Seahawks @ Cowboys
Dallas is looking to add to their column of dismantling poor to mediocre football teams. I’m not saying that Seattle is a bad team, but I’d put them more in the category of middling, which is plenty fine for Mike McCarthy’s crew to take advantage of.
The Seahawks have lost their last 3/4 games, the only win coming on a game-winning field goal, at home, against the struggling Commanders, and their most recent loss being a blowout - on Thanksgiving vs the 49ers - losing 31-13. Let’s not forget that teams tend to struggle the following week after playing San Francisco.
Plus, one of Seattle’s top offensive threats, Running Back Kenneth Walker, is doubtful for this matchup. Typically tailbacks aren’t going to impact a handicap too much - but this situation is different. Not only is Walker incredibly dynamic and a large part of his teams’ offensive success, but his backup, Zach Charbonnet is nowhere near as productive. Over the course of the last two games, Charbonnet has collected a total of 29 carries, but has averaged just 3.3 yards per rush attempt in that span. He can be solid when the brunt of the workload doesn't fall on him, but when it does - that’s when he shrinks.
And Quarterback Geno Smith needs all the help he can get with the subpar type of season he has displayed, as he currently sits 24th in EPA/Play among QBs. I can’t imagine he improves his rankings after this matchup considering this Cowboys defense is 3rd in both EPA/Play and success rate. And even if the Seahawks wanted to run the ball, and had Walker, they would still struggle against this Dallas run defense that ranks 9th in EPA per play.
As for the Cowboys, well, their QB is playing his way into a top MVP candidate. Dak Prescott ranks 2nd in adjusted EPA/Play and 3rd in success rate. Does he pad his stats and look better against inferior teams? Sure he does - but that’s what he has at hand for Thursday night.
Seattle’s defense is 20th in both EPA/Play and success rate. Also, they rank 25th in rush EPA, so perhaps Prescott can have some of the strain alleviated off of him if Tony Pollard and company can get the ground attack established.
With all of that being said - I still think Pete Carroll’s team is capable of keeping things close, but I don’t think they are good enough to win; so that’s why I am utilizing the teaser in this spot so I only have to rely on the home team to win by three or more, instead of nine or more.
Let’s get to their dancing partner for this teaser…
Bengals @ Jaguars
The Jaguars, too, find themselves in a favorable spot at home, on primetime, against the banged up and beaten down Cincinnati Bengals. Last week, without Joe Burrow, Jake Browning stepped in and produced a stat line of 19-26, 226 passing yards, 1 TD, 1 INT against the Steelers. All things considered, not too shabby. But does that do enough to justify confidence in this Bengals team securing a win against the Jags? No, it does not.
Because even if Browning limits his mistakes this upcoming Monday night, he probably won’t be able to generate much success in any capacity against his opponents defense.
Jacksonville has been sturdy and consistent on that side of the ball. They are listed as the 7th best defense in terms of success rate, 11th in EPA/Play, top-10 in drop back EPA and drop back success rate and also 2nd in rush success rate.
The Bengals’ defense, however, has shaped out a tad differently.
Cincy ranks 30th in defensive success rate, 26th in EPA/Play, 30th in drop back success rate and 27th in both rush EPA and rush success rate.
In terms of total defense, DVOA has the Jags 5th and the Bengals 26th.
Trevor Lawrence should have minimal issues navigating around this lackluster Bengals defense.
So let’s go ahead and include Jacksonville as our other leg of the teaser and bring them down six points, too.
Play: 6pt Teaser - Cowboys (-2.5) / Jaguars (-2); risk 1.20 units to win 1.00
*I will add additional plays as the week progresses. Be sure to subscribe to the website so you get notified ASAP, or, follow on Twitter: @dannyburke5
NFL Record: 25-20-1 (+2.82)
Comments