Peyton Manning and Russell Wilson will meet up again Sunday. (USATSI)
Peyton Manning and Russell Wilson will meet up again Sunday. (USATSI)

Each week, we'll take the best -- and most clever -- odds collected by Bovada for the upcoming week and give our take. This is important stuff, perhaps the most important post you’ll read all week. Because if you can’t lose money while watching a game in which you have absolutely no effect, what’s the point of watching sports at all?

Note: Home team is listed first in Against the Spread, and all statistics only include the regular season.

Game One: Seahawks -5.5 vs. Broncos
Sunday, 4:25 p.m. ET, CBS

2014 Against The Spread
Overall: 1-1 Overall: 0-2
Home: 1-0 Home: 0-2
Away: 0-1 Away: 0-0
2014 Team Rankings
Pass offense: 25th Pass defense: 4th
Rush offense: 4th Rush defense: 26th
Pass defense: 17th Pass offense: 3rd
Rush defense: 9th Rush offense: 19th

Verdict: Last season's Super Bowl not withstanding, I would pick the Broncos to beat the Seahawks in Denver or on a neutral site. Normally, I would expect Seattle to beat Denver in Seattle. But not this time. The Chargers exposed Seattle a bit last week, and though Denver hasn't put together an impressive 60 minutes of football, I'm still going with the Broncos as my Super Bowl champs. They'll be 3-0 after Sunday.

Game Two: Bills -2.5 vs. Chargers
Sunday, 1 p.m. ET, CBS

2014 Against The Spread
Overall: 2-0 Overall: 2-0
Home: 1-0 Home: 1-0
Away: 1-0 Away: 1-0
2014 Team Rankings
Pass offense: 26th Pass defense: 18th
Rush offense: 6th Rush defense: 15th
Pass defense: 26th Pass offense: 8th
Rush defense: 5th Rush offense: 25th

Verdict: Yeah, the Bills are 2-0, including a completely unexpected victory at Chicago in Week 1, but I'm not sure I understand how Buffalo is favored in this one. A more appropriate spread would be, say, the Chargers -3. Because remember: The last time the Bills started 2-0 during a season (and they actually started 3-0 in 2011), they finished that year 6-10. Go with the Chargers.

Game Three (largest spread of week): Patriots -14.5 vs. Raiders
Sunday, 1 p.m. ET, CBS

2014 Against The Spread
Overall: 1-1 Overall: 1-1
Home: 0-0 Home: 0-1
Away: 1-1 Away: 1-0
2014 Team Rankings
Pass offense: 27th Pass defense: 2nd
Rush offense: 15th Rush defense: 30th
Pass defense: 3rd Pass offense: 23rd
Rush defense: 20th Rush offense: 29th

Verdict: Like I said Thursday night when I was watching the Buccaneers embarrass themselves vs. the Falcons, the Raiders, at this point, would beat the crap out of Tampa Bay. Unfortunately for Oakland, it's not playing the Buccaneers this week. Instead, it's facing a Patriots squad coming off a big win vs. the Vikings. Thing is, I would pick Minnesota to beat up on Oakland, so I'm thinking New England is going to dominate the Raiders on Sunday.


How many winless teams will there be after Week 3?        

Over/Under   3½

Entering Sunday, the Giants, Jaguars, Saints, Chiefs and Raiders are 0-2. I think the Saints -- and only the Saints -- will win. Therefore, I will go over.

How many sacks will the Jaguars surrender Week 3? (Note: The Jaguars allowed 10 sacks last week)

Over/Under   3

It's hard to imagine the Jaguars offensive line will improve that much from week to week, even though the team waived right tackle Cam Bradford (and will replace him with Sam Young) and said Luke Bowanko will make his first career start at center. But Indianapolis only has managed one sack in its first two games (and that was from linebacker Erik Walden), so it's clear the team hasn't figured out how to create an effective pass rush without Robert Mathis in the lineup. But expect Indianapolis to focus plenty on taking down Jaguars quarterback Chad Henne. I'd go over.

How many snaps will Johnny Manziel take Week 3? (Note: Manziel took three snaps in week 2)

Over/Under   1½

Honestly, I have no idea. This is a complete guess, but I'm going to go over.

Last week: 3-0 against the spread; 1-2 on prop bets. Last three seasons: 60-68 against the spread; 51-37-1 on prop bets.

See my picks and all the experts here.