The Pittsburgh Steelers travel to Gillette Stadium on Sunday, September 20, 2026, for a 1 p.m. ET meeting with the New England Patriots on CBS. Pittsburgh arrives 1-0 after a 20-13 win over Atlanta that opened the Mike McCarthy era and featured a composed outing from 42-year-old Aaron Rodgers. New England arrives 0-1, having led Seattle 10-0 before losing 13-10, a game in which Drake Maye threw three interceptions in the fourth quarter. Two openers, two teams that combined for modest point totals, and a rematch of a series the Steelers won 21-14 last September in the same building. That is the backdrop for today's pick.
The number
Our pick is Under 43.5 on the game total. We are transparent about the inputs here: for this matchup, the model probability, market-implied probability, edge and confidence figures are not available from our engine, and we will not manufacture them. This preview therefore rests on the researched context above rather than on a quantified model edge. We note that the total has also been referenced at 41.5 in some sources; our stated selection and line are Under 43.5, and readers should confirm the exact number they are working from before acting. Treat the case below as directional reasoning, not a precision-graded edge.
Why the model leans this way
The cleanest argument for the Under is what both offenses actually produced in Week 1. Pittsburgh's win over Atlanta finished 20-13, a 33-point game. New England's loss to Seattle finished 13-10, a 23-point game. Neither team has yet shown the ability to push a scoreboard past the mid-20s in isolation, and a total in the low-to-mid 40s asks both to arrive at once.
The turnover picture reinforces the lean, though it cuts in a specific direction. Drake Maye's three fourth-quarter interceptions against Seattle are the kind of drives that end without points and can shorten a game's scoring window when they force a team into a conservative, clock-managing posture. Turnovers are volatile week to week and can just as easily create short fields, so we hold this point loosely rather than lean on it.
The series history is consistent with a controlled game as well. Last year's meeting between these teams ended 21-14, a 35-point total in the same venue with the Patriots hosting. That is one data point, not a trend, but it aligns with a game that stays under the mid-40s rather than one that races past it.
Injury availability adds mild support. Pittsburgh listed Pittman as questionable with what reads as a longshot to play, while Fautanu practiced fully and Washington and Heyward returned without designations. New England was monitoring CB Carlton Davis III (neck), LB Dre'Mont Jones (foot), LB Robert Spillane (knee), OL Ben Brown (knee), and RB TreVeyon Henderson (ankle). Uncertainty at running back and along an offensive line can constrain an offense's ceiling, which is the outcome the Under wants.
The case against
The honest counterargument starts with the sample size: one game each. A pair of low openers is thin evidence, and offenses commonly find rhythm in Week 2 once the first live reps are behind them. Aaron Rodgers is capable of a cleaner, higher-scoring performance than Pittsburgh's 20 points suggest, and Drake Maye's three interceptions are more plausibly a bad afternoon than a settled pattern; a version of Maye that protects the ball can move New England into the 20s comfortably.
Turnovers also work against this pick as often as for it. The same three-interception game that can shorten scoring can, in a different script, hand the opponent short fields and cheap points, inflating a total rather than suppressing it. Special-teams scores, a defensive touchdown, or a single explosive drive can move a game from the high 30s into the mid-40s in a possession or two. Totals in this range are decided by a handful of plays, and Unders in the low 40s lose a meaningful share of the time to exactly these swings — often enough that no result here should be treated as expected.
We are also candid that we are working without a quantified model edge for this game. That absence is itself a reason for smaller conviction, not larger. If the number you see is 41.5 rather than 43.5, the cushion narrows further, and the case weakens accordingly.
Predictions carry risk and outcomes are uncertain; if you choose to act on this analysis, please do so within your means and seek help at 1-800-GAMBLER if you need it. 21+.