Do they call it Garbage time because when a team is up big, their defense starts to play like garbage? I mean do defensive players these days Play to Win, but once they're in position to, it's time to let players on their fantasy teams or their friends fantasy teams rack up some numbers? Do these players start to feel bad that they have to make a game of it all the time? Defenses that stop playing hard for 60 minutes even though they are up big is to football what the pitch count is to baseball.. does some damage to the integrity of the game.
NFL Picks (2011): 135-132-12 (-$2,325) NFL Picks (2010): 144-131-8 (+$6,080) 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, 1:25 p.m. ET. Follow @walterfootball for updates.
Baltimore Ravens (13-4) at New England Patriots (14-3) Line: Patriots by 7. Total: 49.5. Walt's Projected Line: Patriots -7.5.
Sunday, Jan. 22, 3:00 ET
The Game. Edge: Patriots.
Week 19 Recap: Well, the good news is that I've won all but one pick this postseason in which I've had at least one unit on a side. The bad news is that I dropped five units on the Broncos. There were so many things I didn't understand about that game. How did Denver's offensive line implode like that after keeping the pocket clean against the Steelers? Why did Tom Brady look as angry as he does when playing as an underdog? And why didn't God intervene? I figured God would bet at least 15 units on Tebow, so going with a third as much seemed like the right move.
Anyway, I'll be posting these NFL Picks throughout the day. Follow me at @walterfootball for updates.
Vegas Recap: It was an OK weekend for Vegas. The two highly bet teams split (Saints didn't cover; Giants covered), but lots of teasers were broken up because the Packers lost.
I'll be updating the Vegas betting action all week, as usual. I'll notify you of any updates @walterfootball.
Some random football notes I can't put anywhere else:
1. My January NFL Pick of the Month hit for seven units when I picked the Broncos to win straight up over the Steelers. I lost with Denver over New England for five units this past weekend, so naturally, I received hate mail for it:
@Walt <3 Tebow's Teballs - Where was this post last week when I had the Broncos straight up for seven units? Thinking with my little head worked that time! Troll, much, by the way?
He does have a point though. Tebow's man-beefiness did sway my Week 19 selection.
Here's another perverted hate message actually sent through e-mail:
Tebow and Gronkowski... all we're missing now is some kielbasas. But hey, at least my Facebook "friends" were supportive:
Whenever I have a bad week, I know I can always count on Josh here to compliment me on my previous successful picks. What a great guy.
2. Seahawk fans are also mad at me. I projected their team to go 4-12 in my 2011 NFL Season Previews, so they're bashing me in the 2012 NFL Offseason Needs Seattle Seahawks page. My apologies; I thought Seattle would be terrible instead of painfully mediocre.
These crazy Seattle people should just be glad that I don't plan on hiring Migelini, the dumbest person in the world, to write my analysis. Wonder what that'll be like? Here's Migelini's year in review for his beloved Seahawks:
Hmm... actually, maybe I should hire Migelini. What all you theinks?
3. Speaking of people can't speak English, what has Emmitt Smith been up to lately? I took a gander on his Twitter account (@emmittsmith22) to find out. Apparently, Emmitt recently had jury duty. Here's a tweet of his:
This is my first jury trail and guess what. It got dismiss.
This is why our legal system is a joke. First of all, Emmitt's a celebrity, so asking him to be a juror would turn the whole process into a kangaroo court. Jurors are supposed to be anonymous. And second, Emmitt can't speak English, so how can he be trusted to make a just decision in a case? I can only imagine him reading a verdict:
"We the juriness find the defensive uninnocent or maybe sometime guilty, or sometime unguilty... excuse me, I have debacled the verndict that the juriness decide."
Anyway, if you've been following this site, you know that I make a habit of responding to my spam mails. I received a new spam mail of interest last week:
Have a nice day. Sorry if any disturbing you.
In this mail, i'd like to suggest some slimming products for you, with very competitive price and safe delivery.
Fruit&plant weight loss capsule
Meizitang botanical capsule
Hope to find cooperation with you.
Some Slim Forte? Who wouldn't want Slim Forte!?
Is Slim Forte related to Matt Forte? If so, I am interested.
You drive a hard bargain. I would be willing to pay $48 million over six years for Slim Forte, but not a penny more!
Well, I got served. I thought a confused Cassie would reply to me. Instead, I got this:
Damn it! How did she know!? And better yet, can I game her?
Haha, you got me, Cassie. I figured you were some Chinese spammer who would not know who Matt Forte was. I run a football Web site, and I post spam mails and my responses to them, so I was hoping to ask you whether or not Matt Forte invented this slimming product.
Damn it, she didn't sound too interested. Oh well. I wasn't interested in her shady Slim Forte product anyway.
NEW ENGLAND OFFENSE: Man, Tom Brady really hates Tim Tebow. You can read why in my exclusive interview with him in my NFL Playoff Power Rankings. It's one thing I didn't think to factor into last week's failed five-unit selection. Brady was in complete F-U mode the entire game. You could just see it in his eyes, especially when he tossed his sole interception in the first half.
It's very difficult to play with that much passion two games in a row. Remember, the first time Brady slew Tebow, his team was down 17 points the week after against the Dolphins and needed a comeback to eventually win by a field goal. Brady will also have a much more difficult time torching Baltimore's defense. Unlike the Broncos, the Ravens aren't a complete sieve.
Despite this, the Patriots should still be able to score into the high 20s at the very least. These Ravens have struggled a bit defensively, especially versus the run. They let Arian Foster rush for 132 yards on Sunday afternoon, and they've surrendered 4.4 YPC in the previous four contests. If Bill Belichick decides to use more Aaron Hernandez in the backfield, he'll have success with that.
And then there's Brady, who is on fire. The Ravens had issues defending T.J. Yates and Houston's aerial offense, succeeding only when Yates stared down Andre Johnson. Brady is not going to make that mistake, so Baltimore must put pressure on him. If Terrell Suggs is invisible again, the Ravens don't have a shot of winning this game.
BALTIMORE OFFENSE: Even if the Ravens can force the Patriots into a few punts and/or turnovers, it won't mean anything if they can't score themselves. Joe Flacco was awful Sunday, and so was his offensive line. Houston got to him a whopping five times.
Before you get completely down on Baltimore though, remember that New England's defense is nowhere near as talented as Houston's. Sure, the Patriots looked dominant in their destruction over Denver, but that could have been the result of Josh McDaniels feeding inside information to Bill Belichick. I did not think this was going to be a factor because the Broncos changed schemes and some personnel, but I was clearly wrong.
New England's defense has been disturbingly awful all season, and I refuse to believe that Bill Belichick waved some sort of magic wand and suddenly made his stop unit dominant. Brandon Spikes and Patrick Chung are back, but they're not game-changers. Having them on the field can't possibly heal a defense that couldn't stop Rex Grossman, Matt Moore and Ryan Fitzpatrick in December.
I don't trust the Patriots to get to the quarterback as much as they did Saturday night. I don't trust the Patriots to stop the run (5.2 YPC last four games). And I don't trust the Patriots to clamp down on the pass. Flacco and Ray Rice will score points...
RECAP: ...But not enough. I like New England to win. However, I believe the Ravens will cover. In fact, they're my favorite play of the week for a number of reasons:
1. The Patriots looked TOO good Saturday night. Everyone now thinks they're the greatest thing since sliced bread, quickly forgetting that they trailed by 21 to the Bills (at home) in Week 17; were losing by 17 to the Dolphins (at home) in Week 16; and nearly suffered a defeat at Washington in Week 14. The Patriots are good, but they're not THAT good.
2. Speaking of "looking TOO good," I love this trend: Teams that score 40-plus in the playoffs are 3-19 against the spread the following week since 1996 (it worked in the 49ers-Saints game last week). The reasoning behind this is simple - teams that can get to 40 are generally inflated by the public because people love to bet on offense.
3. Another trend going against the Patriots: Teams coming off wins of 21-plus at home in the playoffs are 4-9 ATS the following week since 2002. That's a small sample size, but it's yet another indicator that a particular squad could be inflated.
4. Speaking of inflated, let's talk about the spread for a second. 5Dimes.com's projected line for a Patriots-Ravens matchup prior to the Week 19 games was New England -3.5!
The spread makes no sense. Think about it for a second. The Steelers opened -8 at Denver, right? If you move that to a neutral field, the line would have been -11. New England opened -13 versus the Broncos, so if you conclude that Baltimore and Pittsburgh are even, that means that on a neutral side, the Patriots should be -2 over the Ravens (and consequently -5 at home). In other words, we're getting 2.5 points of value here.
5. The line has moved so much because the Patriots looked great, while Baltimore nearly lost to the Texans. No one thinks the Ravens have a chance now, so John Harbaugh can use the "no one believes in us" card, which worked so well for his brother last week.
6. Thanks to forum member Tbod10 for this: Conference championship favorites of seven-plus are just 3-7 against the spread since 1997 (6-4 straight up). Like many underdogs that have made it this far, the Ravens are a really good team, so they don't deserve to be underdogs of more than a touchdown.
The Psychology. Edge: Ravens.
The Harbaugh family is great at using the "No one believes in us" angle. No one thinks Baltimore has a shot.
The Vegas. Edge: Ravens.
Who is crazy enough to bet on Baltimore at this point? Apparently the sharps, because they bet the spread down from -7.5 to -7.
Percentage of money on New England: 63% (122,000 bets)
The Trends. Edge: Ravens.
Too Greedy: Teams that score 40-plus in the playoffs are 3-19 ATS the following week since 1996.
Big Winner: Teams coming off wins of 21-plus at home in the playoffs are 4-9 ATS the following week since 2002.
Championship Dog of Seven: Favorites of 7+ in conference championships are 3-7 ATS since 1997.
Patriots are 23-13 ATS in December & January home games since 2000.
New York Giants (11-7) at San Francisco 49ers (14-3) Line: 49ers by 2. Total: 41. Walt's Projected Line: 49ers -2.
Sunday, Jan. 22, 6:30 ET
The Game. Edge: Giants.
A reminder that Jerks of the Week for Jan. 16, 2012 are up, so just click the link. This week's jerks is an entry on Hot Tub Etiquette.
Also, I've been posting some comments from perverted users directed at hot chicks on NFL.com's GameCenter, most of which came from a creeper named Aaron3619.
If you recall from last week, Aaron was rejected by StrikerSarah when he asked her for pictures:
The question has to be asked: What does Aaron want to do with these pictures?
He wants to carry StrikerSarah's picture around? What a weirdo.
With that in mind, it's great that people are messing around with Aaron. One such person is someone named SuckOnMyFootball. I've posted some of his/her messages to Aaron before. Here are a couple of new ones:
SuckOnMyFootball actually contacted me through G-chat. Here's our brief conversation:
I guess SuckOnMyFootball was encouraged when I said that I liked that he/she was messing with Aaron because he/she sent Aaron more interesting posts:
OK, so we have that. Meanwhile, my friend Emily said that she's going to mess with him as well. Here's what she wrote to Aaron:
Aaron responded to her, all while trying to secure "nacked" and bikini pics from other girls because you can never get enough, right?
Here are Emily's most recent posts to Aaron:
Hilariously, there are other (jealous?) guys on there warning Emily not to send her pictures to Aaron. But if he e-mails her, we're going to have to think of something amusing. Meanwhile, I just created my own GameCenter profile, TexasGirl1234, so I'm definitely going to have some fun with Aaron and hopefully teach him a lesson.
By the way, 500 bonus points to the first person who can tell me who the chick is in my avatar.
At any rate, it's the final game before the Super Bowl, but we're going to have Joe Buck and Troy Aikman calling the shots instead of the great preseason homers like Kevin Reilly, Don Tollefson and Herm Edwards, and inept ESPN guys Emmitt and Matt Millen. Here's what it would sound like if those five clowns were calling this game:
Kevin Reilly: Welcome to San Francisco, home of the gays! Tonight, the 49ers will battle the Giants. Guys, I told you last week to bet your life savings on the Giants because I put lice in Aaron Rodgers' hats. I hope you won as much money as I did! I used all my new money to buy as many Michael Vick posters as possible. I put them up all over my house and took pictures of them. Hopefully Michael will be my best friend if I show the pictures to him. Guys, what do you think? Will we be best friends?
Tollefson: I don't know the answer to that, Kevin, but I want to thank you for the gambling tip. I won $50,000, and I was able to use it to buy several concubines from Eastern Europe. Unfortunately, they don't understand English, so I'll have to hire a translator to tell them to cook and clean. Kevin, do you have any gambling advice tonight so I can get a translator?
Reilly: Sure! Bet your life savings on the 49ers, guys. The Giants don't have a chance in hell in this game.
Emmitt: Mike, how can you say the Giant have no chance in heck? And please do not say the word H-E-L... uhh... the letter that come after L. It is the place that the devil live inside, the devil that you sometime know who call himselves as Satan. He is a bad guy, and if you say the bad word, you probably gonna have to live in a house with Satan, who probably don't have any cable TV because he is old.
Reilly: No cable TV? That would be horrible! But Emmitt, taking the Niners is a lock. Look at where we are. We're in San Fran-freaking-cisco. Do you know how many gays are here? The Giants have to be spooked! I mean, so many gay men approach me and ask to have sex with me whenever I visit this city, so I can only imagine what the players have to go through.
Emmitt: Mike, what you sayin' have some truth to it. San Diego the city known for havin' a lot of homophobe.
Herm: Not homophobe! Wrong word! Incorrect word! Didn't get the right word! Didn't find the correct word! Got the wrong word! Used the wrong word! It's not homophobe! It's not homonym! It's not synonym! It's not antonym! It's... uhh...
Reilly: Herm, I'm going to pay to have a dozen - no, two dozen gay men rape you. Ha! Let's see how you like them apples!
Millen: Uhh... Kevin...
Reilly: Oh no... why did I have to say that? FML!
Millen: No, it's not that. I have a real question for you.
Reilly: Oh really? Well, I'm flattered. I know everything there is to know about everything, so please, ask away.
Millen: When you say two dozen gay men will rape Herman Edwards, do you mean they'll do that with or without kielbasas? I'm just trying to get an image into my head just in case my computer crashes and I can't access my young stallion porn tonight.
Reilly: That's what I thought you were going to say, idiot!
Millen: Two dozen men... kielbasas... two dozen men... kielbasas... ohhh... TWO DOZEN MEN... KIELBASAS... OHHHHH... OHHHHHHHHHHH!!!
Emmitt: I think Matt Miller havin' an election in the booth, Mike.
Reilly: See what I mean about San Francisco? It brings out all the gays, who will attack the Giants and lose, so make sure you bet your life savings on the 49ers. We'll be back after a word from our local sponsors!
SAN FRANCISCO OFFENSE: How about that Alex Smith? Many scoffed at the Niners' decision to give him $4 million this past offseason, but it turns out that Jim Harbaugh knew what he was doing. It's just amazing how Harbaugh has transformed Smith from a scrub into a capable quarterback. It'll be a crime if he's not the NFL Coach of the Year.
Smith has improved so much that he's no longer the biggest issue on offense. That would now be the line. The front has surrendered 48 sacks on the year, including four against the Saints. New Orleans isn't a team that typically has much success getting to the quarterback without blitzing, so you can only imagine what the Giants are going to accomplish with their quartet of defensive ends.
New York has really improved defensively because of its ability to put immense pressure on the quarterback. Whereas the Giants have permitted opposing quarterbacks to maintain a 7.2 YPA throughout the year, that figure is down to 5.5 despite the fact that they've battled Aaron Rodgers and Tony Romo. Smith is going to have a tough time moving chains.
What about Frank Gore? Well, I wouldn't expect much from him either. The Giants have restricted opposing backs to 4.1 YPC in the previous four contests - another figure that has improved because everyone has come back healthy. With Gore unable to pick up big chunks of yardage, Smith will be in way too many unfavorable down-and-distance situations, which could be hazardous to his health with the four defensive ends breathing down his neck.
NEW YORK OFFENSE: This has been talked about ad nauseum, but Eli Manning deserves so much credit this year after all the criticism he took when he called himself an elite quarterback prior to this season. What Manning does on third down is amazing. If he wins another Super Bowl, do you take him over a healthy Peyton? It's definitely something to think about.
Manning definitely faces a much tougher test this week than he did at Lambeau. While the Packers missed tackles and blew coverages, the 49ers won't be as nearly as accommodating.
Well, not most of the time, anyway. It's not like San Francisco's stop unit is completely impenetrable. Drew Brees threw for 462 yards and four touchdowns, as his play-makers were able to break a couple of big gains because of some tackling issues. The turnovers were a killer for Brees, however, so Manning will have to take care of the football. He's been guilty of 16 interceptions and four forced fumbles this year, so if he's forced into a couple of give-aways, it'll open up the door for San Francisco.
Unlike last week, Manning won't have a strong ground attack to complement him. The 49ers rank first versus the rush, limiting the opposition to 3.3 YPC. The Saints, who ran all over the Lions, mustered just 32 yards on 13 carries on Saturday afternoon.
RECAP: Harbaugh was able to use the "no one believes in us" strategy last week. He won't be able to in this contest because his team is favored. This creates a completely different dynamic, and it's one of the reasons I believe the 49ers will lose.
I don't have any crazy angles or trends for you. I just think the Giants are the better squad. They've been so good since battling the Packers to the very end in their first meeting back in Week 13. I think they're the best team in the NFL right now, and it helps that they play better on the road.
UNIT CHANGE: I'm not as confident as the Giants right now because I've heard really strong arguments for San Francisco over the past couple of days. I'm dropping this selection to one unit.
TEASER HEDGE: The first leg of my teaser hit, so I'm taking the 49ers -2 for a unit as a hedge. If San Francisco wins by 2-7, we'll get a nice middle.
The Psychology. Edge: Giants.
The 49ers go from being a huge underdog to the favorite. That's a tough dynamic shift in the playoffs for a young team.
The Vegas. Edge: 49ers.
Slight lean on the Giants.
Percentage of money on New York: 61% (117,000 bets)
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 7, 2016): 11-4 (+$1,560)
Last Week's 2-3 Unit NFL Picks (Week 7, 2016): 1-2 (-$330)
Last Week's 4-5 Unit NFL Picks (Week 7, 2016): 2-0 (+$1,000)
Last Week Over-Under (Week 7, 2016): 8-6-1 ($0)
Last Week's Prop/ML/Teaser/Parlay Picks (Week 7, 2016): +$270
2016 NFL Picks of the Month: 3-0, 100% (+$2,000)
2016 Season NFL Picks Against The Spread: 72-50-3, 59.0% (+$5,595) 2016 Season 2-3 Unit NFL Picks: 20-16-3, 55.6% (+$345) 2016 Season 4-5 Unit NFL Picks: 14-5-1, 73.7% (+$3,530) 2016 Season Over-Under: 51-55-1, 48.1% ($0) 2016 Season Prop/ML/Teaser/Parlay Picks: +$775
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: 2,363-2,166-134, 52.2% (+$13,745) Career 2-3 Unit NFL Picks: 761-684-37 (52.7%) Career 4-5 Unit NFL Picks: 320-273-14 (54.0%) Career Over-Under: 1,874-1,820-52 (50.7%) Career Second-Half NFL Picks: 22-15-1 (61.1%) Career NFL Picks of the Month: 35-22 (61.4%)
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.