Why It Doesn't Matter that Michael Picked the Giants to Win

by: Chris Sullivan

Hey guys, it looks like Michael's pick of the Giants over the Hawks has made for a lot of buzz in the comments, including a couple choice words that we've had to edit (remember: we try to keep this a pretty clean blog. Every week we have an R-rated post for those sorts of comments right after the Hawks game).

You'll note that Gonzo and I both picked the Seahawks because we both think we've got a good chance of winning. So does Michael. The bottom line is, this is A) not a game we're "supposed to win," B) on the East Coast at 10 AM where we've historically played poorly, and C) the first game after a Bye, where we've historically played poorly. We're 7.5 - 9 point underdogs according to the odds makers. Most things are pointing towards a Seahawks loss in this game.

Picking the Giants over the Hawks does not a traitor make, especially not when you've got a 1-2 team going on the road against the world champs. The fact is, Michael's pick does have the Hawks beating the spread, which is a small victory, really. Anyway, he's in the air all day flying to the Giants game to watch the Hawks. To those who called him a traitor or other such name, you've clearly not been reading the blog. Michael is as big a Seahawks fan as I've ever met, who understands the game much better than I do, and someone who follows the Hawks better than most from 1500 miles away in L.A.

This isn't to say you can't disagree with his pick--Gonzo and I both did--but keep it civil and impersonal, please. You're insulting the guy responsible for this whole community for one pick you disagree with! END