@Mason Curry Thanks Mason. I'll try and take that into account on my next version. I wish Walter would expand the player database and add more rounds. Oh well, I guess the draft is like 10 months away. :)
You can also create your own 2011 NFL Mock Draft on DraftDebacled.com, and if the write-ups are sound enough (and grammatically and factually correct), your mock could be featured in the 2011 NFL Mock Draft Database.
SEATTLE OFFENSE: Matt Hasselbeck was awful last week. Though he had a solid yardage total, his performance at San Francisco was some of the worst quarterbacking I've seen out of a previously competent veteran.
However, it's hard to put all the blame on Hasselbeck; his top receivers were Deon Butler, Brandon Stokley and Ruvell Martin. I'm sure Hasselbeck is thrilled that Mike Williams and Ben Obomanu will be back in the lineup. As we've seen, Williams' absence has had a major impact on Hasselbeck.
So, does this mean that the Seahawks have a shot at upsetting Atlanta? Probably not. The Falcons have been better against the pass lately - they restricted Josh Freeman to 181 yards on 38 attempts two weeks ago - and they will dominate the line of scrimmage this Sunday. As usual, Marshawn Lynch won't get anything on the ground, forcing Hasselbeck to operate in long-yardage situations with John Abraham breathing down his neck. That's not good.
ATLANTA OFFENSE: The Seahawks struggled against the run since losing Colin Cole and Red Bryant in the middle of the season. The good news is that Cole returned to the lineup against San Francisco. The bad news is that it didn't seem to matter because the underwhelming tandem of Anthony Dixon and Brian Westbrook rushed for 83 yards on 23 carries.
The Falcons have a much fiercer ground attack, so Michael Turner figures to have yet another dominant performance. This will set up short-yardage and play-action opportunities for Matt Ryan, who gets to throw against the league's 27th-ranked pass defense in terms of YPA.
RECAP: There aren't any situational angles to strengthen this pick, but Atlanta is one of the top teams in the NFL and should be able to take care of business at Seattle.
By the way, the Seahawks have covered the spread just three times since Week 7. Here are the quarterbacks they did this against: Max Hall, Derek Anderson and Jimmy Clausen. In all other games, they've lost by: 30, 34, 15, 18 and 19.
The Psychology. Edge: None.
No emotional edge found.
The Vegas. Edge: Seahawks.
The public continues to pound the Falcons against crappy teams.
Percentage of money on Atlanta: 82% (139,000 bets)
New York Jets (9-4) at Pittsburgh Steelers (10-3) Line: Steelers by 6. Total: 35.5. Walt's Projected Line (Before Week 14): Steelers -3.
Walt's Projected Line (After Week 14): Steelers -3.5.
Sunday, Dec. 19, 4:15 ET
The Game. Edge: None.
Another friendly reminder that Jerks of the Week for Dec. 13, 2010 are up, so just click the link. This week's jerks are: 1) No Space Man. 2) Fat Sports Bra Chick. 3) 35th Anniversary.
Also, in this week's edition of Emmitt on the Brink, Roger Goodell plans to extend the season to 350 games, and the Patriots draft the son of a former NFL quarterback.
NEW YORK OFFENSE: Mark Sanchez is playing miserably right now. I don't know what happened; he was on fire earlier, but beginning with the Thanksgiving game, he just hasn't been himself.
Playing Pittsburgh is not what he needs. The Steelers just had two pick-sixes, and they have to be licking their chops after watching the Dolphins drop three potential interceptions last week.
The Jets have struggled to run the ball lately, and that's something that figures to continue this week. The Steelers, as you may know, have the No. 1 rush defense in football. Only one team (New England) has rushed for more than 70 yards against them all year.
PITTSBURGH OFFENSE: The Steelers "scored" 23 on the Bengals last week, but most of those points came via two pick-sixes. Pittsburgh struggled to move the chains throughout the entire afternoon, though Ben Roethlisberger did a good job of converting several third-and-longs in the second half.
The Steelers just have major problems with their offensive line right now. And much like the Jets, their issues won't be solved by playing a tough defense.
While Pittsburgh is first versus the rush, New York is second, so Rashard Mendenhall figures to struggle on the ground. Meanwhile, the Jets, coming off a five-sack performance against Miami, will easily break through the Steelers' bruised and battered front, and sack Big Ben repeatedly.
RECAP: As I explained in the NFL Power Rankings, this is one of the worst point spreads I've ever seen because it completely caters to public perception. Two weeks ago, the Steelers would have been -3; maybe even -2.5. But because of public overreaction, the line has soared to -6 or -6.5.
All teams go through a funk. Just look at how the Patriots lost to the Browns. The Jets, like all other really good teams, will get through it, and they'll battle Pittsburgh tough in what should be a close game.
Unfortunately, I could not find any situational angles to support the Jets (or Steelers for that matter). Otherwise, this would have been a huge play.
LOCKED IN: Make sure to get this line at +6 or +6.5.
The Psychology. Edge: None.
No emotional edge found.
The Vegas. Edge: None.
Percentage of money on Pittsburgh: 54% (102,000 bets)
The Trends. Edge: Jets.
Jets are 11-6 ATS on the road since 2009.
Jets are 7-4 ATS as underdogs since 2009.
Steelers are 21-8 ATS in December home games since 2000.
Denver Broncos (3-10) at Oakland Raiders (6-7) Line: Raiders by 7.5. Total: 42. Walt's Projected Line (Before Week 14): Raiders -4.5.
Walt's Projected Line (After Week 14): Raiders -6.
Sunday, Dec. 19, 4:15 ET
The Game. Edge: Raiders.
It's time for Notes from NFL.com GameCenter - a list of a few stupid comments I found on NFL.com's GameCenter and my thoughts on them.
Last week I introduced you to a man named Taton, who posted stuff like "Manning always got pick in the last minutes that is sux!!!!" and "Colts offense and defense not good too many pass drop could catch!!!!"
This week, I present a new GameCenter person named ADawkins. As you'll see, he and Taton are probably long-lost brothers:
1. "list go payton"
List should be "let's." Payton should be "Peyton." But hey, at least he spelled "go" right.
2. "payton has been snoking thats were his been"
"Snoking" with you, perhaps?
3. "if the coilt cant get this they eat but lol"
Sadly, this is the most sophisticated joke you'll see on GameCenter most days.
OAKLAND OFFENSE: Darren McFadden is really amazing. I don't know where this was in his first two seasons, but McFadden is now breaking tackles and outrunning defenders like he did he did at Arkansas.
The Broncos just surrendered 177 rushing yards on 28 carries to the Cardinals, so you have to wonder how they'll stop McFadden.
With McFadden presumably picking up where he left off, Jason Campbell will continue to play well. Campbell was a prolific 21-of-30 for 324 yards and two touchdowns last week. Denver's secondary has some major holes, so you have to like Oakland's chances of scoring tons of points.
DENVER OFFENSE: Interim head coach Eric Studesville announced that Kyle Orton will remain the starter despite his struggles at Arizona. While fans want to see Tim Tebow, this is probably the right move because Tebow is not ready to play yet.
Orton posted some monstrous stats earlier in the year, but you have to wonder if that'll continue now that Josh McDaniels is gone. Even though the Broncos are running the same system, I'd say Orton's free fall will continue - at least against the Raiders and Nnamdi Asomugha, who will be on Brandon Lloyd.
Denver will be able to run the ball, however. Knowshon Moreno is still producing at a high level, and the Raiders just yielded 210 rushing yards on 28 carries to Jacksonville.
RECAP: This is a really bad spot for Oakland, and I really like the Broncos. I'll explain why:
1. The Raiders are in a Breather Alert. Following this game against crappy Denver, they have the Colts and Chiefs. They will not be focused this week.
2. Major revenge situation: Oakland scored 59 points on Denver in a Week 7 matchup. The Broncos did not show up to play last week at Arizona, but they will definitely be out for blood in this game.
3. The Broncos just lost the spread by 25-plus points. Teams tend to rebound well in this situation.
4. As mentioned earlier, road dogs coming off three or more consecutive losses coming into the game tend to cover at a decent percentage.
5. The Raiders are built on running the football and playing good defense, so they're not made to cover large spreads like this.
UNIT CHANGE: It doesn't look like Kyle Orton's going to play. He hasn't thrown at all in practice all week, and if he does go, he won't be anywhere near 100 percent.
With Orton out or really hurt, I can't recommend betting the Broncos at all. In fact, I'd take the Raiders if I had to.
The Psychology. Edge: Broncos.
A Breather Alert for the Raiders: After this "easy" game against the hapless Broncos, they get the Colts and Chiefs.
The Vegas. Edge: Broncos.
No one is taking the Broncos after that embarrassing loss at Arizona.
Percentage of money on Oakland: 83% (90,000 bets)
The Trends. Edge: Broncos.
History: Road Team has won the last 5 meetings (Raiders 7-2 ATS since 2006).
Raiders are 12-31 ATS vs. teams with losing records since 2001.
Raiders are 17-35 ATS at home the previous 52 instances.
Raiders are 4-19 ATS at home vs. teams with losing records.
Green Bay Packers (8-5) at New England Patriots (11-2) Line: Patriots by 14. Total: 43.5. Walt's Projected Line (Before Week 14): Patriots -4 (Rodgers).
Walt's Projected Line (After Week 14): Patriots -6 (Rodgers) or Patriots -13 (Flynn).
Sunday, Dec. 19, 8:20 ET
The Game. Edge: Patriots.
More Notes from NFL.com GameCenter (These are also from ADawkins):
1. "o man there winning games buy rafs"
You want me to buy rafts? What?
2. "a fumbles wow"
This has to be in the top 10 of worst attempts at a sentence ever, right?
3. "the is good but the packers need to keep there salf high and fly"
Perhaps you should keep your "salf" from being high and fly
NEW ENGLAND OFFENSE: As with the Eagles, the only way to beat the Patriots is to outscore them. That's why I think the Colts still stand the best chance of beating them if all of their players are healthy in the postseason.
But I don't see how any defense can stop Tom Brady's offense right now. The Patriots just have so many perfectly tailored weapons for Brady that there are just too many things to take away.
The Packers can disrupt Brady on a drive or two by having Clay Matthews apply pressure on the MVP candidate, but Brady is well protected by an offensive line that has blocked incredibly well since getting Logan Mankins back from his holdout. Brady has taken just seven sacks in the last seven weeks.
GREEN BAY OFFENSE: So, can the Packers outscore New England? If Matt Flynn starts, definitely not. If Aaron Rodgers is under center? Maybe. It's difficult to say because we don't know his condition. The most recent update I have for you is a tweet from Peter King that said he has a hunch Rodgers will play.
Rodgers just suffered his second concussion of the season, so even if he's under center Sunday night, he may not be 100 percent. And if Rodgers isn't completely fine, the Packers have no chance; they couldn't even beat the Dolphins when Rodgers was coming off his first concussion.
Hypothetically, if Rodgers is completely healthy, he has the offensive weapons to consistently score on New England. Yes, he lacks a running game, but so did the Colts, and they lit up the Patriots for 28 points.
RECAP: I'm tentatively leaning Packers, but stay tuned for a more decisive pick once we know what's going on with Rodgers. Based on the news, this could be a moderately sized play.
LINE POSTED: The Patriots opened -13 and are now up to -14, as the public is pounding them like crazy. I like Green Bay for three units because...
1. I've referenced this before - good teams missing their starting quarterback tend to cover the spread. Look at the Steelers without Ben Roethlisberger and the Bears without Jay Cutler. The Packers are a very good football team that will give 110 percent because they know they need to.
2. Conversely, this game means nothing to the Patriots. They're two up on the Jets in the division and essentially two up on Pittsburgh for homefield advantage because they beat the Steelers earlier in the year.
3. Green Bay is an underdog coming off a straight-up loss as a favorite of seven points or more. Teams usually cover in these situations.
4. This spread is out of control. I'll gladly take the 14 points.
The Psychology. Edge: Packers.
The Packers know they'll have to bring 110 percent with Aaron Rodgers out. The Patriots won't take Green Bay seriously in a meaningless game for them.
The Vegas. Edge: Packers.
No one wants any part of Matt Flynn.
Percentage of money on New England: 87% (68,000 bets)
The Trends. Edge: Patriots.
Packers are 25-13 ATS on the road under Mike McCarthy.
Patriots are 19-10 ATS in December home games since 2000.
Chicago Bears (9-4) vs. Minnesota Vikings (5-8) Line: Bears by 5.5. Total: 34.5. Walt's Projected Line (Before Week 14): Bears -2.
Walt's Projected Line (After Week 14): Bears -6.
Monday, Dec. 20, 8:30 ET At University of Minnesota
The Game. Edge: None.
It's Monday Night Football, and unfortunately, we're going to have Mike Tirico, Ron Jaworski and Jon Gruden calling the shots instead of Emmitt Smith, Herm Edwards, Bob Griese and former Philadelphia Eagles Television Network guy Kevin Reilly (a huge homer who called Maurice Jones-Drew "Maurice Drew-Jones" and Torry Holt "Terry Holt"). Here's how it would sound like if Reilly, Emmitt, Griese and Herm were in the booth for this game:
Kevin Reilly: Welcome to Minnesota, a city that's cold as balls. Guys, what do you think about Brett Favre? I usually don't root for anyone not on the Eagles, but I have Favre's rookie card, so I want him to play so it goes up in value.
Emmitt: Kenny, Brett Favre do not have much gas tank left in the tank. So, I do not think his rocket card will go up much in value from here on outside.
Reilly: You're probably right, Emmitt. I think I should focus on my Akili Smith rookie card going up. But guys, what do you think about this Jenn Sterger situation? Do you think it'll lower the value of Favre's rookie card? I'm banking my retirement on it going up.
Herm: That's a horrible plan! That's a terrible plan! That's an awful plan! That's a bad plan! That's bad! That's awful! That's horrible! That's terrible! That's no good, very bad! What about the kids!? What about the wife!? What about the grandkids!? What about... uhh...
Reilly: Don't talk about my family, Herm, you flaming homosexual!
Griese: Brett Favre will probably go to the Hall of Fame!
Reilly: He better go to the Hall of Fame, or his rookie card won't be worth as much! Guys, seriously. Jenn Sterger. I'm scared of her. Not that I can blame Brett. She has pretty big boobies.
Emmitt: Karl, Brett Favre a married man. If he do not stop sendin' text pictures of his sexual to woman with big sexual, his wife will understand that she marry a man who do not have good faithfulness. And if you cannot trust someone in the bed room, how you gonna trust someone in the kitchen?
Reilly: You're right, Emmitt. If my wife couldn't cook, I'd divorce her for sure.
Griese: Brett Favre will probably go to the Hall of Fame!
Reilly: Poor Griese. He's stuck in time somewhere. But man, if I could trade my ugly wife for Jenn Sterger, I'd do it in a heartbeat! I'd even give up all of my kids and my Akili Smith rookie card!
Herm: Akili Smith rookie card not worth anything! Not a dollar! Not a quarter! Not a dime! Not a nickel! Not a penny! Not half a penny! Not quarter of a penny! Not eighth of a penny! Not nothing! Not anything! Akili Smith is not worth anything because... uhh...
Reilly: Shut up Herm! If we start praising Akili Smith, maybe his rookie card will go up a lot and then I'll be able to afford to take Jenn Sterger on vacation somewhere! We'll be back after a word from our local sponsors!
MINNESOTA OFFENSE: I suppose I should start with the Vikings after that? Poor Kevin Reilly probably won't be able to see Favre play, which means another week of the God-awful Tardvaris Jackson.
If you didn't catch the Giants game, Jackson was awful. His throws were all over the place. It's amazing he wasn't picked off more than once.
The Bears will feast on Tardvaris unless the Vikings can establish Adrian Peterson. They weren't able to do so Monday night, as Peterson mustered just 26 yards on 14 carries. Fortunately for Peterson fantasy owners, Chicago has surrendered 230 rushing yards in the past two weeks.
CHICAGO OFFENSE: I've never been high on the Bears because I was too scared to trust the combination of Jay Cutler and Mike Martz. Well, it blew up against the Patriots, as Martz refused to run the ball and Cutler began tossing careless passes amid heavy pressure.
I think there could be some kind of carry-over effect. When it starts going bad for Cutler, it keeps going bad. And the Vikings just picked off Eli Manning twice, so you know they're fully capable of forcing turnovers.
Running the ball with Matt Forte would help, but that seems a bit beneath Martz. Minnesota's defense just surrendered 213 rushing yards to the Giants, and has been having issues containing the run on the right side all year. But the Bears just aren't built to take advantage of that liability.
RECAP: This is a really tough spot for the Bears. Not only are they coming off an emotional loss to the Patriots, they also will be looking past "crappy" Minnesota because they have the Jets and Packers next on the slate.
I'm not going big on the Vikings though; their current stadium situation could be a distraction, while the Bears are coming off a spread loss of 25-plus points.
PICK CHANGE: Two things here: First, Tarvaris Jackson probably won't play, meaning Joe Webb will start. And second, this game will be played at the University of Minnesota. The Vikings will continue to play lethargically.
The Psychology. Edge: None.
Two bad spots for the Bears: They're coming off an emotional loss to the Patriots, and they're in a Breather Alert; they have the Jets and Packers after this "easy" game. However, the Vikings' malaise will continue because they don't have a home.
The Vegas. Edge: Vikings.
Everyone was betting the Bears. Action evened out on Monday.
Percentage of money on Chicago: 64% (131,000 bets)
The Trends. Edge: Vikings.
History: Home Team has won 14 of the last 16 meetings.
Bears are 7-3 ATS after giving up 30 or more points in a loss since 2005.
Bears are 8-27 ATS in December road games the previous 34 instances.
Week 15 NFL Picks - Early Games 49ers at Chargers, Browns at Bengals, Redskins at Cowboys, Texans at Titans, Jaguars at Colts, Chiefs at Rams, Bills at Dolphins, Lions at Buccaneers, Cardinals at Panthers, Saints at Ravens, Eagles at Giants
Prop/Teaser/Parlay Picks A list of some of my favorite team/player prop picks this week (Offense & defensive ROY picks to be counted
whenver winners are announced.) Picks carried over on a week-to-week basis will be in black.
Note: For legality purposes, this Web site does not promote or advocate gambling. This is solely for entertainment purposes only.
Last Week's NFL Picks Against The Spread (Week 21, 2015): 1-0 (+$200)
Last Week's 2-3 Unit NFL Picks (Week 21, 2015): 1-0 (+$200)
Last Week's 4-5 Unit NFL Picks (Week 21, 2015): 0-0 ($0)
Last Week Over-Under (Week 21, 2015): 1-0 ($0)
Last Week's Prop/ML/Teaser/Parlay Picks (Week 21, 2015): -$580
2015 NFL Picks of the Month: 3-3, 50.0% (-$100)
2015 Season NFL Picks Against The Spread: 134-138-12, 49.3% (-$2,360) 2015 Season 2-3 Unit NFL Picks: 47-44-1, 51.6% (-$820) 2015 Season 4-5 Unit NFL Picks: 17-16-2, 51.5% (-$1,120) 2015 Season Over-Under: 143-119-5, 54.6% ($0) 2015 Season Prop/ML/Teaser/Parlay Picks: -$855
1999 Season NFL Picks Against The Spread: 27-41-3 (39.7%) 2000 Season NFL Picks Against The Spread: 128-123-8 (51.0%) 2001 Season NFL Picks Against The Spread: 127-122-7 (51.0%) 2002 Season NFL Picks Against The Spread: 123-136-7 (47.5%) 2003 Season NFL Picks Against The Spread: 146-126-8 (53.7%) 2004 Season NFL Picks Against The Spread: 157-123-8 (56.1%) 2005 Season NFL Picks Against The Spread: 156-126-11 (55.3%) 2006 Season NFL Picks Against The Spread: 151-135-9 (52.8%) 2007 Season NFL Picks Against The Spread: 162-135-10, 54.5% (+$2,550) 2008 Season NFL Picks Against The Spread: 148-140-7, 51.4% (+$2,620) 2009 Season NFL Picks Against The Spread: 151-124-9, 54.9% (+$3,370) 2010 Season NFL Picks Against The Spread: 144-131-8, 52.4% (+$6,080) 2011 Season NFL Picks Against The Spread: 137-133-12, 50.7% (-$1,925) 2012 Season NFL Picks Against The Spread: 130-145-8, 47.3% (-$5,760) 2013 Season NFL Picks Against The Spread: 144-131-8, 52.4% (+$5,580) 2014 Season NFL Picks Against The Spread: 143-133-7, 51.8% (-$1,885) 2015 Season NFL Picks Against The Spread: 134-138-12, 49.3% (-$2,360)
2002 Season 2-3 Unit NFL Picks: 41-49-2 (45.6%) 2003 Season 2-3 Unit NFL Picks: 52-51-2 (50.5%) 2004 Season 2-3 Unit NFL Picks: 65-44-3 (59.6%) 2005 Season 2-3 Unit NFL Picks: 77-61-1 (55.8%) 2006 Season 2-3 Unit NFL Picks: 65-61-4 (51.6%) 2007 Season 2-3 Unit NFL Picks: 83-59-5, 58.5% (+$4,110) 2008 Season 2-3 Unit NFL Picks: 44-57-3, 43.6% (-$3,510) 2009 Season 2-3 Unit NFL Picks: 49-35-3, 58.3% (+$2,260) 2010 Season 2-3 Unit NFL Picks: 51-38-4, 57.3% (+$3,180) 2011 Season 2-3 Unit NFL Picks: 44-51-3, 46.3% (-$2,715) 2012 Season 2-3 Unit NFL Picks: 45-50-2, 47.4% (-$2,130) 2013 Season 2-3 Unit NFL Picks: 38-42, 47.5% (-$2,890) 2015 Season 2-3 Unit NFL Picks: 47-44-1, 51.6% (-$820)
2002 Season 4-5 Unit NFL Picks: 11-12 (47.8%) 2003 Season 4-5 Unit NFL Picks: 16-13-1 (55.2%) 2004 Season 4-5 Unit NFL Picks: 18-11 (62.1%) 2005 Season 4-5 Unit NFL Picks: 25-22-1 (53.2%) 2006 Season 4-5 Unit NFL Picks: 21-29-1 (42.0%) 2007 Season 4-5 Unit NFL Picks: 35-30-2, 53.8% (+$420) 2008 Season 4-5 Unit NFL Picks: 39-26-2, 60.0% (+$4,055) 2009 Season 4-5 Unit NFL Picks: 29-26, 52.7% (+$330) 2010 Season 4-5 Unit NFL Picks: 32-22, 59.3% (+$4,790) 2011 Season 4-5 Unit NFL Picks: 14-14, 50.0% (-$1,260) 2012 Season 4-5 Unit NFL Picks: 14-21, 40.0% (-$3,650) 2013 Season 4-5 Unit NFL Picks: 17-9-3, 65.4% (+$2,970) 2015 Season 4-5 Unit NFL Picks: 17-16-2, 51.5% (-$1,120)
2001 Season Over-Under: 3-2 (60.0%) 2002 Season Over-Under: 121-91-3 (57.1%) 2003 Season Over-Under: 126-132-2 (48.8%) 2004 Season Over-Under: 139-124-4 (52.9%) 2005 Season Over-Under: 117-145-4 (44.7%) 2006 Season Over-Under: 129-132-5 (49.4%) 2007 Season Over-Under: 136-145-3, 48.4% (-$1,900) 2008 Season Over-Under: 137-125-6, 52.3% (+$860) 2009 Season Over-Under: 128-135-4, 48.7% (-$3,195) 2010 Season Over-Under: 128-135-5, 48.7% (-$5) 2011 Season Over-Under: 131-131-5, 50.0% (+$135) 2012 Season Over-Under: 125-121-5, 50.8% (+$30) 2013 Season Over-Under: 132-130-5, 50.4% (-$340) 2015 Season Over-Under: 143-119-5, 54.6% ($0)
2007 Season Prop/ML/Teaser/Parlay Picks: +$1,035 2008 Season Prop/ML/Teaser/Parlay Picks: +$1,775 2009 Season Prop/ML/Teaser/Parlay Picks: +$865 2010 Season Prop/ML/Teaser/Parlay Picks: -$200 2011 Season Prop/ML/Teaser/Parlay Picks: +$590 2012 Season Prop/ML/Teaser/Parlay Picks: -$1,685 2013 Season Prop/ML/Teaser/Parlay Picks: +$2,245 2015 Season Prop/ML/Teaser/Parlay Picks: -$855
2006 NFL Picks of the Month: 3-3 (50%) 2007 NFL Picks of the Month: 3-3, 50.0% (-$400) 2008 NFL Picks of the Month: 6-1, 85.7% (+$3,720) 2009 NFL Picks of the Month: 3-2, 60.0% (+$640) 2010 NFL Picks of the Month: 2-4, 33.3% (-$1,810) 2011 NFL Picks of the Month: 5-2, 71.4% (+$1,870) 2012 NFL Picks of the Month: 3-2, 60.0% (+$560) 2013 NFL Picks of the Month: 6-0, 100% (+$3,900) 2014 NFL Picks of the Month: 2-4, 33.3% (-$1,350) 2015 NFL Picks of the Month: 3-3, 50.0% (-$100)
Career NFL Picks Against The Spread: 2,291-2,116-129, 52.0% (+$8,150) Career 2-3 Unit NFL Picks: 741-668-34 (52.6%) Career 4-5 Unit NFL Picks: 305-267-13 (53.3%) Career Over-Under: 1,823-1,765-51 (50.8%) Career Second-Half NFL Picks: 22-15-1 (61.1%) Career NFL Picks of the Month: 33-22 (60.0%)
My Team-by-Team ATS Record This section shows how well I do when picking each team this year. The purpose is to see how well I read each team. Pushes are not
displayed. Winning/losing streak in parentheses.