We’re entering a $3,000,000-guaranteed Survivor pool on Splash Sports — The Big Splash, $100 to enter, up to 33,334 entries in the field before the September 13 deadline — and we’re doing it with three separate entries built to fail independently rather than three copies of the same “safest” pick. Here’s the strategy behind that, and why the contest’s own rules make this a much harder puzzle than a normal survivor pool.
The Double-Pick Problem
Most survivor pools ask for one pick a week, 18 weeks, each team usable once. This one is tougher: eight weeks — Weeks 3, 6, 9, 12, 13, 14, 15, and 16 — are double-pick weeks, where each entry needs two correct picks, not one, to survive. Miss either one and you’re out, with no partial credit.
Run the math and the squeeze becomes obvious: surviving all 18 weeks takes 26 correct picks per entry (10 single weeks plus 8 double weeks at two apiece), and a team can only be used once per entry all season. There are 32 NFL teams. That’s six teams of slack, and this year’s six weakest teams by projected win total already eat into that cushion. Nobody should expect to run the full table here — the double-pick weeks alone make that a longshot for the entire 33,334-entry field, not just us. The five double-pick weeks bunched into Weeks 12 through 16 are the real killing field: ten correct picks needed in a five-week stretch, right as good matchups get scarce.
Why Three Entries, Built Against Each Other
With one entry, the only lever is picking the best team every week. With three, the goal changes: keep at least one entry alive as long as possible, without tripling our exposure to a single upset by parking all three entries on the same team in the same week. So instead of three identical “safest pick” clones, we built a full 18-week plan for each entry using an optimization pass — not just grabbing whichever team looks best that week, but solving for the team-to-week combination that gives each entry its best possible shot at the whole season. We also weight the double-pick weeks more heavily than single weeks in that model — especially the Week 12-16 stretch — so a genuinely strong team gets held in reserve for a week where two picks have to hit at once, rather than spent early just because it looked good in the moment. Then we solved Entry B and Entry C with a penalty against repeating whatever team an earlier entry already used that week. Net result: across all 18 weeks, no two of our three entries ever land on the same team.
Our Week 1 Blueprint
Week 1 kicks off September 9. Based on where the preseason power rankings and full schedule shake out right now, here’s the plan for all three entries:
Entry C: Jacksonville Jaguars (home vs. Cleveland) — the strongest number on the board for this entry, and a clean spot to open the season.
Entry B: Tennessee Titans (home vs. NY Jets) — a different game entirely from Entry C, so one upset doesn’t touch both entries.
Entry A: Las Vegas Raiders (home vs. Miami) — a lower number on paper, but the full-season optimization flagged this as the right trade to keep stronger teams available for later in the year, especially heading into the Week 12-16 double-pick gauntlet.
Notably absent from Week 1: the LA Chargers, this year’s third-strongest team by our model. An earlier pass of this plan had the Chargers here in Week 1 — but on reflection, spending a team that strong in a single-pick week when the double-pick weeks are the real threat didn’t sit right. The updated model reserves them instead: they show up later in Week 2, Week 11, and Week 16 (a double-pick week), spread across all three entries rather than cashed in early.
That Week 1 Raiders pick is a good example of why we’re not just chasing the best matchup every single week — a plan that greedily takes the best team available now runs out of good options right when the schedule gets hardest. We’d rather take a calculated step back in Week 1 than get stuck with a coin flip in Week 14.
Week 1: What We Considered and Passed On
Since Scott asked us not to shy away from the alternates, here’s what each entry’s pick beat out this week — the picks are only half the story without the tradeoffs behind them.
- Entry A — Las Vegas Raiders (69%): Detroit Lions (79%) and Philadelphia Eagles (75%) both graded higher for Week 1. Both are being held back deliberately: the Lions are earmarked for Entry C’s Week 3 double-pick slot (88%), and the Eagles for Entry A’s own Week 13 double-pick slot (82%). Using either here would mean finding a replacement for a double-pick week later — a worse trade given how scarce good double-week matchups get.
- Entry B — Tennessee Titans (65%): The LA Chargers (90%) were the obvious top number on the board, but they’re being saved for Entry B’s own Week 2 slot (84%) instead — still a great number, just one week later, which frees this week’s stronger options for entries that need them more. Pittsburgh (65%) was an even trade statistically, but going to Cleveland to open the season felt like the safer read on early-season form.
- Entry C — Jacksonville Jaguars (81%): The Chargers (90%) again graded higher, but as above, they’re doing more good in Week 11 for this entry (86%) once other options thin out. Detroit (79%) was the next-closest alternative and is reserved for this entry’s Week 3 double-pick slot instead.
The short version: almost every “obviously stronger” alternative this week is still on the board — just moved to a week where it’s doing more work, especially a double-pick week where two teams have to hit at once instead of one.
The Full 18-Week Roadmap
Per Scott’s request, here’s the complete plan for all three entries, start to finish — not just this week’s picks. Double-pick weeks are highlighted; the last column tracks modeled cumulative survival odds per entry (illustrative, not predictive — see the caveat below the table).
| Wk | Type | Entry A | Entry B | Entry C | A / B / C Survival |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | single | Las Vegas Raiders (vs Miami Dolphins, 69%) | Tennessee Titans (vs New York Jets, 65%) | Jacksonville Jaguars (vs Cleveland Browns, 81%) | 69.3% / 65.4% / 80.8% |
| 2 | single | Tampa Bay Buccaneers (vs Cleveland Browns, 74%) | Los Angeles Chargers (vs Las Vegas Raiders, 84%) | Atlanta Falcons (vs Carolina Panthers, 61%) | 51.6% / 55.0% / 49.2% |
| 3 | DOUBLE | New Orleans Saints (vs Las Vegas Raiders, 72%) San Francisco 49ers (vs Arizona Cardinals, 89%) |
New York Giants (vs Tennessee Titans, 66%) Green Bay Packers (vs Atlanta Falcons, 76%) |
Detroit Lions (vs New York Jets, 88%) Kansas City Chiefs (@Miami Dolphins, 81%) |
33.1% / 27.6% / 35.1% |
| 4 | single | Minnesota Vikings (vs Miami Dolphins, 84%) | Chicago Bears (vs New York Jets, 82%) | New York Giants (vs Arizona Cardinals, 79%) | 27.8% / 22.7% / 27.7% |
| 5 | single | Cincinnati Bengals (@Miami Dolphins, 79%) | New England Patriots (vs Las Vegas Raiders, 84%) | Pittsburgh Steelers (vs Indianapolis Colts, 63%) | 22.0% / 19.0% / 17.4% |
| 6 | DOUBLE | New England Patriots (vs New York Jets, 85%) Los Angeles Rams (vs Arizona Cardinals, 93%) |
Philadelphia Eagles (vs Carolina Panthers, 79%) Indianapolis Colts (vs Tennessee Titans, 68%) |
Buffalo Bills (@Las Vegas Raiders, 79%) Baltimore Ravens (@Cleveland Browns, 77%) |
17.4% / 10.2% / 10.6% |
| 7 | single | New York Jets (vs Miami Dolphins, 67%) | Houston Texans (vs New York Giants, 76%) | Tennessee Titans (vs Cleveland Browns, 61%) | 11.6% / 7.8% / 6.4% |
| 8 | single | Pittsburgh Steelers (vs Cleveland Browns, 74%) | Dallas Cowboys (vs Arizona Cardinals, 86%) | Green Bay Packers (vs Carolina Panthers, 78%) | 8.6% / 6.7% / 5.0% |
| 9 | DOUBLE | Seattle Seahawks (vs Arizona Cardinals, 92%) Kansas City Chiefs (vs New York Jets, 85%) |
Detroit Lions (@Miami Dolphins, 85%) San Francisco 49ers (vs Las Vegas Raiders, 84%) |
Chicago Bears (vs Tampa Bay Buccaneers, 64%) New Orleans Saints (vs Cleveland Browns, 70%) |
6.7% / 4.8% / 2.3% |
| 10 | single | Indianapolis Colts (vs Miami Dolphins, 81%) | Los Angeles Rams (@Arizona Cardinals, 87%) | Houston Texans (@Cleveland Browns, 71%) | 5.4% / 4.1% / 1.6% |
| 11 | single | Dallas Cowboys (vs Tennessee Titans, 76%) | Kansas City Chiefs (vs Arizona Cardinals, 89%) | Los Angeles Chargers (vs New York Jets, 86%) | 4.1% / 3.7% / 1.4% |
| 12 | DOUBLE | Jacksonville Jaguars (vs Tennessee Titans, 79%) Washington Commanders (@Arizona Cardinals, 68%) |
Tampa Bay Buccaneers (vs Carolina Panthers, 68%) Cleveland Browns (vs Las Vegas Raiders, 60%) |
Cincinnati Bengals (vs New Orleans Saints, 71%) Indianapolis Colts (vs New York Giants, 61%) |
2.2% / 1.5% / 0.6% |
| 13 | DOUBLE | Denver Broncos (vs Miami Dolphins, 89%) Philadelphia Eagles (@Arizona Cardinals, 82%) |
Minnesota Vikings (vs Carolina Panthers, 69%) Cincinnati Bengals (@Cleveland Browns, 68%) |
Washington Commanders (@Tennessee Titans, 52%) Seattle Seahawks (vs Dallas Cowboys, 74%) |
1.6% / 0.7% / 0.2% |
| 14 | DOUBLE | Chicago Bears (@Miami Dolphins, 78%) Detroit Lions (vs Tennessee Titans, 85%) |
Baltimore Ravens (vs Tampa Bay Buccaneers, 76%) Seattle Seahawks (vs New York Giants, 82%) |
Denver Broncos (@New York Jets, 75%) Philadelphia Eagles (vs Indianapolis Colts, 75%) |
1.1% / 0.4% / 0.1% |
| 15 | DOUBLE | Green Bay Packers (vs Miami Dolphins, 90%) New York Giants (vs Cleveland Browns, 68%) |
Denver Broncos (@Las Vegas Raiders, 72%) Washington Commanders (vs Atlanta Falcons, 61%) |
Tampa Bay Buccaneers (vs New Orleans Saints, 63%) Los Angeles Rams (vs Dallas Cowboys, 75%) |
0.7% / 0.2% / 0.1% |
| 16 | DOUBLE | Baltimore Ravens (vs Cleveland Browns, 87%) Los Angeles Chargers (@Miami Dolphins, 82%) |
New Orleans Saints (vs Arizona Cardinals, 81%) Pittsburgh Steelers (vs Carolina Panthers, 68%) |
New England Patriots (@New York Jets, 75%) Minnesota Vikings (vs Washington Commanders, 64%) |
0.5% / 0.1% / 0.0% |
| 17 | single | Buffalo Bills (@Miami Dolphins, 86%) | Jacksonville Jaguars (vs Washington Commanders, 71%) | Dallas Cowboys (vs New York Giants, 69%) | 0.4% / 0.1% / 0.0% |
| 18 | single | Houston Texans (vs Tennessee Titans, 81%) | Buffalo Bills (vs New York Jets, 89%) | San Francisco 49ers (@Arizona Cardinals, 81%) | 0.3% / 0.1% / 0.0% |
Caveat: this is a preseason model (projected win totals plus a simple win-probability formula), not real betting lines. Treat Weeks 1-3 as the most actionable; everything past Week 4 is a sequencing plan — which team is earmarked for which slot — that will keep getting rewritten as camp battles resolve, injuries happen, and real lines post. The survival percentages exist to show why the Week 12-16 stretch is the real danger zone, not as a precise forecast for any one entry.
What’s Next
This is a living strategy. Every week between now and kickoff — and then every week of the season — we’re revisiting the plan with fresh training camp news, injury reports, and (once the games start) actual lines and results, then re-optimizing whatever weeks are left. Expect this space to get more precise as August rolls on and roster battles resolve.