
Broncos
| Week: | 7 - 9 0.438 |
| Season: | 17 - 15 0.531 |
| Lifetime: | 361 - 205 0.638 |
Patriots
Saints
Texans
Giants
Eagles
Colts
Chiefs
Bengals
Commanders
Cowboys
Raiders
Chargers
Steelers
49ers
Broncos
| Week: | 9 - 7 0.562 |
| Season: | 18 - 14 0.562 |
| Lifetime: | 282 - 181 0.609 |
Patriots
Saints
Texans
Giants
Ravens
Colts
Bills
Bengals
Commanders
Cowboys
Raiders
Chargers
Steelers
49ers
Falcons
| Week: | 9 - 7 0.562 |
| Season: | 19 - 13 0.594 |
| Lifetime: | 272 - 148 0.648 |
Patriots
Panthers
Texans
Buccaneers
Ravens
Vikings
Bills
Bengals
Commanders
Seahawks
Raiders
Chargers
Steelers
49ers
Falcons
| Week: | 10 - 6 0.625 |
| Season: | 12 - 7 0.632 |
| Lifetime: | 156 - 97 0.617 |
Patriots
Saints
Texans
Giants
Eagles
Colts
Chiefs
Bengals
Commanders
Cowboys
Raiders
Titans
Steelers
49ers
Broncos
| Week: | 8 - 8 0.500 |
| Season: | 17 - 15 0.531 |
| Lifetime: | 31 - 29 0.517 |
Patriots
Saints
Texans
Giants
Ravens
Vikings
Bills
Bengals
Commanders
Cowboys
Raiders
Chargers
Steelers
49ers
Falcons
| Week: | 9 - 7 0.562 |
| Season: | 17 - 15 0.531 |
| Lifetime: | 17 - 15 0.531 |
Patriots
Saints
HOU @ JAC - No Pick
Giants
Ravens
Vikings
Bills
Bengals
WAS @ LA - No Pick
Cowboys
LV @ MIA - No Pick
TEN @ LAC - No Pick
NYJ @ PIT - No Pick
DET @ SF - No Pick
DEN @ ATL - No Pick
| Week: | 3 - 5 0.375 |
| Season: | 3 - 5 0.375 |
| Lifetime: | 3 - 5 0.375 |
Create an Account or Login to make your own picks!
| Vikings 20 @ Colts 23 | |
 | JeremyThe Vikings won't win many more games if they play like they did for much of last week. Except for this one. |
 | SarahCould go either way, both teams had their problems in the first game. #DullAnalysis |
 | JonThis could be interesting. I think Percy Harvin will have a big game. |
 | Lions 19 @ 49ers 27 | |
| JeremyStafford might find a way to throw 8 ints in this one. |
| SarahKind of excited to watch this game.... oh wait Stafford had like 4 INTs last week right? |
| JonIntriguing. (sí, sí, very intrigued, very intrigued) This could be a really good game. I'll be setting my dvr to record only the handshake. |
| Broncos 21 @ Falcons 27 | |
| JeremyAm I to understand Peyton Manning is actually the quarterback of the Broncos? |
| SarahHave Matty Ice on my fantasy team and RGIII, both were good picks.... so far. |
| JonSomehow I feel like the Vikings should be playing in this game. |
  | skulman 09/12/2012 @ 02:36:21 PM |
 |
|---|---|---|
There are ALOT of teams that won't win if they played like they did last week. I mean it was only week 1  |
Yours:
 
Rated 0 times. |
|
  | Sarah - 4605 Posts 09/12/2012 @ 07:21:18 PM |
|
|---|---|---|
| Yea, but if you saw the Packers game, they looked beyond horrible. |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
 | Alex - 3619 Posts 09/12/2012 @ 10:13:03 PM |
|
|---|---|---|
|
AP in the discussion for best RB ever? He's not even on this totally random list I don't understand http://www.rankopedia.com/Best-NFL-Running-Back-Ever/Step1/743/.htm Fantasy football has made the otherwise totally reliable yahoo answers impossible to search for anything about an NFL player besides "Who should you draft/trade/start for your team?". http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/rb2007 The simple version: DYAR means a running back with more total value. DVOA means a running back with more value per play. Year DYAR DVOA 2007 4th 7th 2008 17th 22nd 2009 10th 23rd 2010 6th 7th 2011 9th 11th They have stats back to 1991, Emmitt Smith was first in DYAR in 92, 93, 94, 95, second in 91 I know I'm going to miss the Thursday night game pick at least once this year. Football is for weekends. |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
 | Scott - 6225 Posts 09/13/2012 @ 07:41:47 AM |
|
|---|---|---|
| You know what I'm doing during tonights Packer game? Learning about childbirth. That's right. Night 2 of 2 of our childbirth class is tonight. So while Rodgers is scrambling for first downs and Matthews is sacking Cutler, I'll be learning about pain tolerance, and breathing, and amniotic sac ruptures. I have the game set to DVR, but I'm not sure if I want to sneak a constant look at my phone to see how it plays out, or if I play the earmuffs game and wait in ignorance until I get home and watch the recorded game with no prior knowledge. The second options takes a lot of will power, of which I have very little. |
Yours:
Total:  Rated 1 times. |
|
|
| Scott - 6225 Posts 09/13/2012 @ 07:44:20 AM |
|
|---|---|---|
| Also, maybe ESPN/NFL Network is still sour about the whole "It's modern-day slavery" thing. |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
| Scott edited this at 09/13/2012 7:44:43 am | ||
|
| Scott - 6225 Posts 09/13/2012 @ 08:58:47 AM |
|
|---|---|---|
| Now I'm the ScottTime (truely, the only meaningful time period in all of history) leader in wins |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
|
| Alex - I don't need to get steady I know just how I feel 09/13/2012 @ 01:03:38 PM |
|
|---|---|---|
|
Alex Wrote - Yesterday @ 10:13:03 PM I know I'm going to miss the Thursday night game pick at least once this year. Football is for weekends. So instead of picking my game last night I just made this comment about forgetting to pick games... |
Yours:
Total: Rated 1 times. |
|
 | Carlos44ec - Since 1980! 09/13/2012 @ 05:00:21 PM |
|
|---|---|---|
|
Jeremy: "I'm going to fill this spot of two teams, and a rivalry, that get talked entirely too much about with this: I get where the Vikings stand nationally. I understand they won't be the headliner on most, if any, weeks, especially when paired with the Jaguars. That said, in a week where the best running back that the league has seen, possibly ever, returns from a devastating knee injury in essentially record time to run roughshod over another team, squared against perhaps the second best back, recently off a nationally discussed hold out. In a week where the two teams combine to produce, easily, the most dramatic game. In a week where, the very first example of a new, and big, rule change effecting a game plays out. I shouldn't have to watch the NFL Network/ESPN for an hour and a half before you would even know the Vikings or Jaguars were NFL franchises, let alone what played out. There are only 16 games." if only I could vote a steamy turd for this comment. Turd this post if you agree. |
Yours:
Total:  Rated 1 times. |
|
|
| Scott - 6225 Posts 09/14/2012 @ 08:48:46 AM |
|
|---|---|---|
|
A few thoughts. 1) I made it the entire night without finding out anything about the game until I got home. So at about 10:00 I started watching the DVR'd game and finished up around 11:30. Not too shabby, although the drama of the fake field goal was ruined by the fact that the DVR didn't respond to me hitting "play" right away, so I saw for a brief moment the Packers running down the field. 2) Tramon Williams had a rough year last year after battling a pinched nerve early on. He never really recovered and played soft the entire season. At least last night, Tramon all but shut down and dominated Brandon Marshall. Hopefully that's a trend. 3) That was one of the best defensive performances I've seen from the Packers in over a year. I know the Bears have some issues with their offensive line, but that doesn't take away from a defense that sacked the QB 7 times, picked off 4 passes, and if it wasn't for a few guys with bricks for hands, they could have had about 3 more ints. 4) There may be some bias to this test since he is 1-7 against the Packers, but I don't think I've noticed more lame duck floater passes thrown by any other QB than Jay Cutler. I swear he lofts 4 or 5 wobblers a game that look they came off the hand of a peewee QB. I'm sure he has a strong arm and all, but there are times where he puts absolutely nothing into a throw and ends up with some of the ugliest looking passes. 5) after two weeks, the Packers are better than the Bears (and by association better than the Colts), but not as good as the 49ers. 6) I changed my pick in the Vikings-Colts game. My initial thought was "both teams aren't that good, and the Vikings barely won at home to the Jaguars". The Colts, however, got pummeled by the Bears who then looked like a high school offense compared to the Packers defense. So the Colts defense must be absolutely terrible if they allowed 42 points to the Bears. Vikings by 14. That's all for now. |
Yours:
Total: Rated 2 times. |
|
|
| Scott - No, I did not change your screen saver settings 09/14/2012 @ 11:27:25 AM |
|
|---|---|---|
|
Carlos44ec Wrote - Yesterday @ 05:00:21 PM Jeremy: "I'm going to fill this spot of two teams, and a rivalry, that get talked entirely too much about with this: I get where the Vikings stand nationally. I understand they won't be the headliner on most, if any, weeks, especially when paired with the Jaguars. That said, in a week where the best running back that the league has seen, possibly ever, returns from a devastating knee injury in essentially record time to run roughshod over another team, squared against perhaps the second best back, recently off a nationally discussed hold out. In a week where the two teams combine to produce, easily, the most dramatic game. In a week where, the very first example of a new, and big, rule change effecting a game plays out. I shouldn't have to watch the NFL Network/ESPN for an hour and a half before you would even know the Vikings or Jaguars were NFL franchises, let alone what played out. There are only 16 games." if only I could vote a steamy turd for this comment. Turd this post if you agree. what "rule change" was jeremy referring to? |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
|
| Alex - Who controls the past now controls the future 09/14/2012 @ 12:25:38 PM |
|
|---|---|---|
|
Scott Wrote - Today @ 11:27:25 AM Carlos44ec Wrote - Yesterday @ 05:00:21 PM Jeremy: "I'm going to fill this spot of two teams, and a rivalry, that get talked entirely too much about with this: I get where the Vikings stand nationally. I understand they won't be the headliner on most, if any, weeks, especially when paired with the Jaguars. That said, in a week where the best running back that the league has seen, possibly ever, returns from a devastating knee injury in essentially record time to run roughshod over another team, squared against perhaps the second best back, recently off a nationally discussed hold out. In a week where the two teams combine to produce, easily, the most dramatic game. In a week where, the very first example of a new, and big, rule change effecting a game plays out. I shouldn't have to watch the NFL Network/ESPN for an hour and a half before you would even know the Vikings or Jaguars were NFL franchises, let alone what played out. There are only 16 games." if only I could vote a steamy turd for this comment. Turd this post if you agree. what "rule change" was jeremy referring to? Overtime |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
| Alex screwed with this at 09/14/2012 12:25:54 pm | ||
|
| Scott - No, I did not change your screen saver settings 09/14/2012 @ 12:30:05 PM |
|
|---|---|---|
| Ah, I just looked up last week's game. Although it would have been more fitting if the vikings kicked the field goal and then lost on an ensuing touchdown, since of course it would be the vikings who would be the first team to get screwed by the "it's not sudden death if the first possession ends in a field goal" rule. But alas, it didn't play out that way. |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
|
| Alex - 3619 Posts 09/14/2012 @ 12:39:27 PM |
|
|---|---|---|
|
Scott Wrote - Today @ 08:48:46 AM 2) Tramon Williams had a rough year last year after battling a pinched nerve early on. He never really recovered and played soft the entire season. At least last night, Tramon all but shut down and dominated Brandon Marshall. Hopefully that's a trend. He played well but they also pretty much double covered Marshall on every play. Scott Wrote - Today @ 08:48:46 AM 3) That was one of the best defensive performances I've seen from the Packers in over a year. I know the Bears have some issues with their offensive line, but that doesn't take away from a defense that sacked the QB 7 times, picked off 4 passes, and if it wasn't for a few guys with bricks for hands, they could have had about 3 more ints. After last seasons complete lack of pass rush this was good to see. Particularly when got pressure rushing only 4 or 3. Scott Wrote - Today @ 08:48:46 AM 4) There may be some bias to this test since he is 1-7 against the Packers, but I don't think I've noticed more lame duck floater passes thrown by any other QB than Jay Cutler. I swear he lofts 4 or 5 wobblers a game that look they came off the hand of a peewee QB. I'm sure he has a strong arm and all, but there are times where he puts absolutely nothing into a throw and ends up with some of the ugliest looking passes. Kind of like James Jones, Cutler doesn't have 100% focus on every play. The long interception towards Marshall into double coverage basically seemed like Culter said to himself, "meh, @#$# it, I don't care anymore". Meanwhile Rodgers blows a gasket after his interception when they were up by 3 scores with 8 minutes left. That focus and never taking a play off is what separates the talented from the best. My only other thought is this could have been a much closer game. Marshall should have had caught that ball in the end zone. The Bears had some dumb penalties. So as much as last week was no time to hit the panic button, let's not get too excited about 1 win either. |
Yours:
Total: Rated 1 times. |
|
|
| Scott - 6225 Posts 09/14/2012 @ 12:50:58 PM |
|
|---|---|---|
|
One funny comment I heard listening to the Scott Van Pelt show on my way home from work yesterday (before the game): he was talking about the Bears offense and if they would match up against the Packers: Sure Cutler's got some nice weapons, but he doesn't have actual weapons. He's not out their wiedling swords (emphasis on the W). To Alex's very last comment, I agree. The offense, for what ever reason, is not fully in sync. Receivers are dropping what appear to be nicely thrown balls, Rodgers isn't hitting guys perfectly the way he seemed to last year, and so far the offensive line has been shoddy. Particularly the left side of the line, particulary Marshall Newhouse. He got blown up a couple of times last night, and not just ran over. Julius Peppers ran right around him on one play that resulted in a sack and Newhouse barely got a hand on him. I, like Alex (I'm assuming anyway), am withholding judgement thus far. Like I said, all we know right now is the Packers are probably better than the Bears but not quite as good as the 49ers |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
  | Jeremy - 9475 Posts 09/14/2012 @ 05:33:32 PM |
|
|---|---|---|
|
Alex Wrote - 09/12/2012 @ 10:13:03 PM AP in the discussion for best RB ever? He's not even on this totally random list I don't understand http://www.rankopedia.com/Best-NFL-Running-Back-Ever/Step1/743/.htm That list has a guy in a Mets uniform and He Hate Me on it...so..... |
Yours:
Rated 0 times. |
|
|
| Scott - Get Up! Get outta here! Gone! 09/17/2012 @ 10:41:24 AM |
|
|---|---|---|
| I'm not going to lie, I assumed that the Vikings were a little better than that. My assumption (although the transitive property doesn't always work too well in football) was that since the Colts gave up 42 points to the Bears, who then got totally shut down by the Packers, the Vikings should have been able to put up some points against what must obviously be an extremely terrible defense. I apparently underestimated the Vikings suckitude. Although I didn't watch the game so I have no idea how the game played out other than the final score. |
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....
Bears 10 @ Packers 23
Jeremy
I'm going to fill this spot of two teams, and a rivalry, that get talked entirely too much about with this: I get where the Vikings stand nationally. I understand they won't be the headliner on most, if any, weeks, especially when paired with the Jaguars. That said, in a week where the best running back that the league has seen, possibly ever, returns from a devastating knee injury in essentially record time to run roughshod over another team, squared against perhaps the second best back, recently off a nationally discussed hold out. In a week where the two teams combine to produce, easily, the most dramatic game. In a week where, the very first example of a new, and big, rule change effecting a game plays out. I shouldn't have to watch the NFL Network/ESPN for an hour and a half before you would even know the Vikings or Jaguars were NFL franchises, let alone what played out. There are only 16 games.Sarah
If the Packers play like they played on Sunday they're not winning this game.Jon
I'm not ready to freak out about the Packers and say they've taken a slide. More likely, they just ran into one of the top teams in the league last Sunday. That said, the Bears possibly have their best roster assembled in a while. I'm not sure about it, but it sounds like something that might be true. Brandon Marshall teamed up with Jay Cutler should probably scare Packers fans. Still, I'm not sure the Bears defense is the defense of years past. Again, I'm just not sure. But I'd be surprised if they're as good as San Francisco is. Here's the big stat you need to know about the Packers though. In their last 5 games (regular season and playoff games combined), they are 2-3. Though, there was a bye in there that they earned, so that's sort of a win. As for this game, even with Jennings out, they probably have enough offense to win.