GIANTS @ REDSKINS: It's rare that I say I'm not worried about a cover at all but...I'm not worried.

2016 Record: 36-21

The Pick:

Redskins - 7.5 over Giants

Lay the points. I know you're afraid of the .5 point and if you want to buy it down to 7, it's actually one of the only times I'd say it's allowed. But I'm not here to post -130 favorites. I will lay the 7.5.

This line is all driven by McAdoo. He says he will play the starters.

Folks, for all the good this guy has done this year he is still a rookie coach making a rookie mistake. He wants to appear competitive in the face of a worthless game to the Giants (outside of a tune-up) but as soon as Eli gets sacked he should be pulled to forgo injury risk of any kind, especially after Mariota and Carr going down in one week. End of story. And the same for ODB who will be hounded by Josh Norman all day anyway (and forget injury, a suspension is possible with these two going at it).

This is insane. He can't play the starters for anything more than a quarter and at most a half in a meaningless game and I expect the Skins to come out firing in the first quarter anyway with all that's on the line.

How can you tell me a defense (who has down one of it's top guys in JPP), is going to play full bore for 4 quarters with all starters?

In a meaningless game. And this all only costs us 7.5 points? At home? Where the Giants, of their 5 losses, have lost 4 on the road. The teams they lost to? Paper tigers: Vikings (under .500), Packers (When they were struggling mightily), Eagles (with the playoffs on the line and then they backed in), and the Steelers.

This is not the same team as it was on the road.

And the Skins? You may have visions of the Skins team last year who you felt were illegitimate playoff participants. This is a completely different team than last year. And the stats prove it.

Redskins played TWO playoff teams last year in the regular season and were outscored: 106-44.

This year, they played SEVEN playoff teams and were almost dead even in scoring at: 177-169.

Last year was one of the weakest NFC East divisions:

4-12 Cowboys, 6-10 Giants, 7-9 Eagles.

This year? 13-2 Cowboys, 10 win Giant team and a competitive up and coming Eagles team who are a tough out.

"But Scal, the Pass Defense is terrible!!"

Yes it is, but again, Eli will not play this whole game so you should have Josh Johnson coming in at some point (NOT Nassib who many here know as Eli's backup but he's had elbow surgery 10 days ago).

The last time Johnson threw a pass in the NFL?

12/11/2011. I'm serious.

If he comes in, the Giants already have a very weak running game with Paul Perkins as their primary in front of Jennings.

So even if Eli stays in, the Skins have played good/decent to top flight QB's this year (unlike last year): Dak twice/Wentz twice/Eli/Stafford/Palmer/Dalton/Newton/Flacco.

Now you see why their pass defense gets shredded? And this team has nine wins!

And they easily could have 11: A missed 34 yard FG in London. And the other game which some here don't remember and it was worse: Up 17-13, they let the Lions score a TD in 73 seconds over a nearly a full football field.

And now for the whopper.

Remember we took Penn State to beat Wisconsin and I said that THIS Penn State team would never be the same. The momentum it built, it's defense, it's QB/RB combo, it's resurrection from the Paterno scandal, Franklin's resurgence. All of that or almost all that goes away in a new season. That was one reason why we took them. They were a special team.

We get that magic with the Skins and it only comes around once in Halley's Comet flyby with the Skins.

Simply put, this is one of the great offensive teams the Skins have ever had.

How good? They rank third in total yards in the NFL.

How often has that happened? 5 times.

1999, 1991, 1984, 1983, 1966 since WORLD WAR II. This kind of offensive production is happening once or twice a decade (and skipping several other decades completely).

THAT is why we lay 7.5 here boys. This is unique offensive force for the Skins to cover a bigger number which we need to do here.

All the pieces are here for a cover and we will call McAdoo's bluff. He'll play his hand in the first quarter and almost certainly the second but again, if the Skins get to Eli you have to sit him. And his backup hasn't seen a receiver in half a decade.

The Skins have EVERYTHING to play for. This is one of the most valuable franchises in the NFL with one of the cockiest owners and are playoff starved for a win there. But get there first. And although the Giants have been impressive, they unraveled last week against the Skins as road favorites and get penalized here as 7.5 dogs. This will be an inexcusable loss and shouldn't be close. Skins exploded for 40+ last week as 6 point favorites over the Bears and this is the same Skins team that dropped 40+ on the resurgent Packers.

One final note: A guy who always burns the Giants, Desean Jackson, is coming on strong to end the season. Total receiving yards in the last 5 games: 114, 111, 102, 59, 118.

There's enough here for a cover. McAdoo with feign aggression and fold his hand when the chips are down in the second half and we pull away. I absolutely do not see the Giants winning this game and eliminating the Skins (a win and their in scenario if not for a GB/Det tie) so 7.5 is not a ton of points at home otherwise. And the Skins beat them in Week 4 when they were 0-3 and the Giants were 2-0 (they have their number this year imo). I look for the Skins to play pedal to the medal the entire game.

Folks,

These two posters have been up my a** all this year and all last year. I hit 70% last year and 70% for 12 months this year until we dipped to 63% this month. But I can assure you, if I put every single exotic bet I posted here (to help others win money) and every single thread which I gave my thoughts in (like Wyoming/Utah State, Penn State/Rutgers, Wisconsin/Iowa, Navy/ND) in my record, I'd be at 70% as well. To the reader if they play those plays, they are benefitting regardless and that is what matters so they are recognizing the 70% this year as well. Anyhow, 63% is still good for tailing obviously especially with someone who explains themselves through reasoning.

Now a guy hitting at the perecentages I do over two years through everything he posts for others (and by the way, I can go back further with top-flight winning percentages but I won't belabor this), is 'throwing shi+ at a wall" to see what sticks....

Folks, let my record do the talking.

I said to bet against Rousey with the 'fade clinical depression' angle.

Now to trolls like High and jdr, they actually want a literal diagnosis, that is, I would have to have a pdf of her interview session with a certified psychiatrist to make this statement or else it's 'delusional'. ANYTHING to defame.

The angle of course speaks more broadly to a inept mental state, at least for UCF fighting against one of the best female fighters and punchers (her weakness) on the other side.

And what did we see? Rousey lose in 48 seconds after getting hit 27 times. She was basically defenseless. I would look better in a UFC ring and I am no fighter. It was a total MENTAL breakdown. And that is an angle they defamed for an entire thread. What ELSE would explain a fight where Rousey can barely throw or block an acceptable punch?

So her mental state, and the severity of the psychological trauma she suffered from her last loss, is what you angle on. Because if you angle on record or skill, Rousey wins every time as the most dominant female fighter ever. But when you use the "Fading clinical depression" angle, you need an actual psychiatrist certifying that result in writing or you are 'delusional' to trolls. That is how trolls work. I.E, you CANNOT WIN with a ANY write-up.

And the amazing thing is they probably tailed my a$$ and are here today to run yet another pick into the ground, before they even see the result.

So why would they run this pick into the ground? Because I said McAdoo would play his starters.

And they say 'great angle.'

Well what ******* angle do they have? Nothing.

The point is the line is a BARGAIN at 7.5 for a coach who will play the starters (that is, he will play them beyond the first half but Josh Johnson comes in with reasonable time in the third it's over. And he is terrified to bring in JJ because he knows its waving the white flag, and for all I know he can keep Eli in the entire game, but I am betting even that won't be enough), because it drives the line DOWN.

This line should be 10 and even 10.5 but because McAdoo is running his mouth to the press (and there is truth in it), he is taking major points off this line. The Giants have nothing to play for but pride and to sustain an injury.

So what do the trolls say? "I'd tease it."

Well fu** them! Who's that helping without more legs? And even at that, the tease juice is even more at -120. So they will cost you more, they give you no other pick, they agree my pick will win but are the MOST conservative in doing so so they take ONE LEG of a teaser, they give you NO angle to build from on this game or any other AND they shi+ on the pick and write-up to boot.

This doesn't even speak to what is embedded in the write-up and that is that Washington is so adept offensively this year as compared to any other year we treat them as we treat the Rockets: "Pour on the  offense (which should translate to scoring in this spot even though they've had trouble with that this year in others, but this situation calls for it) and worry about the defense later" especially in what is a de facto playoff round for them.

Fu**

These

Fu***ing

Trolls.

I could go on about other 'delusional' angles they claim I've posted but why bother. They don't read the whole or understand my write-ups anyway. Anyone hitting at my percentages, even with nice sized dogs on ML's isn't throwing sh** at a wall, they are taking a hot steaming one and having guys like Hugh and Jdr on stand-by to wipe and talcum powder their as*.

Wipethat trolls.

I was at that game. Coughlin didn't rest his starters and the Pats played their starters because a 16-0 season was on the line. So the Giants put their first line in precisely because the Pats said they play it out as usual.

And I can tell you the defenses half-a** that game. 38-35 and there was no real juice to the game where either team wanted to buckle down on D and stop the other. Strange game.

Pats didn't really care about the 16-0 that year though. Here? The Redskins, again, a long-starved franchise for playoff entry and moreover wins, will throw everything at them.

McAdoo just wants to see points on the board and Eli move the ball without INT's to make up for last week. But to keep Eli in there after taking a sack he's slow to get up from in the third (very possible with this makeshift o-line), is insane. And let's say the Skins are up by 3 at that point. That gives them an entire quarter to score a TD against what should be back-ups. And their offense isn't chopped liver.

So many unknowns on the Giants side and so many knowns on the skins side. That's why .5 point doesn't scare me. How can Giants backers confidently say they'll win this game. They've played horribly on the road this year. How can they say they'll give 4 quarters of effort? You can't. You can definitively say that with the Skins.

Moreover, the line is appropriate. Who would back the Giants here at Metlife 7.5-6=+1.5. Would you back the Giants at home under the same circumstances on what is a ML? No. No one here can confidently say they would. Because home field doesn't matter in a game like this with the Giants having everything locked up and the motivation on the other side of the ball is the same. Even moreso I'll back the Skins at 7.5.

Thanks Jrod but I know trolls (yourself and others and you've done more than your fair share/not on the level of Hugh and Jdr of course, who are at all time highs) tail me.

That is why trolls get so pissed off at losses. Why else would you care????

So trolls defame picks, and all the while, they are playing those very same picks. Amazing isn't it???