So here we are in the friggin 17th inning and still deadlocked at one all. I have the Indians at +1.5 RL and all I can think is Murphy going to get me again in this situation, I lost by two runs with the Rangers two days ago UP 7 to 3 going to the bottom of the ninth and losing with TX +1.5 RL!! We will see.
NFL Picks (2010): 144-130-8 (+$6,190) NFL Picks (2009): 151-124-9 (+$3,370) NFL Picks (2008): 136-125-6 (+$4,330)
If you don't quite understand the line, total or anything else, go to my
Sports Betting FAQ.
Vegas betting action updated Jan. 23, 1:20 p.m. ET.
Green Bay Packers (12-6) at Chicago Bears (12-5) Line: Packers by 3.5. Total: 42. Walt's Projected Line: Packers -3.
Sunday, 3:00 ET
The Game. Edge: Packers.
Week 19 Recap: I loved three picks last Monday: Packers +2.5, Seahawks +10 and Jets +9. In fact, I considered all three as my January NFL Pick of the Month. The Jets would drop out of consideration because of Rex Ryan's comments toward Tom Brady - way to prove him wrong, Tom - and I eventually settled with the Seahawks. They fit one more situational angle (4) than the Packers. If Green Bay was a 3-point underdog, I may have gone with them. That's how close it was.
I picked the wrong side, but I stand by my Seattle selection. John Carlson's injury ruined their entire game plan. The team dropped seven passes in the first half - and that doesn't even include Jordan Babineaux's failed pick-six that eventually helped the Bears go up 14-0. That dropped interception will haunt my dreams for a long time.
I lost my January NFL Pick of the Month, so I naturally received some hate mail even though I posted the following gambling disclaimer: "The Seahawks are my January NFL Pick of the Month. This does not mean that I'd condone betting thousands upon thousands of dollars on them. This is my pick, and I'm not even going four figures, so if the Bears cover, I don't want to receive any e-mails saying, "OMGZ I LOST LIEK $$30K ON THIS GAEM F*** YOU A**HOEL!!!"
From Jim M:
NIce pick of the month. Two months in a row your pick of the month is one of the most lopsided games all year. Your write ups are pretty funny really. all your meaningless statistics that have no impact on the game. You should change your website to walTERRfootball because your picking skills are Terrible.
Oh man, I hope someone didn't buy the domain name walTERRfootball.com yet. This idea could be worth millions.
From Go Gata:
Another great pick of the month call. You're unreal dude...what a joke.
Well, at least Go Gata thinks I'm funny. By the way, I'm glad to see that a Florida fan can put a coherent sentence together. It's nice to know that progress is being made at that school.
What's with the red font? I know I got my pick wrong. Do you have to emphasize it?
And did Jeff W. really need to link to my site in an e-mail to me? It's almost like he wasn't sure I'd know what he was talking about. Oh, you mean my prediction was wrong? I almost forgot. Thanks for the reminder, Jeff.
Meanwhile, a "professional" handicapper named Mister East - Russ L. from my hate mail column in Jerks of the Week three weeks ago - popped into my forum when the Bears were up 14-0 and announced that his biggest play of the day was on Chicago because of some nonsensical and irrelevant stats.
Wow, great timing there. As you can see in Mister East's thread the forum members weren't too happy about this.
McNulty: Posted when the Bears have a 14-0 lead? Nice.
Red-Headed Step-Child: I feel dumb for even participating but just don't reply to this idiot. He's shown that he can go on for pages, ranting about **** when no one is even reading or replying. He's a hack just let him go away.
Metaldeth: Probably had 2 versions prepared.
Kind of makes you think what would have happened if the Seahawks were winning. Would Mister East have posted anything? Or would he have told everyone he liked Seattle? As I wrote in the aforementioned Jerks of the Week entry, tout services make their money by giving out one side to half their clients and the other side to the other half. That way, they can reel in half of their paying customers. The other half, meanwhile, is informed that they can get the scamdicapper's "elite" picks by paying more for their service. It's amazing that so many people get suckered into this.
At any rate, Mister East was not happy that everyone was upset with the timing of his pick. He replied:
Make me a moderator in this forum, and I'll clean up the trash, and we all will make money.I'll ban all the idiots. I have no more comments for the peanut gallery, I'll just wait for Walter to say yay or nay
Hmm... tough choice. I can:
A) Make Mister East a moderator so he can get rid of some quality posters on the forum and continue to scam the rest of the message board into paying two grand for his "picks."
B) Ignore him on the message board and later make fun of him on my NFL Picks page.
Guess which one I chose?
Mister East announced he was leaving after forum member FoRM shot him an angry message:
Uncover before your superior, dog. I am no peanut gallery. I've moderated or administrated half a hundred forums, chans, and torrent trackers. Never have I encountered anybody as blatantly ignorant or pretentious as you. If you're going to shamelessly continue to show off and refer to the (relatively) intelligent and perceptive members of this community as a "peanut gallery," I think you should just leave. You're not helping out the community by staying here any more; you're just advertising for your stupid little service. I don't care if you reach 100% on all your picks - I'd rather go hit-and-miss with a decent guy like Walter than straight-on with vermin like you.
This whole ordeal got me thinking - if scamdicappers can pull crap like this, why just limit conning people in sports? For example, a scamdicapper - perhaps Mister Compassion Chuck Norris' brother-in-law, Mister Mid-Southwest Central - could easily post the following on my forum:
MY PICK: United States -130 over England in Revolutionary War: 500 Units!!!
Thought I'd post this after the war started so paying clients don't rebel,
The United States had a much better economic boost than anyone had imagined. The French and Indians were supposed to fight it out for supremacy in the United States, but it was America that won. England is now the Cinderella darling of the world. Let's rewind the tale of this team over the last 2 decades and then before. England hosted the for what amounted to a playin war in the 1760s. Noone wanted to touch England, with 70% of the public on the Ottoman Empire. England rose up and beat the Ottoman Empire rather handily keeping them out of the European supremecy. Last decade noone wanted any part of this team vs the reigning world Champion Roman Empire, but they rose up to the occasion and beat them. Now England has been anointed the chosen one, as a country that noone wanted to touch is now a public darling with 60% behind them. Are we overlooking th fact this country gave up nearly 500 cavalry units last week? Maybe we are forgetting their last 5 battles vs countries with a rising economy show them losing by a total of 114 soldiers or 22.8 spw (soldiers per war)? Oh but they beat the Roman Empire, and beat America in America, therefore they will stay within 10 dead soldiers here. WRONG! The fact they beat America here, is serving notice to the Americans and they won't be caught off guard. England lost 9 battles by 15 soldiers or more, which tops any country in the world, and they are not in their homeland anymore! They will get crushed here. This also fits my 18-1 ATS war system for the 1700s a well as the 22-6 ATS war system. America in a blowout.
Guys, bet USA -130 over England in the Revolutionary War. And please buy our service, where you can get our guaranteed winner in the War of 1812. We need the money because Mister Compassion Chuck Norris hasn't gotten his ATM card in the mail yet.
Anyway, it's the usual - my NFL Picks will be posted periodically throughout Tuesday. You can follow me on Twitter @walterfootball to receive updates for when I post each selection.
GREEN BAY OFFENSE: Troy Aikman said that if he were starting a franchise from scratch, he'd pick Aaron Rodgers over any other quarterback. That's quite a statement considering the year Tom Brady had, but after watching Brady play very stoically against the Jets, I'm beginning to think that Aikman was on to something.
Rodgers was incredible against the Falcons, going 31-of-36 for 366 yards and four touchdowns (3 pass, 1 rush). After witnessing Rodgers' dissection of Atlanta's defense, it's hard to imagine him not torching any team in the NFL.
However, there's a huge difference between the Bears and the Falcons. In the regular-season finale at Green Bay, Rodgers went 19-of-28 for 229 yards, one touchdown and an interception against Chicago. The Packers had problems moving the chains the entire afternoon in a 10-3 defensive struggle.
One thing is different this time around - Green Bay has a running game. James Starks is exactly what the Packers were missing ever since losing Ryan Grant in the opener. Starks is a really talented (but injury-prone) back who will keep the Bears honest this time around; in the aforementioned Week 17 meeting, Brandon Jackson led the team with seven carries for just 19 yards. Starks actually had more yardage (20) but on just five attempts.
CHICAGO OFFENSE: Rodgers didn't have his best game against the Bears in Week 17. Jay Cutler, meanwhile, looked like he was reverting into 2009 mode. Cutler went 21-of-39 for 168 yards and two interceptions.
Cutler's protection was miserable. He was sacked six times by Green Bay's ferocious pass rush. But if you think the poor play by the offensive line forced Cutler into those turnovers, think again. Against the Seahawks last week, Cutler was very fortunate to escape with a mistake-free game. Cutler tossed a potential pick-six to Jordan Babineaux, who dropped it. Later, Cutler fumbled, but was lucky that one of his linemen pounced on the football.
The Packers have an opportunistic defense, so they'll capitalize on Cutler's mistakes. So with that in mind, Mike Martz needs to run the ball as much as possible. He was good in this aspect against Seattle, but not in the Week 17 battle. Despite the fact that it was a close battle throughout, Cutler attempted 39 passes compared to Matt Forte's 15 runs. And it's not like Forte couldn't do anything on the ground; Forte rushed for 91 yards on those 15 carries.
Martz's game plan will have a big say in this result. If Martz has Cutler slinging the ball around, the Bears don't stand a chance. But if Martz is smart and calls for lots of running plays, Chicago may advance to the Super Bowl.
RECAP: I've had the Packers listed No. 1 or 2 in my NFL Power Rankings for quite some time now. So, it may surprise you that I'm picking the Bears to cover.
How can I possibly like Chicago? Well, three things to consider:
1. The Bears really have to feel disrespected here. They're the No. 2 seed and the winner of the division, yet they're 3-point home dogs to a No. 6 seed.
2. I'm concerned that the Packers will be overconfident. Everyone expects them to win. Everyone is telling them how great they are. After the Atlanta blowout, Rodgers beamed during his post-game press conference and told all the reporters that he just had his best performance. Well, for the sake of Packer fans, I hope Rodgers realizes that this game won't be nearly be as easy as that Falcons contest.
3. And speaking of that game, take a look at this stat: Teams coming off wins of 21-plus points in the playoffs are 4-9 against the spread in their next game since 2002.
With all that being said, the Packers have a good chance of winning this game. And so do the Bears. I believe this NFC North battle will go down to the wire and be decided by one score.
The Psychology. Edge: Bears.
The Bears really have to feel disrespected by this spread.
The Vegas. Edge: Bears.
Everyone is all over the Packers once again, though the percentage has come down since the beginning of the week.
Percentage of money on Green Bay: 72% (149,000 bets)
The Trends. Edge: Packers.
History: Home Team has won 6 of the last 7 meetings.
Packers are 28-14 ATS on the road under Mike McCarthy.
2. 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. Our 2011 NFL Draft Contest will be available soon.
3. Jerks of the Week for Jan. 17, 2011 are up, so just click the link. This week's jerks are: 1) Arizona Shooter. 2) GameCenter People. 3) ABC's Off the Map.
4. In this week's edition of Emmitt on the Brink, it's a recap of the 2015 divisional round of the playoffs, including Oakland's win over Kansas City with Al Davis' new weapon from hell.
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 (the third from Jason R.):
1. "ravens have 21 points allready inless there is a rule stating they can get negitive 4 points ..."
Hey, on GameCenter, anything is possible.
2. "ur a idit the mannings r onr of the best talk about over ratede bret farv is"
I feel like Percy Harvin; I'm getting a migraine just looking at this.
3. "do wn gose rodgers .... pop geos the weesle .... and ha ha my laughter is loud fo cheesle"
The loud laughter must echo in your padded room in the insane asylum.
Anyway, throughout the season, I've been posting mock TV broadcasts of Bob Papa, Joe Theismann and Matt Millen, and Kevin Reilly, Emmitt, Herm Edwards and Bob Griese. It's the playoffs now, so it's time to do something special. So, why not combine these two teams to make one ultra, mega TV broadcast of epic fail?
Kevin Reilly: Welcome to Pittsburgh, the far worse of the two cities in Pennsylvania. Guys, I feel like I'm in hell here. Philadelphia is the city of Brotherly Love. Pittsburgh is the Sister City of Gay Love. Emmitt, what do you think? On a scale from one to 10, one being my Eagles and 10 being Perez Hilton's double-rainbow butt hole, how gay is the city of Pittsburgh?
Emmitt: Now Kasey, I'm very ashameful to hear your homophone comments on the same week that Martin Luther King Kong celebrate the day he become President of the United States of American. If people in Pittsburgh want to take it in the back side, there is nothin' wrong with that.
Matt Millen: Did someone say backside? I want you to look down on the field at a particular backside. See Ben Roethlisberger? Now that's some backside. That's 100-percent USDA backside right there. I could ride that backside all night long in the hotel room.
Kevin Reilly: Ha! This weirdo with the mustache is gay! I told you, Emmitt! Everyone in this city is gay, including Herm!
Herm: I'm gay! I mean I'm not gay! Not gay! Definitely not gay! No gay here! No gay there! No gay anywhere! No homosexual! No queer! No gay thoughts! No gay ideas! Big Ben's not gay either! He's straight! He's like a Red Lobster waiter! He's servin up touchdowns!
Bob Papa: I like to go to Red Lobster for my birthday.
Joe Theismann: Matt Millen likes to go to Red Lobster too. He lives at Red Lobster. No, really, he has a cot out by the garbage cans, and he waits for the workers to toss out the unfinished food so he can feast on it because he's fat!
Millen: You know, I wish sometimes you wouldn't make fun of me, Joe. I know at least 50... no... 100... 100,000 other people who wait outside of Red Lobster by the dumpsters. So, I'd appreciate it if you stopped making fun of me. And here's what I mean by making fun of me. You sometimes say things about the game. But sometimes you say other things. And in those occasions, sometimes you'll say something about me. And more often than not, you're referring to my weight, which I'm very sensitive about. And when someone says something sensitive about someone else, that means you're making fun of them.
Theismann: Hey, Matt, there's a fried shrimp on the floor! Get it!
Millen: Where? Where!?!?!? I didn't even bring my emergency cocktail sauce!!!!!
Bob Papa: Don't worry, Matt. I brought some cocktail sauce with me because I knew you'd forget it when you were downloading pictures of Ben Roethlisberger.
Millen: NOM NOM NOM NOM!!!!!
Reilly: Jesus Christ, Emmitt. How did we get stuck with these idiots?
Emmitt: I am also at a lost for words. But as the wise man once say, sometime life deal you a bad arm.
Reilly: Just one more week with these morons. We'll be back after a word from our local sponsors!
NEW YORK OFFENSE: It really amazes me that everyone bashes Mark Sanchez. Sanchez is by no means a great quarterback (yet), but I think people forget that he's only in his second year. Most second-year quarterbacks struggle. Sanchez has his ugly moments, but he steps up in clutch situations. If he can lead his team to a Super Bowl victory, he'll be exactly where Ben Roethlisberger was in his second season.
Sanchez went 16-of-25 for 194 yards and three touchdowns at New England last week. The Steelers obviously have a better defense than the Patriots, but Sanchez already beat Pittsburgh, going 19-of-29 for 170 yards against them in a Week 15 matchup. I just re-watched that game, and I forgot how impressive Sanchez was.
There's a big difference this time, however. Troy Polamalu will actually be in the lineup. Polamalu missed the prior matchup, so he'll be around to terrorize Sanchez for the first time in the young quarterback's career.
The Jets will undoubtedly try to run the football with their two talented backs, but that won't be possible against Pittsburgh. In the prior meeting, LaDainian Tomlinson and Shonn Greene combined for 89 yards on 23 carries, but that was with Polamalu on the sidelines.
PITTSBURGH OFFENSE: Ben Roethlisberger is amazing. How he continues to convert key long-yardage situations and win games despite his horrendous offensive line is beyond me. Roethlisberger was sacked six times by the Ravens, but somehow managed to get the job done.
It'll be more of the same against the Jets. Rex Ryan will have his crazy blitz schemes ready for the Steelers, but Big Ben will undoubtedly dodge defenders, keep plays alive and hit his receivers past the first-down marker.
Like last week, the Steelers won't be able to run the football; the Jets have limited the opposition to 3.6 yards per carry in the postseason.
RECAP: I don't love the Jets, but they're my favorite play Sunday. Hey, there are only two games this week, so it's not like I have a lot to choose from.
The fact that New York won in Pittsburgh helps them. I've mentioned this a few times this postseason, but I researched how the winners of non-divisional, same-site rematches fared in the playoffs. Since 2002, the victors are 17-10 straight up; 4-2 if we're talking about a road winner.
More prominently, the Rabid Dog trend applies again. Teams coming off a straight-up win in the playoffs as underdogs of seven or more are 6-2 against the spread the following week since 2002.
Meanwhile, the Steelers just aren't built to blow out good teams. Here are their results against all of the playoff teams they've battled this year: Won by 6 over Atlanta; lost by 3 to Baltimore; lost by 10 at New Orleans; lost by 13 to New England; won by 3 over Baltimore; lost by 5 to the Jets; won by 7 over Baltimore.
Like the NFC Championship, I think this will be a close game, so I like getting the 3.5 points.
The Psychology. Edge: None.
No emotional edge found.
The Vegas. Edge: None.
Percentage of money on Pittsburgh: 57% (146,000 bets)
The Trends. Edge: None.
Jets are 13-7 ATS on the road since 2009.
Jets are 10-5 ATS as underdogs since 2009.
Steelers are 23-9 ATS in December home games since 2000.
Ben Roethlisberger is 8-3 ATS in the playoffs (5-2 as a favorite).
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.