My predictions for this weekend's NFL Divisional Round games and the only times I've ever felt particularly confident about anything I've predicted with sports

Saturday 1/17/26

Sports predictions never seem to go well. Or maybe I should say that they can only go so well. You can put them down in writing, and when you look back later you'll usually see you didn't fare so hot. There haven't been many times when I thoroughly believed what I would have predicted would happen actually happened. Allowing that it wasn't some huge mismatch. Two occurrences come to mind: I had a strong inkling the Patriots were going to lose to the Giants in the 2007 Super Bowl. That team was ripe to beat and they almost had been by the Giants only a few weeks before.

Contrary to what almost everyone will tell you, that Patriots team wasn't great. They were flawed. Even on offense they were flawed. They either chucked it deep to Randy Moss--one-on-one (or one-on-two) balls that he went up and got--or dumbed it underneath to Wes Welker. The defense was old. The combination of a predictable offense and a defense minus playmakers--though it had a lot of former playmakers--proved their undoing. That and a Giants defense with a perfect game plan and a coach in Tom Coughlin who knew what he was doing and how to upset Goliath.

Then there was Game 7 of the Stanley Cup Finals between the Bruins and Canucks. I knew the Bruins weren't losing that game. Tim Thomas wasn't losing that game. And the Canucks, as gutless and passive as they were, weren't going to go out and take the game. One more, actually--I felt like I knew very early that the 2013 Red Sox would win the World Series. That team had the most fight in it of any team I've ever seen in any sport. A relentless squad.

They could be trailing 9-1 and down to their last at-bat, and they'd grind it out. They'd put a couple runs on on the board before losing in that scenario, and someone would see the final and think one thing, and someone who'd watched the game would think another. They never lost more than three games in a row that year. Do you know how hard that is to do? No team has ever bettered that. It was never easy against them. They fought 100% the whole time. You don't see that in sports, and especially not in baseball. Was a thing to behold if you were paying attention on a day in, day out basis.

In the spirit of likely looking back and seeing how off I was, these are my predictions for the four NFL playoffs games this weekend:

Bills over Broncos.

Bears over Rams.

Patriots over Texans.

49ers over Seahawks.

My reasoning...

I don't much believe in Denver. Strike me as paper tiger. Paper horse, if you prefer. This pick is predicated on Josh Allen doing Josh Allen things. If he's off, Buffalo loses. But if he's wheeling and dealing, I think said w&d, coupled with Buffalo's experience and hunger, gets the job down at whatever they call that stadium (Mile High is in there somewhere).

I think the Rams are much better than the Bears. So why am I picking Chicago? I believe in this weather thing. Teams from warmer places and/or that play in a dome lose when they play outside in the cold in January. Then again, the teams that do win in these situations will usually have much more talent, and that's just enough to get them over the top. Instead of winning by two or more scores, they win by a field goal. That could happen. The Rams are in a tough spot, though.

I've already gone into why I think the Patriots will beat the Texans. Or why they should. What a love fest this week for that Texans defense, right? Gushy gushy goo. Many ropes of seed have been launched into the air as so much released excitement re: that defense.

I don't know, man...I'm a little dubious. And it's not as if the Texans should have an easy time marching up and down the field themselves. I think Maye and McDaniels will be able to cook up enough offense, the defense will be efficacious...and...let's not forget...it'll be cold. The Texans are from...well, obviously.

Again, I think this matters. Historically, it always has. Cold weather usually defeats good teams even if the team that plays in the cold weather isn't that strong, and I think the Pats are pretty good...if we're grading on a curve in an NFL replete with bad teams and a surplus of mediocrity. Are they good-good in an absolute sense? I'd say no. But you don't have to be now. You're good in the current NFL by being less bad, if that makes sense. Does to me. I see this play out week after week.

The Patriots are better than people nationally think they are. Most of those people get too hung up on the soft schedule thing. The Patriots have had hard games. They're proven in those games. They won in Buffalo. That Sunday night game in Baltimore was tricky--Baltimore believed they needed that game to make the playoffs. Patriots beat themselves against the Bills in large part in their second match-up, but they were right there. And they just won a playoff game last week against a team that wanted to play the Patriots because they were confident they matched up well against them.

It'll be disappointing as a Patriots fan if they lose tomorrow, but for me that'll be because they have a real chance to win it all this year, and you don't know when you will again. I assume very little with sports, in terms of year to year stuff.

The last one is a toss up to me. I don't know...the 49ers have a bit of grit. Pluck. The Seahawks aren't an amazing team but rather one that's just had a really nice year. They're rested. 49ers had to go to Philly. Seattle is better than Philly. More stable. Lot of drama and distraction with that Philly team, so this will be an even harder test. But you can only pick one team, so I'll take San Francisco.

And while we're at it, I like Indiana on Monday night over Miami because how do you pick against them? I know--I picked against the 2007 Patriots, who were also undefeated. Yeah...you could see them clinging, though. They were just squeaking by for a while. Indiana seems to have gotten better throughout their season.

Anyway, that's what I got. And if one can visit this entry later and delight in how much I got wrong, then smoke 'em if you got 'em, as they used to say. I'm not Criswell. But who is?