Ralph is the champion of week twelve, with a 12-4 record. Give props. Get your picks in early for the THURSDAY NIGHT GAME. All picks are against the spread. Home teams are in caps. Here are my selections: COWBOYS -7 over Packers, RAMS -4.5 over Falcons, Bills +6 over REDSKINS, Lions +3.5 over VIKINGS, TITANS -4 over Texans, Jaguars +7 COLTS, Jets +1 over DOLPHINS, Chargers -5 over CHIEFS, EAGLES -3 over Seahawks, PANTHERS -3 over Niners, SAINTS -3 over Bucs, CARDS +1 over Browns, RAIDERS +3 over Broncos, BEARS +2 over Giants, Bengals +7 over STEELERS, and, on Monday Night Football, Patriots -20.5 over RAVENS. Make your selections in the comments section.

I'd say "I am the greatest," but you already know that.

Boys
Rams
Skins
Vikings
Titans
Colts
Fins
Chargers
Seahawks
Niners
Bucs
Browns
Broncos
Giants
Bengals
Pats

Packers
RAMS
Bills
Lions
TITANS
Jaguars
Jets
Chargers
EAGLES
PANTHERS
Bucs
Browns
Broncos
BEARS
Bengals

Monday Night

Patriots

Rosevelt Colvin placed on IR for the Pats. Big hit to the defense, but I'm just glad it came to the linebacking corps and not to the secondary. Heaven knows the secondary can't take it.

Troy Brown has been activated. I hope they use him as a cornerback, we need the help.

Green Bay
St. Louis
Buffalo
De-Riot
Tennessee
Indianapolis
New York (Jets)
San Diego
Philadelphia
San Francisco
New Orleans
Cleveland
Denver
Chicago
Pittsburgh
Baltimore

Congrats, Ralph!
Packers, Rams, Redskins, Vikings, Texans, Colts,
Chargers, Eagles, Panthers, Bucs, Browns, Broncos, Giants, Bengals, Pats

Nice job Ralph. You must be a fantasy footballer to demonstrate this kind of consistency.

BOYZ
RAMS
SKINS
VIKINGS
TITANS
COLTS
Nyets
Bolts
Feables
PANTHERS
Bucs
Browns
Broncos
DA BEARSS
STEELERS
Pats

Jerry Jones and the NFL Network will, once again, force me to leave my nest to go to a bar to watch his Boyz tomorrow night. Can't say it $uck$ too much.

I do enjoy the fantasy football (having a pretty good season, too; but guy in my league has Brady, Moss, and Peterson, so I'm ultimately doomed).

Jerry and Co. would prefer you switch to dish (which, by the way, is probably cheaper than having cable and going to the bar for a game even once). I have cable, but as I live in Big D, it's not a concern... this week. But I will have to go somewhere else to watch the Pats-Giants game.

I thought so. It makes sense that when you study something regularly and understand the minutiae, like anything else, you get good at it. It's no mystery why fantasy guys do well picking games for real. Still, there are informed decisions that need to be made to be right so that information, in the hands of somebody who makes good decisions, works.

With reference to das Dish in general and specifically how it relates to the NFL Network, I've heard that the Dish is a pain. Especially when it comes to bad weather which we can have a lot of up here in our socialist little Shangri-La. And as I don't watch a lot of TV other than History, Discovery channels, etc. and most any televised sporting event, I don't find what my cable company gives me to be that limiting.

I know that for obvious reasons the NFL is pushing their medium but I got it free for a while and other than the occasional game, it was pretty lame. So much so that I can't see going out of my way to break a sweat to get it.

So, got to go out to watch likely the best NFC match up of the season.

Yeah. I wouldn't go out and get dish just for NFL Network (though it would be a nice bonus to see the extra games in my home). I've had both Direct TV and Cable, and I prefer the former (as soon as my current contract expires, I'll be switching back to dish). It's true that in a hard rain, your out of luck. But my Time Warner cable goes out for no apparent reason on a pretty regular basis, so it wouldn't be any real difference.

Speaking of success at picking the games, I've always wanted to try making a living betting on NFL (or NCAA)games. I've always believed that a knowledgeable football fan (especially one that pays attention to stats and matchups like a fantasy footballer) knows as much about picking winners as the Vegas guys.

If I didn't have a family, and weren't pursuing a career, I'd love to live in Vegas for a season betting on games (rent an apartment; and hang out in the sports-book on Sundays). If you bet $500 a game, and could average a 10-6 record, you'd make (an average of) $2,000 a week ($32,000) in a regular season. That's pretty good cash.

I work a scheme (for entertainment purposes only) every week where I get to pick four locks and have been very successful doing it. But I stay away from the full NFL pick schedule.

In the day, I used to study this stuff and did pretty well but my financial interests now lie elsewhere and I don’t go into anything without being pretty darn sure of what the outcome will be.

So sports in general and the NFL in particular have become more of an entertainment passion. With the occasional monetary reward.

The vig, however small the percent, paid on losing bets makes the odds favor the bookie. Also, the house generally has a much greater money supply than the individual better. In other words, the house can withstand even particularly cruel losing streaks. The better cannot. Many bettors that I know treat their winnings like monopoly money, and start making very stupid bets. These are some of the reasons most bettors can't sustain winning over a whole season.

packers

Packers,
RAMS,
REDSKINS,
VIKINGS,
TITANS,
COLTS,
Jets,
CHIEFS,
Seahawks,
PANTHERS,
Bucs,
Browns,
Broncos,
Giants,
STEELERS,
RAVENS.

Next to Brady, Romo is the man.

Super Bowl: Patriots by five.

GB sucks and Favre is not a winner. Forget about getting hurt, if it ain't easy, the pressure will get him.

Except for a couple drives in the third quarter where the ball seemed to get away from him, Romo played a near flawless game. Of course, it helps when your offensive line completely dominates the line of scrimmage (most of the game, Romo could have set up a lawn chair in the pocket).

I think Dallas is a much better team than Green Bay. It seemed like Dallas let up a bit when Favre went out, only to have Rodgers play way over his head. That, combined with some strange play-calling (Julius Jones instead of Marion Barber on a 3rd and 1 that they had to have; are you kidding me!) and a fluke turnouver in the endzone by Owens (he's dropped the ball maybe three times all season), kept the game closer than it should have been.

Nevertheless, I'm still worried about the secondary against the Pats. Newman and Henry are playing, but Newman is playing with a partially torn plantar fascia, and Henry is playing with a high ankle sprain. Of course, on the flip side, Glenn has been running for two weeks without any problems, and should be on the field again by the middle of December.

I'm not sure I would say the Cowboys are a "much better" team than Green Bay. Favre had a horrible game last night, and you can't count on that regularly. But the Cowboys are definitely a better team, and I'd be surprised if they didn't end the season as NFC Champions.

I think "much better" is accurate for this one reason. Dallas owned the line of scrimmage against Green Bay. Many of Favre's poor throws can be attributed to pressure. And, as I said, Romo had all day to throw (he had time to look to his 3rd and 4th options; not that he needed to with Owens torching Harris). The Dallas O-line is just too big and athletic for the undersized Green Bay defensive-line.

Favre is good for at least one boneheaded play a game. He had no business throwing the ball on that first interception and it cost them big time.

Green Bay is a good team. But they are not, as their record might indicate, a top tier team and I don't think they can play with the big dogs.

I've never been much of a Favre fan but I do respect him and in particular marvel at his toughness and durability. But sometimes I think he'd rather be doing jean commercials than playing football and as the Packers go as Favre goes, I see them getting beat in the post season.

I would say their most likely scenario right now is a loss to the 'boys in the NFC Championship Game. It's true that Dallas has better lines, both O and D than Green Bay. But if Favre has a big game instead of a terrible one, that game is a lot closer and a Pack victory is not out of the picture. Still, I expect to see the 'Boys in the Super Bowl.

Absolutely, anything can happen, but I just don't see the Packers beating the Boys in Dallas in the championship game. And there really isn't any other challenger in the NFC.

A few weeks ago, I would have argued that the NFC is, if not the better conference, at least the AFC's equal. Now, it's not even close. With Manning at the helm, the Giants are going nowhere in the playoffs (assuming they even make the playoffs). Detroit is average at best. They'll lose to Dallas next week which will drop them into the pack (they have a record of 6-5; they're are six teams in the NFC with a 5-6 record). So it's basically the Boys and Pack.

The AFC, on the other hand, has several really talented teams below the Pats. If the Colts get relatively healthy, they're as dangerous as anyone (including New England, in my opinion). The Steelers and Jacksonville are tough. San Diego, if they ever remember how good they are, is dangerous. And the last team I'd want to see is the Browns (imagine that!). Anderson is playing out of his mind, and he's got Edwards, Winslow and Lewis around him. In short, getting to Arizona through the AFC is going to be very difficult.

I would agree that it's the Cowboy's conference to lose. Don't see anybody stepping up.

And I don't think the AFC is all that complicated either. All teams except the Pats can be had.

The Colts will not get back Freeney (hes on the IR) and I do not expect them to get back Marvin Harrison. If he does come back he won't be 100%. Without those two players they are not on New England's level imo.

The Chargers have horrible coaching and so their potential is severely limited.

At the moment I consider the Jags to be the #1 threat to the Patriots from inside the AFC. But I don't think even they are much of a threat.

rams, redskins, lions, titans, jaguars, dolphins, chargers, seahawks, panthers, saints, browns, broncos, giants, steelers, ravens.

Hahaahahahahahah oh my god, It's BCS Ragnarok!

"At the moment I consider the Jags to be the #1 threat to the Patriots from inside the AFC. But I don't think even they are much of a threat".

Ah....? no!

Does college football $uck this year or what?

I'll say it again: college football defenses CAN'T TACKLE!!!

The linebackers are playing old; the secondary is porous and in disarray; the O-line is braking down; the running backs can’t run; receivers are not getting open and dropping balls.

But when Saint Tom is on the field, they can beat anyone!

"breaking down" These late nights are killin' me.

Are you calling him "Saint Tom" because miracles happen when he's at QB? The timeout and false-start on 4th down were certainly miracles. Without that divine intervention, the Pats lose. And that defensive holding penalty on 4th down was pretty close to a miracle in the sense that it was inexplicable. That said, I do think the last TD catch was a catch, but it was really close.

At the end of the day, I'm glad that the Pats won. I want them to be unbeaten when Dallas beats them.

I think the loss of Colvin will end up being fairly significant. At 38, Seau is not an every down player. And he's certainly not (now) the playmaker that Thomas is. Moving Thomas to outside softens up the middle. Add that to the problems in the secondary, and the Pats defense appears to be susceptible to inside runs and inside throws.

I think some of the offensive woes can be blamed on the weather. With that kind of wind, the deep pass becomes difficult to impossible. Against the wind it gets knocked down; and with the wind it sails. But the pass blocking cannot be blamed on the weather. For two weeks in a row, Brady has been under serious pressure.

If the Pats struggle or lose against the Steelers, we've got ourselves a trend.

Yes. There were some miracles happening last night. The least of them, as the thuggish cry baby Ravens would have everybody believe, were calls by the refs. They were pretty questionable all the way around so I think the calls were a wash.

But the time out was huge, a couple of motion calls and a few well timed bad plays by the thuggish cry baby Ravens definately worked to increase the chances of a lucky Patriot's win.

As Bruschi said after the Eagles game, NFL football gets harder in late November and on when the weather becomes a factor.

No excuses though, at this point in the season, they look like a team in regression and next week will tell the tale. If they lose or if it's a close one, I'm worrying.

So I can't really disagree with 99% of what you've said. With the exception that the final td by Gaffney was not a questionable catch.

But, again, as long as they have Saint Thomas upright, they are still in every game.

I agree that Gaffney's catch was a catch. I just said it was really close (it looked like the ball was coming away from his hand right after he picked his second foot up, but it still appeared to be in his grasp).

Welker got me beat last night. He scored only four fantasy points, and I lost be nine. If he'd had even an average game, I'd have won handily. Oh well.

In that case, make this one of the rare times when I'm in 100% agreement.

I kept waiting for Welker to show up. I can see that they have Moss figured out and double cover him but how do you do that with young Wesley? Especially when the defense has to put their energy into covering Moss.

But as Brady says his favorite receiver is his open receiver, I would suspect that Welker was taken care of by the Ravens as, by degree, he's typically a factor.

Last night proved, once again, that the running game is a factor. As I've said, football 101 dictates that a good running game sures up a good passing game.

So, based on that truth, I have two major worries for my 2007 Patriots: they can't run and they can't stop the run.

The sports talk a-holes up here keep talking about it like it's a non-factor. Their contention is that the passing game is so good that the Pats don't need a running game. Stupid. And in my opinion whistling past the graveyard.

In fact for the last two weeks crucial touchdowns have been scored by rushers.

The Watson route had 2 penalties, a hold and a pass interference penalty that wasn't called when Watson jumped up for the ball, but couldn't because he was climbed on from behind just before the ball got there. The official called the lesser holding call and cut Baltimore a break. Oh but you don't make those calls at the end of the game, many have said. Sure if you are corupt or you set certain degrees of the rules at different times of the game, fantasyland. A good official has to make that call in the NFL every time. The rules in the NFL favor the offense and that call should be made in the NCAA and even high school as well, where their is a lot more leeway. The Patriots are victims of what they themselves were guilty of during their first super bowl years against teams like St. Louis and Indy. You hold up or just plan hold the backs and slot receivers as much as you can which can allow you to double the teams #1. I guess turnabout is fair play. Indy helped change the rules a few years ago to try to lessen what Balt and to a lesser extent philly has done the past few weeks. Regardless the Pats are now beatable and they need to wake up and improve in all phases.