Week 6 of the NFL season kicks off Thursday night with a matchup between the struggling Washington Commanders and Chicago Bears at Soldier Field. Washington (1-4) is coming off a 21-17 loss at home to the Titans, and Chicago (2-3) is off a 29-22 road loss to the Vikings. But Thursday's game still offers plenty of ways to wager, if you so choose. So what plays do we like for this matchup?
Betting analysts Doug Kezirian, Tyler Fulghum, Joe Fortenbaugh, Anita Marks and Erin Dolan; fantasy and sports betting analysts Eric Moody and Andre Snellings; and ESPN Stats & Information's Seth Walder, ESPN analyst Jason Fitz and Football Outsiders' Aaron Schatz provide their top plays for the matchup.
Note: Lines from Caesars Sportsbook unless otherwise indicated.
Thursday's game is a matchup of two struggling teams in the 1-4 Commanders and 2-3 Bears. The line has been around a pick 'em to -1 on both sides with a low total of 38. Which side or total will you be playing?
Moody: I'd bet on the under in this matchup. The Bears rank 31st in total yards per game (274.0) and 30th in scoring (16.0), and the Commanders rank 19th in total yards per game (341.6) and also don't score a ton of points, averaging 18.3 per game. The totals have gone under in five of Washington's past seven games. Thursday night unders for games with a total of 40 points or less are 20-7-2. When all of this is taken into consideration, the under is likely to prevail.
Fortenbaugh: Half-unit wager on the under, but beware. At some point these Thursday night totals are going to get so low that there will be value in backing the over. However, I don't think this is that particular spot. Both teams rank outside the top 20 in yards per play; Chicago ranks 23rd in pace, and the Commanders rank 29th in yards per point. Take note that the Bears rank fifth in rush offense and 11th in yards per rushing attempt, but Washington ranks sixth in rush defense DVOA. What's the over for total punts in this game?
Schatz: If you need to play this game, go with Chicago. The Bears are slightly better than the Commanders in our DVOA ratings at Football Outsiders, and they were slightly better (on defense) in our preseason projections as well. Plus, they have home-field advantage, for whatever that's worth these days. (It's less than it used to be, but it's something.)
Fitz: I feel like I could simply cut and paste "take the under" on these Thursday night games. That being said, the trend exists for a reason, and I think we should expect it to continue for most of the season. As for this game in particular, I still have little to no reason to believe in the Bears offensively, and as much as we'd love this game to shock us all, I think this falls predictably under. When it's a low-scoring game, it becomes about which quarterback I can trust more and, shockingly, this might be one of the only times the answer is Wentz, so I'm leaning Washington.
Marks: I'll take the Bears -1. These teams are heading in opposite directions. Washington has lost four straight games and is struggling for answers. Wentz keeps doing Wentz things and had a head coach throw him under the bus again. Chicago has been in two one-score games on the road against teams that are 4-1. The Bears coaching staff is better, and Matt Eberflus was the defensive coordinator in Indy when Wentz was the QB, so his knowledge of Wentz's weaknesses will be a huge factor.
Walder: Justin Fields is coming off his best game and when in doubt I lean toward the team with the better offensive line: That's Chicago. Don't let Fields' sack totals fool you, the Bears' offensive line is OK -- Washington's is not. Another reason to like Chicago is that it is getting corner Jaylon Johnson back from injury. It's a small sample, but Johnson hasn't allowed a single target in his 51 coverage snaps this season, per NFL Next Gen Stats.
The NBA season is almost here. Sign up for ESPN Fantasy Basketball today. Play for free
QBs Carson Wentz and Justin Fields are 24th and 25th, respectively, in ESPN's Total QBR, part of the reason for their teams' struggles. For the second straight week, Fields' passing yards prop is sub-200 yards at 172.5 and Wentz is 223.5. Do you like either one of those this week?
Moody: I like Wentz over 223.5 passing yards in this matchup. With receiving playmakers Terry McLaurin and Curtis Samuel, he should be able to surpass the number. Wentz has surpassed 223.5 passing yards in three out of five games this season. Only the Jets (42.8) and Cardinals (43.8) average more passing attempts per game than the Commanders (42).
Schatz: I also like Wentz over 223.5 yards here, in part because the Bears should slow down the Washington running game and force the Commanders to air it out on long down and distances. The Bears rank seventh in run stop win rate, while the Commanders are 29th in run block win rate. Chicago gives up a lot of rushing yardage, but that's related to game situation, and I don't think the Commanders are taking a big lead in this game that will let them salt away the clock. (I also doubt Wentz is picking up 53 scramble yards like Daniel Jones and Tyrod Taylor did in Week 4.) Football Outsiders' Week 6 projections estimate a 71% chance that Wentz goes over this passing yardage total.
Fortenbaugh: Wentz going over his total caught my attention because throwing for a bunch of yards has never been his problem. Heck, he's averaging 278 passing yards per game this season, which ranks fifth in the NFL. Wentz's problem -- and there are several -- is that he makes head-scratching mistakes in the most crucial of moments. He can go ahead and blow this game in the final two minutes and it shouldn't make a difference in terms of him recording at least 224 passing yards.
Fitz: We made so much of the end of the loss to the Titans that we have seemingly erased what was, overall, an OK game for Wentz. The Bears' defense is giving up 367 yards per game (22nd). Chicago is last in the NFL defensively on third downs and in the bottom third defensively in the red zone. The simple fact is the team isn't very good. And while Wentz might not be Patrick Mahomes, he won't have to be to put up some yards here. I'll take the over for Wentz.
Snellings: I'll take the over on Fields' passing yards. So much has been made about how few passes he's throwing, and how a good amount of that seems to be lack of trust in Fields as a passer. Well, almost a third through the season, Fields is starting to get some experience. He's coming off his best passing game of the season, throwing for 208 yards on the road against a stingy Vikings defense. The week before, he managed 174 passing yards on the road against an even stingier Giants pass defense. Fields is trending in the right direction as a passer and should surpass the line of 172.5 yards.
With the early struggles, both teams are long shots to make the playoffs. Washington is 10-1 to make the postseason and 50-1 to win the NFC East. The Bears are also 10-1 to make the postseason and 40-1 to win the NFC North. Is there any reason to think one of the two teams can turn it around and make a run?
Dolan: The short answer is no. The Commanders have not shown any signs on offense or defense that they are a threat to make it to the postseason or win the NFC East. The same applies for the Bears.
Kezirian: Right there with Erin. There is no reason to think Chicago has any shot. The roster just lacks talent. The Bears should be more like 100-1 to win the division. In terms of a playoff berth, I think their 2-3 record is a mirage. Washington does have some talent, but the rest of the division has much more. Philly is a contender, while the Cowboys and Giants are surpassing expectations. Washington is 1-4 and could conceivably make the playoffs, given an eventual playoff team is likely 3-2 or 2-3 right now, but I would not take 10-1 odds.
Fortenbaugh: No. That's the answer. No. This one doesn't require any analysis for those who have been on planet Earth for more than 90 seconds.
Fitz: The only bet we should be considering for these teams moving forward would be regarding where they pick in the draft. Both of these teams are flat out irrelevant in the playoff conversation.
Moody: I don't think so. The Bears and Commanders have inconsistent quarterback play from Fields and Wentz, respectively. Neither team accumulates a lot of yards or score a lot of points. Furthermore, both teams play in very competitive divisions and don't have stout defenses. There is a reason the Bears and Commanders are long shots.
Schatz: Offense is more predictive than defense, and these offenses are awful this year. The defenses are each a little bit disappointing as well. There's no indication the Bears are going to turn it around ... and even if the Commanders did manage to turn it around, three division foes starting 4-1 or better goes a long way toward blocking them from a playoff spot.
Snellings: I don't have any confidence in the Commanders and not a lot of confidence in the Bears, but they are at least within the realm of possibility to me. The NFC East is actually brutal this season, with three teams already three full games (or more) ahead of the Commanders. I can't think of the stumble that would allow Washington to get back into it. The Bears, on the other hand, are still only two games behind the Vikings and only a game behind a Packers team that just doesn't look that good. Still, I can't talk myself into the 10-1 price, but I would at least entertain the possibility of taking a flier at 40-1 on the Bears to win the North.
Last Thursday night, there were no TDs scored in the Colts' 12-9 win over the Broncos. That paid 35-1 at Caesars and up to 100-1 at other books. Caesars Sportsbook currently has "No TD" posted at 29-1 this week. Are you taking it?
Moody: No, I'm not. Both teams have defensive weaknesses that the other will attempt to exploit. I think of the Commanders' pass defense and the Bears' run defense. It looks like a 17-14 game to me.
Fitz: I'm not taking that. As bad as both teams are, expecting no touchdowns in back to back weeks is just asking too much. Even if by accident, someone will score a touchdown in this one.
Dolan: I am not. Enticing to do so after last week but unlikely to happen again. Neither defense is that good. At least one touchdown will be thrown.
Marks: I am not taking that bet. The football gods can't be that cruel to us on back-to-back Thursday nights. Brian Robinson to score a touchdown is +235, which I will play. Last week was his first game back after being shot, I believe this is the week he gets a full workload, and this coaching staff LOVES him! With Logan Thomas out, tight end Cole Turner gets the start and is +550. He scored 10 TDs his last year at Nevada and could be a threat in the red zone for the Commanders.
Are there any other props in this game you are playing?
Moody: I'm betting on Brian Robinson to rush over 48.5 yards. Just six weeks after suffering gunshot wounds, the rookie played in his first NFL game Sunday against the Titans. Robinson (18 snaps) and Antonio Gibson (20) played a similar number of snaps against Tennessee. Robinson was the primary player on run plays. He finished with 22 rushing yards on nine attempts. The Bears' defense is allowing 170 rushing yards per game. The only defense that allows more is the Seahawks' (170.2).
Fortenbaugh: Wentz over 0.5 INTs (-121). He has thrown six picks so far this season, with at least one coming in four of five games. For his career, Wentz has thrown 63 interceptions across 90 games, with 33 picks in 44 career road contests.
Dolan: Wentz over 0.5 INTs. Wentz has been intercepted on 2.9% of his passes, the eighth-highest rate in NFL this season. I think he will be highly motivated in this game given Washington's 1-4 record, including four straight losses. Plus, Ron Rivera basically called Wentz out as the main reason the team is doing so poorly in the division. I think Wentz tries to be the hero in this one and slings the ball all over the place recklessly. He has three interceptions in three road games this season. The only time he did not throw an interception this season was against the Eagles in Philly. Meanwhile, the Bears' defense has eight takeaways this season, including five interceptions. Wentz is becoming much like Matthew Stafford ... an automatic interception bet each week.
Fitz: Fields over 42.5 yards rushing (-115). Fields has gone over that number in each of his past three games, and on a short week to prepare he will have to rely more on instincts than ever before. That, to me, means running the ball to make a play whenever the opportunity presents itself. I don't trust the Bears' offense to stay on schedule, but I do trust Fields to try to be dynamic however he can be.
Marks: Brian Robinson over 11.5 attempts (-120). Robinson had nine rushes for 22 yards in his first game last week but that was just a warm-up. I expect Robinson to carry the rock at least 15 times this week against a Bears rush defense ranked 22nd in the league.
Walder: Cole Kmet under 29.5 receiving yards (-119). My projections forecast a mean of 24.5 yards for Kmet in a low-passing environment on Thursday night. Even with some basic math I think we can guess this line is a little high. Kmet has a 15% target share this year, and if we go off Fields' 23.5 passing attempts line that works out to about 3.5 expected targets for Kmet in this game. In a small sample, his yards per target is up this year, but over Kmet's career he's averaging 6.4 yards per target. If we multiply the two numbers together we get roughly 22.4 receiving yards. I'd trust a model over back-of-the-napkin math, but that's the start of how we get to an under pick on Kmet.
Snellings: I'll take Fields over 0.5 touchdown passes and Darnell Mooney over 44.5 receiving yards. As I mentioned above, I think Fields is slowly developing as a passer, and he's facing a relatively weak Commanders pass defense. The Commanders have allowed the third-most passing touchdowns (11) in the NFL. As for Mooney, after a nightmare start to the season he has now notched 146 receiving yards over his past two games, going over 44.5 yards in both games. As Fields gets more comfortable, Mooney should be the primary recipient.