Seattle ML

[Goat Milk]

No reason Seattle shouldn't be favored here. Jackson is not healthy and he is half their offense. If bradford thrwos 40 times against the Hawks he will get buried.

If they announce Jackson isn't playing in the next few days this line will drop.

For you trend guys:
Seahawks 6-0 last 6 against Rams when they are favored.
Seahawks 4-1 last 5 played in STL.

[icancount2one]

Hawks strike me as a team that's much more dangerous at home than on the road. Bradford's looking really good in the early going and who knows if Seattle lays an egg.

No play for me, I'm just saying don't overlook the Rams as much as you could have last year..

[Dark Horse]

I'm pretty confident STL takes this.

RF's haven't exactly been stellar this season. STL has been quite disciplined about their balance between passing and rushing. And SEA has a lot of new pieces, so don't be surprised to see them intimidated on the road.

[marcoloco]

i agree w/ goat milk. jump on seattle now, especially with the rams best weapon in sjax most likely not playing, and if he does he wont be near 100%

[Goat Milk]

No way rams win if Jackson doesn't play.

[Goat Milk]

ml changes

[plzkthx]

hawks all the way. already made my bet

[Limey]

Steven Jackson accounted for only 48 of St Louis's 365 yards last Sunday as they went about beating Washington, arguably a better team than Seattle.

Just my two cents.

[spargament]

The idea that SJax's absence lacks major significance is laughable.

[Salmon Steak]

Those stats were seasons ago when the Rams were garbage. They still are not great but better than in years past. You are right that Jackson will be a big factor.

[mv09]

Seattle sucks on the road.

[8ArIvd5]

Seattle's a different team because of a different head coach. I like your play GM.

[cowboyfan08]

Bol,goat will be on hawks also.

[isles71]

Definetly on the hawks. The Rams are better but stand no chance.

Bradford is good and Jackson is a good running back, but mostly the Rams are the worst. Really bad and maaaaay go 4-12 or more likely 3-13.

[Limey]

The idea that SJax's absence lacks major significance is laughable.

Significant, sure. Majorly significant, I'm not sure. Stating that he accounted for 13% of St Louis's yardage against Washington is not an 'argument'. Rams played the entire second half without him and won the half 16-3.

Again, his absence has to have some significane but I'd be very wary of basing a pick on it.

[sharper2]

im weary about Seattle on the road but if jacksons out im with you, seattle should win