Survivor Pools - Week 2 (1 Viewer)

[Raider Nation]

Some mammoth lines here. This might be one of those "dead weeks" where everyone advances.

For instance:

Chicago

N.O. -7

G.B. -10.5

CAROLINA

K.C.

DETROIT -8

Seattle

PITTSBURGH -14.5

Jax

NYJ -9.5

S.D.

N.E. -7

Anyone thinking about getting cute and taking a smaller favorite, then pray one of the big favorites gets knocked off??

 

[silentcoach]

Maybe some "easy" ones with Jets and Steelers.

 

[Podcast]

Pittsburgh

 

[The Hank]

Some mammoth lines here. This might be one of those "dead weeks" where everyone advances.For instance:ChicagoN.O. -7G.B. -10.5CAROLINAK.C.DETROIT -8SeattlePITTSBURGH -14.5JaxNYJ -9.5S.D.N.E. -7Anyone thinking about getting cute and taking a smaller favorite, then pray one of the big favorites gets knocked off??

I love Pittsburgh this week and I think they'll win handedly, but that line... I'd be inclined to take Seattle w/ points

 

[Raiderfan32904]

I like Detroit early in the season, while still full strength against a horrible KC team pre-Haley firing. Actually I think I'll round robin all KC opponents till Haley's canned. Then I'll find another gravy train.

 

[gkza]

Any love for Buffalo?

Oak is coming off short week, fliyng acorss the country for a 1pm start. There are some crazy statistics that show how miserable Oak is when playing 1pm starts EST.

Might not be too smart, I thought Oakland looked decent in their victory last night. Any thoughts?

 

[Raider Nation]

Any love for Buffalo? Oak is coming off short week, fliyng acorss the country for a 1pm start. There are some crazy statistics that show how miserable Oak is when playing 1pm starts EST. Might not be too smart, I thought Oakland looked decent in their victory last night. Any thoughts?

In a suicide pool? That's insane, IMO, and not just because I'm a Raider fan. Oakland can run on anyone.

 

[Raider Nation]

Maybe some "easy" ones with Jets and Steelers.

Just a word of caution about the Jets: Jacksonville totally shut down Chris Johnson last week. Their D looks MUCH improved.

 

[Raiderfan32904]

Any love for Buffalo? Oak is coming off short week, fliyng acorss the country for a 1pm start. There are some crazy statistics that show how miserable Oak is when playing 1pm starts EST. Might not be too smart, I thought Oakland looked decent in their victory last night. Any thoughts?

Oakland has been training starting last year to accomodate for 10AM games. They change their entire schedule of training as if they are on East Coast time. Just as the trained at night all week to get ready for last night's game. They have been improved quite a bit in cross country trips. KC is a horrid team, and Buffalo ran up the score on a team that collectively gave up. I'd not get cute with Buffalo when you have a plethora of double digit favorites on the board. Just advance, safe and sound. Leave the risk for another day.

 

[silentcoach]

Maybe some "easy" ones with Jets and Steelers.

Just a word of caution about the Jets: Jacksonville totally shut down Chris Johnson last week. Their D looks MUCH improved.

True, however, the jets did not run on the cowboys to beat them, did they?! Sanchez will throw all over the field....again. And the jets' def will do enough to win.

 

[Pipes]

Don't overthink it and just take Pittsburgh. Seattle's terrible and Pittsburgh is going to be pissed after last week's showing. That game is going to be a bloodbath.

 

[J-Dawg]

I had Arizona last week and it nearly cost me. Don't want to make the mistake this week and try to get cute, I'm taking Pittsburgh. I hate to burn one of the best teams in the league so early, but I don't want to be eliminated by the 2nd week of the season either.

 

[Lascelle]

Leaning Pittsburgh as well.

Plenty of time to get cute with picks later in the year when the Suck for Luck race is in full swing.

 

[Time Kibitzer]

Don't overthink it and just take Pittsburgh. Seattle's terrible and Pittsburgh is going to be pissed after last week's showing. That game is going to be a bloodbath.

Take Pitt and breathe easy.

 

[adrenaline]

I like Baltimore (-6) at Tennessee.

 

[massraider]

Some mammoth lines here. This might be one of those "dead weeks" where everyone advances.Anyone thinking about getting cute and taking a smaller favorite, then pray one of the big favorites gets knocked off??

Yeah. I am in a really big Survivor pool, and if you want to win, you have to take some risks. I am thinking about Buffalo. The Raiders have had a tough time stringing wins together, discipline is still a problem, and its the second road game in a row, early East Coast game. They tend to not like those. I also think the Bills might be a bit underrated. Fitzpatrick is flying under the radar, but he does a lot of really good things. The Raiders could have lost on Monday, and they are a much better team than the Broncos. Orton doesn't drop that ball, I think they lose. Oakland isn't as good as the sum of their parts yet, and I think they are better later in the year. A letdown after breaking their Opening Day and Monday Night streaks, short week, and cross country trip seems very possible.

 

[leave a whisper]

i had the 49ers -5 over the Seahawks last week

this week: i like the Colts +2 over the Browns.

 

[johnadams]

I don't see how anyone would take a team other than Pitt or GB this week. To me, it's all about staying alive through the first few weeks. I look at it this way. I take Pitt now, then I'll get to use them. If I take BUF now and whiff, I'll not get the opportunity to take Pitt in the future. I'll save my risks for when I've used up my sure things, hoping that the league is done by week 10 and I won't have to look to many BUF-OAK games to win.

 

[Time Kibitzer]

Some mammoth lines here. This might be one of those "dead weeks" where everyone advances.Anyone thinking about getting cute and taking a smaller favorite, then pray one of the big favorites gets knocked off??

Yeah. I am in a really big Survivor pool, and if you want to win, you have to take some risks. I am thinking about Buffalo. The Raiders have had a tough time stringing wins together, discipline is still a problem, and its the second road game in a row, early East Coast game. They tend to not like those. I also think the Bills might be a bit underrated. Fitzpatrick is flying under the radar, but he does a lot of really good things. The Raiders could have lost on Monday, and they are a much better team than the Broncos. Orton doesn't drop that ball, I think they lose. Oakland isn't as good as the sum of their parts yet, and I think they are better later in the year. A letdown after breaking their Opening Day and Monday Night streaks, short week, and cross country trip seems very possible.

Do you get extra points for taking lesser favourites or something? Otherwise I don't see how playing in a larger Survivor pool would affect your strategy; your goal is to pick winners 17 weeks in a row no matter the size of the pool.

 

[massraider]

Some mammoth lines here. This might be one of those "dead weeks" where everyone advances.Anyone thinking about getting cute and taking a smaller favorite, then pray one of the big favorites gets knocked off??

Yeah. I am in a really big Survivor pool, and if you want to win, you have to take some risks. I am thinking about Buffalo. The Raiders have had a tough time stringing wins together, discipline is still a problem, and its the second road game in a row, early East Coast game. They tend to not like those. I also think the Bills might be a bit underrated. Fitzpatrick is flying under the radar, but he does a lot of really good things. The Raiders could have lost on Monday, and they are a much better team than the Broncos. Orton doesn't drop that ball, I think they lose. Oakland isn't as good as the sum of their parts yet, and I think they are better later in the year. A letdown after breaking their Opening Day and Monday Night streaks, short week, and cross country trip seems very possible.

Do you get extra points for taking lesser favourites or something? Otherwise I don't see how playing in a larger Survivor pool would affect your strategy; your goal is to pick winners 17 weeks in a row no matter the size of the pool.

If you feel good about Buffalo's chances , and they win, you have an advantage over anyone that took a chalk pick. Later in the year, when you are deciding who to pick, you have a larger pool of better teams than people that used the Pats, Eagles, etc. I used San Fran last week. I don't have to pick them late in the year, hoping they upset someone, because I used all the good teams early. After two weeks, someone that took San Fran and Buffalo has a distinct advantage over someone that took Philly and New England.

 

[Time Kibitzer]

Some mammoth lines here. This might be one of those "dead weeks" where everyone advances.Anyone thinking about getting cute and taking a smaller favorite, then pray one of the big favorites gets knocked off??

Yeah. I am in a really big Survivor pool, and if you want to win, you have to take some risks. I am thinking about Buffalo. The Raiders have had a tough time stringing wins together, discipline is still a problem, and its the second road game in a row, early East Coast game. They tend to not like those. I also think the Bills might be a bit underrated. Fitzpatrick is flying under the radar, but he does a lot of really good things. The Raiders could have lost on Monday, and they are a much better team than the Broncos. Orton doesn't drop that ball, I think they lose. Oakland isn't as good as the sum of their parts yet, and I think they are better later in the year. A letdown after breaking their Opening Day and Monday Night streaks, short week, and cross country trip seems very possible.

Do you get extra points for taking lesser favourites or something? Otherwise I don't see how playing in a larger Survivor pool would affect your strategy; your goal is to pick winners 17 weeks in a row no matter the size of the pool.

If you feel good about Buffalo's chances , and they win, you have an advantage over anyone that took a chalk pick. Later in the year, when you are deciding who to pick, you have a larger pool of better teams than people that used the Pats, Eagles, etc. I used San Fran last week. I don't have to pick them late in the year, hoping they upset someone, because I used all the good teams early. After two weeks, someone that took San Fran and Buffalo has a distinct advantage over someone that took Philly and New England.

Picking teams like that is just putting unnecessary risk on yourself. Saving Pitt for later is irrelevant if you go out in week 2 after picking Buffalo. The advantage for saving teams also isn't as great as you may think. At no point during the 17 weeks are you ever forced to take an underdog, so having to pick a ####ty team and hope they upset someone simply wouldn't happen. There are teams that go 2-14 that you can just pick their opponent every week and do pretty good. At this early point in the season though we don't know who those teams are.

 

[johnadams]

At this early point in the season though we don't know who those teams are.

I'm looking squarely at SEA, especially when they play outside of their division.

 

[Doctor Detroit]

I like Baltimore (-6) at Tennessee.

Road teams never the best play in these IMO. If you are going Baltimore why not just take Pittsburgh? You're wasting a good team early might as well take the team at home.I'm going Detroit myself.

 

[Sinrman]

Definitely Pittsburgh. They are going to be ANGRY, and Seattle is just awful...

 

[Lash]

i like PIT as easiest winner but Lions as second easiest

and PIT has TEN coming to town in 3 weeks

DET doesnt have a gimme again like this week until week 11 vs CAR and by that time Stafford, Best likely will be hurt for the year

so going DET

 

[Raider Nation]

i like PIT as easiest winner but Lions as second easiestand PIT has TEN coming to town in 3 weeksDET doesnt have a gimme again like this week until week 11 vs CAR and by that time Stafford, Best likely will be hurt for the yearso going DET

Man, that's ballsy IMO. All Charles needs is a small opening and he can make some house calls. Hold your breath and pray.

 

[duaneok66]

agree with others in here who say take PIT and relax . . .

 

[Raider Nation]

agree with others in here who say take PIT and relax . . .

Let's say someone had three spots in the same pool. How stupid would it be to go all-in on the Steelers with all three selections?

 

[duaneok66]

agree with others in here who say take PIT and relax . . .

Let's say someone had three spots in the same pool. How stupid would it be to go all-in on the Steelers with all three selections?

fair point, but seriously, is there ANY way the Steelers lose that game???

 

[Billy Bats]

agree with others in here who say take PIT and relax . . .

Yea I'm in that boat as well. I'll use the best teams early and sweat picks later on when the pool has dwindled. All my buddies who took KC and Cleveland this past Sunday can't use Pittsburgh this week.

 

[Raider Nation]

agree with others in here who say take PIT and relax . . .

Let's say someone had three spots in the same pool. How stupid would it be to go all-in on the Steelers with all three selections?

fair point, but seriously, is there ANY way the Steelers lose that game???

I wasn't making a point. It's an honest question.If someone with only one spot can "relax" picking them, can I not "relax" picking them with all three picks?

 

[Restricted]

Some mammoth lines here. This might be one of those "dead weeks" where everyone advances.Anyone thinking about getting cute and taking a smaller favorite, then pray one of the big favorites gets knocked off??

Yeah. I am in a really big Survivor pool, and if you want to win, you have to take some risks. I am thinking about Buffalo. The Raiders have had a tough time stringing wins together, discipline is still a problem, and its the second road game in a row, early East Coast game. They tend to not like those. I also think the Bills might be a bit underrated. Fitzpatrick is flying under the radar, but he does a lot of really good things. The Raiders could have lost on Monday, and they are a much better team than the Broncos. Orton doesn't drop that ball, I think they lose. Oakland isn't as good as the sum of their parts yet, and I think they are better later in the year. A letdown after breaking their Opening Day and Monday Night streaks, short week, and cross country trip seems very possible.

Do you get extra points for taking lesser favourites or something? Otherwise I don't see how playing in a larger Survivor pool would affect your strategy; your goal is to pick winners 17 weeks in a row no matter the size of the pool.

If you feel good about Buffalo's chances , and they win, you have an advantage over anyone that took a chalk pick. Later in the year, when you are deciding who to pick, you have a larger pool of better teams than people that used the Pats, Eagles, etc. I used San Fran last week. I don't have to pick them late in the year, hoping they upset someone, because I used all the good teams early. After two weeks, someone that took San Fran and Buffalo has a distinct advantage over someone that took Philly and New England.

Agree with the methodology but you gotta play it somewhat safe the first few rounds/weeks as you get to know the teams again. Sin, The people who took KC and Cleveland last week.

 

[Billy Bats]

agree with others in here who say take PIT and relax . . .

Let's say someone had three spots in the same pool. How stupid would it be to go all-in on the Steelers with all three selections?

I've never had more than one entry in a survivor pool, but taking the same team on all your entries defeats the purpose of having multiple entries, no? I would make three different selections each week.

 

[adrenaline]

I like Baltimore (-6) at Tennessee.

Road teams never the best play in these IMO. If you are going Baltimore why not just take Pittsburgh? You're wasting a good team early might as well take the team at home.I'm going Detroit myself.

Mainly because Pit was crap last week, yeah I know it was against Baltimore < another good reason to take them this week.I won with Detroit on the road last week.

 

[NajehHejan]

I went ballsy last week and took CLE in one and SF in the other. Now that I'm already out of one, but am feeling solid with SF in the rear view mirror in the other, I'm going Pitt or DET. Would rather take DET as I trust them less, and they have less future value, but just don't know if I can do it.

 

[Marauder]

agree with others in here who say take PIT and relax . . .

Let's say someone had three spots in the same pool. How stupid would it be to go all-in on the Steelers with all three selections?

I've never had more than one entry in a survivor pool, but taking the same team on all your entries defeats the purpose of having multiple entries, no? I would make three different selections each week.

I've never had more than one entry in a pool either but I would have no problem taking the same team on all my entries early in the year. My strategy would be to give all three entries the best chance to survive until later in the year when it gets tougher. Then you have the leverage to take some chances.

 

[massraider]

Some mammoth lines here. This might be one of those "dead weeks" where everyone advances.Anyone thinking about getting cute and taking a smaller favorite, then pray one of the big favorites gets knocked off??

Yeah. I am in a really big Survivor pool, and if you want to win, you have to take some risks. I am thinking about Buffalo. The Raiders have had a tough time stringing wins together, discipline is still a problem, and its the second road game in a row, early East Coast game. They tend to not like those. I also think the Bills might be a bit underrated. Fitzpatrick is flying under the radar, but he does a lot of really good things. The Raiders could have lost on Monday, and they are a much better team than the Broncos. Orton doesn't drop that ball, I think they lose. Oakland isn't as good as the sum of their parts yet, and I think they are better later in the year. A letdown after breaking their Opening Day and Monday Night streaks, short week, and cross country trip seems very possible.

Do you get extra points for taking lesser favourites or something? Otherwise I don't see how playing in a larger Survivor pool would affect your strategy; your goal is to pick winners 17 weeks in a row no matter the size of the pool.

If you feel good about Buffalo's chances , and they win, you have an advantage over anyone that took a chalk pick. Later in the year, when you are deciding who to pick, you have a larger pool of better teams than people that used the Pats, Eagles, etc. I used San Fran last week. I don't have to pick them late in the year, hoping they upset someone, because I used all the good teams early. After two weeks, someone that took San Fran and Buffalo has a distinct advantage over someone that took Philly and New England.

Agree with the methodology but you gotta play it somewhat safe the first few rounds/weeks as you get to know the teams again. Sin, The people who took KC and Cleveland last week.

I think people who took KC didbn't think they were going to far out on a limb. Divison winner, strong running game,vs. a bad team that is on the road. I diodn't hear too much talk about an upset special on this game. That's a bit of 20/20 hindsight. I did play it somewhat safe, in that I switched my pick from AZ to SF last minute. Too many unknowns at QB for both teams, which fits in with what you say. Getting bounced in Week 13 is the same as getting bounced in Week 2, I can have a real shot by calling the wins for a few lesser teams early in the year. You play it safe, come Week 12, you are choosing from a bunch of teams that can lose to anyone, and competing against guys guessed right early in the year, and are choosing between Green Bay, Philly, and New Orleans.

 

[Billy Bats]

agree with others in here who say take PIT and relax . . .

Let's say someone had three spots in the same pool. How stupid would it be to go all-in on the Steelers with all three selections?

I've never had more than one entry in a survivor pool, but taking the same team on all your entries defeats the purpose of having multiple entries, no? I would make three different selections each week.

I've never had more than one entry in a pool either but I would have no problem taking the same team on all my entries early in the year. My strategy would be to give all three entries the best chance to survive until later in the year when it gets tougher. Then you have the leverage to take some chances.

So what's the point of having three entries if they can all get bounced on one upset? I'd rather lose one entry and still have 2 shots on winning the whole thing. maasraider> What happens in week 13 when a couple of the better teams have nothingto play for and start resting guys? Meanwhile they're playing a team that's fighting for their playoffs lives? And Losing in week 13 isn't close to losing in week 2. Ive lost 11 weeks of competition, and had to deal with a whole season of ragging and ball breaking from my buddies who are still playing and laughing at me because I was being "smart" and taking Buffalo in week 2. Not even close to the same!

 

[Buc in Exile]

I like the Jets here. Their schedule gets pretty dicey after this week, and I can't see Jax scoring more than 17 on the road. I certainly couldn't fault anyone for taking Pittsburgh, but there are quite a few good places left to take them.

 

[massraider]

I like the Jets here. Their schedule gets pretty dicey after this week, and I can't see Jax scoring more than 17 on the road. I certainly couldn't fault anyone for taking Pittsburgh, but there are quite a few good places left to take them.

I like this call, and not sure I have guts to take Buffalo, and I think the Jets can lose a few they supposed to win. Seems like a good spot.

 

[Lash]

RE: jets

at some point in some game later on this year they are gonna face a QB who cant handle blitzes, whether because it's a QB starting because of an injury OR one of these young QBs that the teams put in too early

and it'll be an automatic W

i like Jags defense and run game and can see a one score game, but i can also see McCown getting flustered

tuff choice between DET and NYJ now that you've made me think about it, with PIT being the obvious