Sportsinteraction

Posted Friday at 2:30pm EST and odds are subject to change.

NFL Week: 5

October 9

What you see below is our early leans. Many of the selections below will stay the same and some will be moved into official plays with wagers on Sunday. However, there is also the possibility that we see, read or get a sense that something is not right with one of our selections and change our pick. There are several different criteria we use to grade a game and make it an official play and a lot of things can happen or change between Friday and Sunday. We’ll have all write-ups (except Monday Night Football) posted on Friday but our actual wagers won’t be posted until Sunday morning between 10 AM and 12:00 PM EST

Philadelphia +7½ over Jacksonville

9:30 AM EST. Another NFL game in London, another opportunity for Roger Goodell to remind everyone that there's apparently no corner of the planet where he isn't willing to sell a few tickets. We'll keep this one relatively brief because these overseas games introduce an entirely different set of variables, and pretending otherwise is foolish.

Travel, disrupted routines, unfamiliar surroundings and different preparation schedules make these games considerably less predictable than a normal Sunday afternoon matchup. We saw another example of unusual scheduling circumstances with Thursday night's Dallas-Tampa Bay game. Now Philadelphia and Jacksonville get to pack their bags, cross the Atlantic and participate in Uncle Roger's international cash grab.

The betting market certainly has its favorite. Jacksonville is 3-1, has looked considerably sharper than Philadelphia and is coming off a victory over Cincinnati. The Jaguars' only loss came against Denver, and they're getting plenty of respect as a result. Jacksonville is also practically a London resident by NFL standards. The Jaguars have played overseas so often that somebody should probably check whether they qualify for British citizenship.

Philadelphia, meanwhile, is rapidly becoming the NFL's favorite punching bag.

The Eagles have been dreadful offensively, and last week's performance against the Rams was particularly embarrassing. Philadelphia went 0-for-12 on third down, the worst third-down showing by any NFL offense in six seasons. Jalen Hurts averaged an astonishingly poor 2.19 yards per drop-back, and the entire operation looked like it was being coordinated by somebody who had misplaced half the playbook.

Nick Sirianni is taking plenty of heat, the injury list is substantial, and the Philadelphia media has practically begun making funeral arrangements for the season. Saquon Barkley suffered a hamstring injury against Los Angeles, several important starters were already missing, and additional defensive injuries only added to the misery.

There's no point sugarcoating it. The Eagles have looked awful.

And that's precisely why they're interesting.

Philadelphia's stock has fallen through the floor. Nobody wants anything to do with the Eagles, while Jacksonville is receiving the kind of attention usually reserved for teams that have accomplished considerably more than winning three of their first four games.

This is a classic perception-versus-price situation. The Eagles' recent performances have been so ugly that the market has pushed Jacksonville into the role of a substantial favorite. The question isn't whether Philadelphia deserves criticism. It certainly does. The question is whether the difference between these teams justifies Jacksonville laying more than a touchdown on a neutral field.

There's also something uncomfortable about the number itself. Seven and a half is generally an attractive favorite's number because the extra half-point encourages underdog money. In this case, that hook is sitting there inviting bettors to take a Philadelphia team that has given them almost no reason to trust it.

We don't particularly like that, either. Philadelphia's defense remains its most credible path to competing, and a lower-scoring game would make seven and a half points considerably more valuable. Games at Tottenham Hotspur Stadium have frequently been relatively low scoring, and an overseas matchup involving a struggling offense is hardly an automatic invitation to expect fireworks.

Jacksonville also enjoys an unusual familiarity with these international games, another reason this isn't a selection we're pounding the table over but the Eagles haven't suddenly forgotten how to play football, and the difference between their underlying talent and their current public reputation has become substantial. Philadelphia has gone from a perennial contender to a team the media is practically writing off before the season reaches its halfway point. That's usually when the price starts getting interesting. We'll take the seven and a half points with Philadelphia, although with considerably less enthusiasm than we normally have for an underdog in this range. Philadelphia +7½ is the recommendation. As for the overseas circus, Uncle Roger can keep it. Recommendation: Philadelphia +7½

New Orleans +2½ over Minnesota

1:00 PM EST. If there's a more overvalued team in the NFL right now than the Minnesota Vikings, we'd love to know who it is. Minnesota is 4-0, the defense is getting rave reviews, Brian Flores is being treated like a defensive genius, and the betting public is beginning to believe the Vikings are legitimate contenders. Four victories, zero losses. What could possibly be wrong with that? Plenty.

Minnesota might be the least convincing undefeated team in football. The Vikings have somehow managed to win four games while producing an offense that looks like it was assembled from spare parts at a garage sale. They've scored just two offensive touchdowns over their last three games, relying on their defense, kicking game and a remarkable collection of fortunate circumstances to keep that perfect record intact.

Let's examine those four victories before we start clearing space for another Lombardi Trophy. In Week 1, Minnesota trailed Green Bay for most of the afternoon and appeared headed for defeat before escaping with a late comeback. Against Chicago, the Vikings managed a thrilling 9-3 victory after the Bears lost their quarterback. Then came Tampa Bay, a dreadful football team forced to start a rookie quarterback. Last week, Minnesota survived Miami 15-10 in another game that could easily have gone the other way.

That's four victories, but hardly four performances that scream championship contender. Change a handful of plays and this team could be sitting at 0-4 instead of 4-0. That's not an exaggeration about the thin margins involved. Minnesota has been living dangerously for a month, and the market is rewarding the Vikings as though they've been steamrolling opponents.

The biggest issue remains quarterback play. Minnesota has an excellent defense, but the Vikings are trying to win football games without a dependable offense. Their quarterbacks have contributed very little, and while Flores deserves credit for what his defense has accomplished, asking that unit to carry the entire operation every Sunday is not a sustainable formula.

Eventually, somebody is going to make Minnesota score points to win a game. What happens then?

Now consider the other side of this matchup.

New Orleans is coming off an absolutely humiliating Monday night performance against Atlanta. The Saints were hammered 45-24, their defense was shredded, and whatever remaining enthusiasm existed for this team disappeared somewhere around halftime. The Saints are 1-3, their head coach is under fire, and the local media has plenty of ammunition.

In other words, New Orleans couldn't be much less attractive to the average bettor.

Perfect.

This is one of our favorite types of situations: a team coming off an embarrassing nationally televised loss facing an undefeated opponent whose record looks considerably better than its actual performances. The public sees Minnesota at 4-0 and New Orleans at 1-3 and wonders why the Vikings aren't favored by considerably more. That's precisely the point.

New Orleans has offensive problems of its own, particularly with the running game, but Tyler Shough and Chris Olave have demonstrated that the Saints can move the football through the air. Shough has thrown for more than 1,200 yards with nine touchdowns, while Olave has already collected 35 receptions for 491 yards. Unlike Minnesota, New Orleans has shown the ability to generate offense without requiring its defense to perform miracles.

There's also a scheduling consideration. This will be Minnesota's third road game in four weeks, and the Vikings return home next week to face Indianapolis. That's a demanding stretch for a team whose victories have required considerable physical and emotional investment. New Orleans, meanwhile, is returning home after getting embarrassed in prime time, with an opportunity to respond in front of its own fans.

The Saints are certainly no bargain on the basis of their recent performances. Their defense has been atrocious, and nobody is confusing them with a Super Bowl contender. But that's already reflected in the price. Minnesota's weaknesses, on the other hand, are being disguised by an undefeated record. That's the difference between evaluating teams and evaluating betting lines.

The Vikings have been getting every bounce, every break and just enough scoring to escape with victories. The Saints have been getting buried in criticism. One team's stock is approaching its ceiling, while the other's has been beaten into the ground.

Minnesota's defense is legitimate. Its 4-0 record is legitimate. But the idea that this is a complete football team deserving of unquestioned respect is anything but legitimate.

The Saints are being priced against Minnesota's record rather than Minnesota's actual level of play, and that's an opportunity worth taking. New Orleans +2½ is one of our favorite plays on the board. The Vikings' undefeated record is impressive on paper, but paper doesn't play football. Recommendation: Saints +2

Green Bay +1½ over Chicago

1:00 PM EST. When was the last time the Chicago Bears walked into Lambeau Field as a favorite? You'd have to go all the way back to 2006, when Rex Grossman was quarterbacking the Bears. That's twenty years ago, folks. Twenty years of Green Bay generally being the team that commanded respect in this rivalry, and now Chicago is laying points on the road without its starting quarterback. If that doesn't tell you how dramatically perceptions have changed in the first month of the season, nothing will.

Green Bay has become one of the least appealing teams in football. The Packers look awful, smell awful, and have done very little to convince anybody that things are about to improve. Jordan Love hasn't looked particularly sharp, the offense has been inconsistent, and the defense has been equally disappointing. Last week's loss to Tampa Bay was another ugly chapter, particularly considering the Buccaneers were starting rookie quarterback Jalon Daniels.

Meanwhile, Chicago is enjoying a completely different reception. The Bears are winning football games, Tyson Bagent has kept the offense functioning in Caleb Williams' absence, and Ben Johnson's team is beginning to attract the kind of attention that Green Bay used to receive automatically.

The Bears piled up 492 yards and 34 first downs against the Jets last week. That's an impressive afternoon by any standard, even if Chicago managed only 23 points because of repeated failures in the red zone. The Bears moved the football almost at will, and the final score probably understated how thoroughly they controlled the game.

Green Bay, on the other hand, lost to a Tampa Bay team that entered the game without a victory. Jordan Love threw an interception near the Buccaneers' goal line, and the Packers squandered opportunities against an opponent they were widely expected to handle. Those are the performances everyone remembers. And those are the performances that influence the next week's betting line but there's a difference between recognizing that Chicago has played better football and deciding the Bears deserve to be favored at Lambeau Field.

Had somebody suggested before the season that Chicago would be laying points in Green Bay while playing without Caleb Williams, the response would have been laughter. The Bears were supposed to be an improving team, not one that could lose its starting quarterback and suddenly command favorite status in one of football's most difficult road environments. Yet here we are.

The market is reacting to what it has seen over four weeks, and those reactions have created a substantial shift in the perceived value of both teams. Chicago's stock is climbing, Green Bay's stock is sinking, and the betting line has moved accordingly.

That's exactly the type of situation that gets our attention.

We're in the buy-low, sell-high business, and there aren't many teams with lower stock than Green Bay right now. The Packers are being dismissed as a mess, while the Bears are receiving considerable praise for overcoming their quarterback situation and continuing to win.

The interesting part is that Green Bay hasn't been completely incapable of moving the football. Against Tampa Bay, the Packers had opportunities to put points on the board but failed to finish drives. That's frustrating, certainly, but it's also different from an offense that cannot advance the ball at all. Jordan Love and the Packers still have enough offensive ability to make Chicago's defense work.

The Packers are not an attractive selection. That's the point. Attractive teams generally come with unattractive prices, and Chicago has become the fashionable side of this matchup. Four weeks ago, Green Bay would have been the favorite here. Now the Packers are getting points at home against a division rival playing with its backup quarterback. That's an enormous change in perception over a very short period.

Chicago might be the better team at the moment, but the market has taken that observation and stretched it into a price that gives the Bears too much credit and the Packers too little.

Green Bay is ugly, unpopular and coming off another embarrassing loss. Chicago is winning, gaining confidence and attracting plenty of attention. Everything about the current narrative points toward the Bears. Everything about the price points toward Green Bay. Recommendation: Packers +1½

Indianapolis +2½ over Pittsburgh

1:00 PM EST. The Indianapolis Colts are returning from London, and that's hardly an ideal scheduling spot. Pittsburgh has enjoyed additional preparation time after playing Cleveland last Thursday, while the Colts have spent part of their week crossing the Atlantic, adjusting their body clocks and trying to remember what country they're in.

Ordinarily, that would be enough to make us look elsewhere. Unfortunately for Pittsburgh, there's the small matter of the Steelers being one of the least convincing teams in football.

Pittsburgh is a couple of fortunate bounces away from being winless. The Steelers escaped Cincinnati by three points and were downright lucky to beat Atlanta in their opener. The Falcons controlled large portions of that game, yet somehow Pittsburgh walked away with the victory. Last week, the Steelers lost to Cleveland despite outgaining the Browns and controlling possession. Aaron Rodgers threw two interceptions, and Pittsburgh once again demonstrated that moving the football and actually winning are two entirely different occupations.

Rodgers is still capable of making plays, but this isn't the Green Bay version of Aaron Rodgers. That guy could put a team on his back. This version sometimes looks like he'd appreciate somebody helping him carry the groceries.

Indianapolis wasn't particularly impressive in its 30-13 victory over Washington in London, either. Daniel Jones and the Colts generated just 257 yards, and their first five possessions produced four punts or turnovers. Washington's quarterback problems and mistakes made the final score considerably more flattering than the actual performance.

But that's part of the appeal here. Neither team has been especially convincing, yet Pittsburgh is being asked to lay points simply because it's at home and has the scheduling advantage.

The Colts have enough offensive talent to compete with this Pittsburgh defense, and the Steelers haven't demonstrated the consistency to justify much confidence as a favorite. Last year's 27-20 Pittsburgh victory over Indianapolis was another misleading result, with the Colts outgaining the Steelers by 143 yards but burying themselves with turnovers.

The overseas travel is a legitimate concern, and it's the reason this isn't among our stronger recommendations. However, we're even less interested in laying points with a Pittsburgh team that has been surviving on narrow margins and good fortune. The Steelers have been playing with fire since opening day. Eventually, somebody gets burned. Recommendation: Colts +2½

New England -3½ over Las Vegas

1:00 PM EST. There's something rather peculiar about this number, and it's precisely why we're interested in New England. The Patriots have spent the better part of the last year teaching bettors not to trust them, and Drake Maye's tendency to give the football away hasn't exactly helped restore confidence. Meanwhile, Las Vegas is 3-1, playing competitive football and looking like a completely different team from the outfit we've become accustomed to watching.

The Raiders nearly knocked off Kansas City last week, and if not for a costly fumble on a punt late in the fourth quarter, they might have walked away with the victory. They're playing with confidence, scoring points and giving their supporters plenty of reasons to believe they've turned a corner. New England? Not so much.

Yes, the Patriots are coming off an impressive victory in Buffalo, but one good afternoon doesn't erase months of frustration. The public has seen enough of this team to remain skeptical, particularly with a quarterback who can make a beautiful throw on one possession and then hand the opposition a gift basket on the next. So here's the question: Why is New England favored by 3½ instead of three

That extra half-point is significant. Three is one of the most important numbers in NFL betting, and the oddsmakers have deliberately positioned this line on the other side of it. They're asking anyone interested in New England to lay more than a field goal against a Raiders team that has been playing considerably better football.

Meanwhile, Las Vegas backers get the attractive hook. A three-point Patriots victory still cashes a Raiders ticket. Considering the way these teams have looked, taking the points seems almost too easy and that's what makes the number interesting.

There are football arguments supporting New England. The Patriots have a rushing attack capable of exploiting a Raiders defense allowing 5.2 yards per carry, and Las Vegas' impressive record has been built partly against some very weak opposition. The Raiders have looked good, but their résumé isn't quite as impressive as the standings suggest.

Still, this selection isn't about drawing up offensive formations or spending three paragraphs explaining how Rhamondre Stevenson can find running lanes. It's about recognizing a price that doesn't seem to fit the prevailing narrative.

The Raiders are the fashionable side. They're 3-1, they're competitive, and they're getting more than a field goal against a New England team that most bettors wouldn't trust to babysit their goldfish. Yet the oddsmakers have made the Patriots a substantial favorite anyway.

We're not suggesting the sportsbooks possess some magical ability to predict the future. But betting lines are prices, and this particular price tells us New England is being assigned more respect than its public reputation would suggestThere's also a little historical theater surrounding this matchup, with New England honoring Adam Vinatieri and its 2001 championship team against the very franchise that was on the wrong end of the infamous Snow Bowl. Somewhere, Charles Woodson is probably still looking for an explanation. The Raiders are the easier team to like. The Patriots are the more uncomfortable team to back. We'll take uncomfortable when the price makes sense. Recommendation: Patriots -3½

Miami +6½ over Cincinnati

1:00 PM EST. There are bad football teams, there are really bad football teams, and then there's the Miami Dolphins, who have spent the first month of the season making the other two categories look respectable. Miami has been dreadful, and we're not about to insult anyone's intelligence by suggesting otherwise

The Dolphins have become one of the NFL's favorite punching bags, and deservedly so. The offense has struggled, the defense has been vulnerable, and every Sunday seems to bring another reason for Miami fans to consider taking up gardening but here's the thing about betting on bad football teams: Eventually, the price becomes more attractive than the team itself.

Miami is getting 6½ points at home against Cincinnati, and that's where our interest begins. The Bengals are certainly the more appealing side. They have greater offensive firepower, a more recognizable collection of playmakers and considerably fewer reasons for their supporters to hide under the furniture. But Cincinnati hasn't exactly been a model of consistency, either. The Bengals have demonstrated that they can be dragged into competitive games, and their defense isn't so imposing that Miami should be written off before kickoff

The Dolphins' stock is about as low as it can get. Nobody wants them, nobody trusts them, and the betting public has spent the last month watching this team find increasingly creative ways to disappoint.

Cincinnati, meanwhile, is the obvious selection. The Bengals are facing a struggling opponent and are being asked to win by a touchdown. To the casual bettor, that probably sounds reasonable.

But the NFL has a funny way of punishing reasonable assumptions.

Miami still has offensive speed, and Malik Willis provides a different dimension with his mobility. Ollie Gordon II gives the Dolphins an opportunity to establish something on the ground, particularly against a Cincinnati defense that can be challenged physically. There are enough offensive pieces here to suggest Miami isn't completely helpless, regardless of what the first four weeks have looked like.

More importantly, the Bengals aren't exactly arriving with the defensive credentials of the 1985 Chicago Bears. Miami doesn't have to suddenly become an offensive powerhouse to make this a competitive afternoon.

There's also the matter of perception. Cincinnati is being priced as though the difference between these teams is enormous, and while the standings and recent performances support that narrative, the betting market has a habit of exaggerating those differences when one team becomes particularly unpopular. Miami has reached that point.

This isn't a selection based on suddenly discovering something wonderful about the Dolphins. It's about recognizing that the market has very little interest in backing them, and that lack of interest has created an attractive home-underdog price. The Bengals are the better-looking team. Miami is the better-looking number.

And when you're in the business of finding value rather than collecting attractive football teams, that distinction matters. The Dolphins have been awful, but awful teams don't remain awful every single Sunday. Sometimes the ugliest team on the board turns out to be the most attractive wager.Recommendation: Dolphins +6½

New York Jets -2½ over Cleveland

1:00 PM EST. Ladies and gentlemen, the Cleveland Browns bandwagon is officially accepting passengers. Get your tickets, grab a seat and enjoy the ride. Apparently, the Browns have become one of the NFL's hottest attractions. Cleveland's stock hasn't been this high since Brian Sipe was throwing passes, and there are people actually lining up to bet on the Browns.

The Cleveland Browns! We're talking about the same franchise that has spent the better part of three decades making losing look like an Olympic sport.

But give credit where it's due. Cleveland has been playing better football, and last week's victory over Pittsburgh has everyone suddenly treating the Browns like they've discovered the secret to winning. The defense has shown some life, the team is competing, and the betting public is beginning to believe that Cleveland might actually be respectable.

Careful, folks. That's usually when the trapdoor opens.

There's nothing wrong with recognizing improvement, but there's a big difference between identifying a team before its stock rises and jumping aboard after everybody else has already bought tickets. If you're backing Cleveland now, you might still cash, but you're arriving awfully late to the party. The cheap seats are gone, the drinks are watered down, and the band is already packing up.

Meanwhile, there's the New York Jets.

Nobody wants the Jets. Nobody trusts the Jets. And the idea of actually laying points with the Jets is enough to make a grown man consider switching to professional bowling.

New York has been dreadful, and last week's loss to Chicago did nothing to improve its reputation. The Jets were pushed around, surrendered nearly 500 yards and looked like a team that would struggle to organize a two-car funeral.

So why are the Jets favored?

That's the question worth asking.

Cleveland is coming off an impressive victory over Pittsburgh, while New York is coming off another embarrassing performance. The Browns are gaining respect, the Jets are losing whatever little respect they had left, and yet the oddsmakers are asking New York to lay 2½ points. If the Browns are suddenly such a wonderful football team, why aren't they favored?

This is the type of number that makes bettors uncomfortable, and that's exactly what attracts us to it. The public sees Cleveland's improvement and New York's incompetence and naturally gravitates toward the Browns. Getting points with the team that looks better seems like a gift but the NFL isn't in the business of handing out gifts. Neither are the sportsbooks.

We're in the buy-low, sell-high business, and this matchup checks both boxes. Cleveland's stock is soaring, while the Jets' stock is somewhere beneath the basement, possibly next to Jimmy Hoffa.

We're not suggesting New York has suddenly become a good football team. The Jets have enough problems to keep a team of psychiatrists employed until Christmas. But the price is what matters, and this is an opportunity to back an extremely unpopular home favorite against an opponent whose recent success has attracted plenty of attention.

The Browns might continue their resurgence. They might even prove that this isn't another false dawn in Cleveland, where false dawns have become something of a municipal tradition but buying Cleveland after the market has already discovered the Browns isn't nearly as appealing as it was a couple of weeks ago. Sometimes the best wager is the one that makes you want to wash your hands afterward and laying points with the New York Jets certainly qualifies. Recommendation: Jets -2½

Washington -4½ over NY Giants

1:00 PM EST. Stop the presses! The New York Giants are 3-1, and apparently we're supposed to be impressed. The Giants have won three of their first four games, and suddenly people are talking about them as though they've discovered something special.Before anybody starts making reservations for the Super Bowl parade, perhaps we should examine exactly whom these clowns have beaten. Their three victories came against Dallas, Tennessee and Arizona, three teams with a combined record of 3-9. That's not exactly a murderers' row. It's more like the NFL's witness protection program.

In Week 1, the Giants defeated Dallas with Jaxson Dart at quarterback. At the time, that victory looked respectable. Four weeks later, we're discovering that the Cowboys are pure garbage themselves, so beating them isn't quite the accomplishment it initially appeared to be. Next came Tennessee, a game the Giants somehow won 12-7 despite trailing for much of the afternoon. Twelve points against the Titans? Congratulations. Somebody get the champagne. Then came last week's masterpiece against Arizona. The Cardinals practically gift-wrapped the game for New York, including a first-and-goal opportunity from the three-yard line that somehow produced absolutely nothing. Arizona had enough chances to win that game twice, but apparently decided the Giants needed the victory more and just like that, the Giants are 3-1.

The one time New York faced a legitimate opponent, the Los Angeles Rams beat the living daylights out of them, 28-6. That was also the game in which Dart was injured. We're well aware that the Giants have continued winning without him, but beating three bottom-feeders doesn't suddenly transform a bad football team into a good one. The Giants are a bad football team wearing a very flattering 3-1 record.

There's another important distinction here. All three New York victories came at home. Their only road appearance resulted in that 22-point humiliation against Los Angeles. Now they're heading into Washington to face a Commanders team coming off an ugly 30-13 loss to Indianapolis in London. 

Washington's stock has taken a hit, and understandably so. The Commanders were outplayed in the second half against the Colts, and the final score wasn't pretty. But that defeat has created an opportunity to back the more capable team at a reasonable price against an opponent whose record is being taken far too seriously. 

Washington has already demonstrated what it can do at home, upsetting Seattle as an 8½-point underdog. The Commanders have more offensive upside than the Giants, a more credible quarterback situation and a much better opportunity to dictate the game than New York's recent results might suggest. This is another classic case of perception versus reality.

The market sees a 3-1 Giants team that keeps finding ways to win. We see a team that has been living off a steady diet of lousy opponents, fortunate breaks and victories that look considerably better in the standings than they did on the field. The Giants aren't some emerging powerhouse. They're the same collection of misfits that happened to stumble into three victories against teams that couldn't beat a drum.

Washington, meanwhile, is being discounted after one ugly overseas performance. That's precisely the kind of overreaction that creates value. The Giants' 3-1 record is fool's gold. Washington is the better team, playing at home, with a favorable opportunity to expose New York's inflated standing. The Giants have enjoyed their little moment in the sunshine. Now comes the part where somebody turns the lights back on. Recommendation: Washington -4½

Seattle -3½ over San Francisco

4:25 PM EST. Who in their right mind is betting on the Seattle Seahawks this week? Seriously, have you seen the San Francisco 49ers? They're undefeated, Brock Purdy is playing like the second coming of Joe Montana, and the offensive line hasn't allowed a single sack in four games. Purdy has thrown 11 touchdown passes against just one interception, and the 49ers have already knocked off the Rams and Broncos in convincing fashion.

San Francisco looks unstoppable. Seattle looks vulnerable. And the oddsmakers have decided the Seahawks should be favored by more than a field goal. Excuse us? Everywhere you look, the experts are lining up to tell us how wonderful the 49ers are. Purdy is an MVP candidate, George Kittle is terrorizing defenses, Deebo Samuel is back making plays, and Mike Evans has added another dangerous weapon. The 49ers are being discussed like a team that might not lose until Christmas.

Meanwhile, Seattle is coming off an ugly 30-23 victory over the winless Chargers in a game that featured 28 combined penalties. The Seahawks committed 14 of them, including seven personal fouls or other 15-yard infractions. Apparently, the Seahawks have decided that tackling opponents after the whistle is a legitimate defensive strategy.

Sam Darnold has also started looking a little more like the Sam Darnold everyone remembers, throwing three interceptions over the last two weeks. The running back situation is a mess, Kenneth Walker III is gone, and Seattle has been searching for help in places normally reserved for NFL retirement announcements. The Seahawks were reportedly interested in Joe Mixon, who hasn't played since 2024, but he couldn't pass a physical. At this rate, somebody should check whether Shaun Alexander still has his cleats and then there's the revenge angle. San Francisco was humiliated 41-6 by Seattle in last January's playoffs, and the media can't stop reminding us that the 49ers are coming back for revenge. Apparently, Brock Purdy and company have spent the entire offseason staring at pictures of Seahawks players taped to their bathroom mirrors.

Revenge! Motivation! Redemption! The whole Hollywood production. Wonderful. Now explain the betting line. Why is Seattle favored by 3½ points against an undefeated San Francisco team that seemingly has every advantage? Why not Seattle -3? Why put the hook on one of the most important numbers in football, making San Francisco +3½ look even more attractive?

The 49ers are undefeated, they're playing outstanding football, and they're getting more than a field goal against a Seattle team that hasn't looked particularly impressive. Add the revenge narrative, and San Francisco becomes one of the easiest underdogs on the board to sell to the betting public. That's precisely what makes this matchup interesting.We're not going to pretend Seattle has looked better than San Francisco. It hasn't. We're not going to manufacture some elaborate X's-and-O's explanation for why the Seahawks are suddenly superior. The 49ers have earned their praise but the betting market isn't a beauty contest. It's about recognizing when the price doesn't seem to fit the prevailing perception.

San Francisco's stock is through the roof. Seattle's stock has taken a beating despite its 3-1 record. Everybody wants the undefeated team getting points, and almost nobody wants to lay 3½ with a Seahawks squad that barely escaped the winless Chargers. Yet that's exactly what the oddsmakers are asking bettors to do. The 49ers are the obvious side. The Seahawks are the uncomfortable side. And there's nothing more dangerous in this business than a wager that looks so obvious you can't understand why anybody would take the other team. San Francisco might be the best-looking team in football right now. Unfortunately, we're not handing out trophies for looking good in October. We're buying Seattle when nobody wants it and selling San Francisco when everybody thinks it can't lose. Recommendation: Seahawks -3½

Arizona +5½ over Detroit

4:25 PM EST. The Detroit Lions have one of the most explosive offenses in football. Jared Goff has thrown for 1,214 yards, nine touchdowns and zero interceptions. Amon-Ra St. Brown is catching touchdowns like they're going out of style, and Jahmyr Gibbs has already scored five times on the ground. Detroit is averaging nearly 30 points per game, and that's the kind of production that gets bettors excited.

There's just one little problem. The Lions couldn't stop a parked car from rolling downhill.

Detroit is surrendering an astonishing 446.8 yards and 31.8 points per game. That's not a defense. That's a hospitality service. Opposing offenses show up, take whatever they like and leave with a complimentary touchdown.

Yet the Lions are laying 5½ points on the road.

Arizona is 1-3, has lost three straight and isn't exactly attracting much betting interest.Jacoby Brissett has been inconsistent, and the Cardinals' defense has been every bit as generous as Detroit's. The Cardinals have allowed opposing quarterbacks to post a ridiculous 114.9 passer rating, so Goff should certainly have opportunities. but that's what makes this matchup interesting. Detroit's offense is receiving all the attention, while its dreadful defense is being treated like a minor inconvenience. It isn't.

Arizona has enough offensive ability to exploit Detroit's defensive shortcomings, and Brissett has thrown six touchdown passes despite the team's disappointing start. Against a defense allowing more than 31 points per game, the Cardinals are hardly overmatched offensively.

This is another example of the market attaching a premium to the more attractive team. Detroit has the recognizable stars, the exciting offense and the reputation. Arizona has three consecutive losses and very little public appeal but the Lions are 2-2 for a reason. Their offense has been excellent, and their defense has been atrocious. Those two things tend to cancel each other out.

The Cardinals aren't pretty, but neither is Detroit's defense. In a matchup featuring two teams that have been handing out yards like Halloween candy, taking the home underdog at a generous price is considerably more appealing than laying nearly a touchdown with the visitors. Detroit might score plenty. The problem is that Arizona could do the same. Recommendation: Cardinals +5½

Baltimore +3½ over Atlanta

1:00 PM EST. Here's a perfect example of how quickly the betting market can change its opinion of two football teams. A couple of weeks ago, Baltimore was receiving plenty of respect while Atlanta was trying to convince everyone that it wasn't headed for another miserable season.

Now the Falcons have blown out Green Bay and New Orleans in consecutive games, and suddenly Atlanta is the team everybody wants to own. The Falcons' stock is soaring, while Baltimore's stock has taken a hit because of Lamar Jackson's ankle injury.

Jackson is doubtful after leaving last week's victory over Tennessee in a walking boot. That's obviously significant, and nobody is going to pretend Tyler Huntley provides the same offensive threat. When Jackson left against the Titans, Baltimore didn't score another point.

But that's precisely why this number has become interesting.

The market has made a substantial adjustment for Jackson's uncertain availability, while simultaneously rewarding Atlanta for two impressive victories. That's a lot of positive sentiment being attached to the Falcons and a lot of negative sentiment being attached to Baltimore.

The Ravens are still 3-1, folks. They haven't suddenly become the Cleveland Browns because their starting quarterback is injured.

Baltimore still has a physical running game, defensive talent and enough experience to compete with a Falcons team whose reputation has improved dramatically over a very short period. Huntley isn't Jackson, but he's also not some guy Baltimore found working the concession stand.

Atlanta deserves credit for its recent performances, but those victories have transformed the Falcons from a team nobody trusted into a home favorite against one of the AFC's more talented rosters. That's quite a promotion. There's also the scheduling situation. Atlanta played Monday night, giving the Falcons a shorter preparation week, while Baltimore has had additional time to prepare for the possibility of playing without Jackson.

This isn't a comfortable selection, particularly with the quarterback uncertainty. But uncomfortable selections are often where the value is hiding. Atlanta is being priced at the height of its early-season popularity, while Baltimore is being discounted because of an injury that has dominated the conversation all week. The Falcons have looked terrific lately. The Ravens suddenly look vulnerable. That's the story everyone is buying. At +3½, we're buying the team nobody seems particularly interested in owning. Recommendation: Ravens +3½

LA Rams -3½ over Buffalo

8:15 PM EST. Remember back in August when the Los Angeles Rams were supposed to go undefeated? The media couldn't stop talking about them. The betting public was salivating. Matthew Stafford was going to lead another Super Bowl charge, and the Rams were being discussed as though the other 31 teams were merely showing up to collect their paychecks. Four weeks later, Los Angeles is 2-2, and suddenly nobody wants anything to do with the Rams.Funny how quickly things change in the NFL.

The Rams were thoroughly outplayed by San Francisco in their opener, lost another game to Denver, and barely escaped Philadelphia last week. That victory over the Eagles could easily have gone the other way, which means this supposedly unstoppable football machine isn't far removed from being 1-3. The Rams' stock hasn't just fallen. It's taken the elevator to the basement.

Meanwhile, Josh Allen is the new Superman. He can throw it, run it, escape three defenders, leap over a fourth and probably sell popcorn at halftime. The football world loves Allen, and with good reason. He's one of the most gifted quarterbacks in the league, and Buffalo's 3-1 record has the Bills looking like legitimate contenders again. Now Allen takes his one-man show to Los Angeles for Monday Night Football, with the entire country watching and he's getting 3½ points! What's not to like?

Well, for starters, Buffalo's three victories came against Dallas, Tennessee and Arizona, teams with a combined record of 3-9. That's hardly a collection of heavyweights. The Bills have looked impressive, but the quality of their opposition deserves a closer examination before everybody starts polishing the Lombardi Trophy.

The Rams, on the other hand, have already been through some difficult assignments, and their disappointing record has dramatically changed how the market views them. That's the attraction here

Four weeks ago, Los Angeles was considered one of the best teams in football. Now the Rams are laying just 3½ points at home against Buffalo, and the betting public is being handed an opportunity to grab more than a field goal with Superman himself.

We understand the appeal. Allen is capable of taking over any game, and the Bills are certainly dangerous enough to win outright. But there's a difference between recognizing Buffalo's ability and deciding the Bills are the right side at the current price. The market has fallen out of love with the Rams at precisely the same time it has become increasingly enamored with Buffalo. There's also something particularly appealing about backing a talented team whose early-season struggles have completely changed the conversation. The Rams haven't suddenly forgotten how to play football. Stafford hasn't forgotten how to throw, and Sean McVay hasn't forgotten how to coach. Los Angeles simply hasn't lived up to the enormous expectations that surrounded it throughout the summer.

Expectations, however, don't determine a team's actual ability. Buffalo arrives with the better record, the more celebrated quarterback and all the excitement that comes with a nationally televised appearance. The Rams arrive with a disappointing record and four weeks of criticism. Guess which team the public would rather bet? We're not interested in buying Buffalo when everybody is telling us how wonderful the Bills are. We're much more interested in buying the Rams when the same people who couldn't stop praising them in August have suddenly decided they're overrated. The Rams were overpriced when everybody loved them. Now that nobody wants them, the price has become considerably more attractive. Josh Allen might be Superman, but even Superman has to deal with kryptonite occasionally. Recommendation: Rams -3½