I think you may have been right about the Redskins being overrated. Bills to I guess they're both average. I don't think anyone is overrating the Lions though. Everyone knows that their wins have been sort of lucky. They also lost to the Bears.
@Damian I'm not 12 you pile of @#$@, I'm 35 married with 2 kids. I'm sick of these fake football experts giving their "all powerful" betting information and then having these minions in the comment section butt worshiping him because "he told them who to pick" It's sad pathetic and Walt should be ashamed of himself.
Hello again welcome back to my weekly installment of the NFL mock draft. I again went through and adjusted my rankings to determine where teams are at the end of the year. Much like the draft however, guessing who will win each week in the NFL is just as hard. So, if you are mad at where I have your team just look at your schedule and be realistic on who you can beat, but also realize things change week to week in this league. Without further ado here we go!
NFL Picks (2011): 137-133-12 (-$1,925) 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 Feb. 6, 5:45 p.m. ET. Follow @walterfootball for updates.
New York Giants (12-7) vs. New England Patriots (15-3) Line: Patriots by 3. Total: 54. Walt's Projected Line: Patriots -3.
Sunday, Feb. 5, 6:30 ET
The Game. Edge: None.
Week 20 Recap: There's nothing to be upset about, perhaps outside of the fact that I reduced my Giants +2 units from two to one early in the weekend. I should have just trusted myself.
As I wrote a few weeks ago, I want to look back at this whole season and seek out all of the bad beats (backdoor covers, front-door covers, special-teams crap). I'm not just going to look at where I've been screwed; my plan is to find every contest that had weird stuff going on, even those I benefited from, like New England over Buffalo in Week 17. This was the Year of the Bad Beat, so I'm curious to see how many odd instances I can unearth.
Some random football notes I can't put anywhere else:
1. I'm +20 units since Week 9, but I really struggled with my picks early on. Some people who are struggling now are those whom I listed in my Service Tout post last Sunday morning.
I didn't notice this at first amid the wall of text, but forum member Leelee pointed out something pretty hilarious:
PARLAY OF THE DECADE
HAMMER OF THE MONTH
Oh, degenerate gambling.
Sadly, both the Parlay of the Decade and the Hammer of the Month failed to hit. I can understand a parlay losing (even if it's the best one in 10 years), but how do you lose the Hammer of the Month? It's the freaking Hammer (of the month)! Mario used a hammer to defeat barrels and a giant ape in Donkey Kong, and you're going to come with a loser as your Hammer of the Month? What a disgrace.
2. Speaking of disgraces, the owner of the Rams, Stan Kroenke, should be ashamed of himself. If you haven't heard, St. Louis will be playing a game in England for the next three years, thus its fans will have only seven home games to not attend this season.
Look, you may not think Kroenke isn't screwing over his fans too much because no one comes to Ram games, but the fact remains that Kroenke is reportedly doing this because he owns some sort of corporation in Europe named Arsenal. I have no idea what this Arsenal is, or whom it plans to attack, but it's become abundantly clear that Kroenke is a communist because he supports non-American businesses.
St. Louis fans - yes, I'm talking to all 12 of you - please don't watch this team anymore. If you do, you'll be siding with a man who's in league with Soviet Russia, North Korea and the city government officials of Philadelphia.
3. While we're on the subject of communism, I wanted to black out this site for my stance against SOPA, but 1) people would have been disappointed and 2) I was too lazy. But I am totally against it. I don't need to explain why because Facebook friend Jay B. did so in a wall post:
Just how scary are these new possible government bills? Check this article out, it is definitely something to think about...
Due to new government intervention and bills such as PIPA and SOPA, it is possible that WalterFootball.com could be in danger! Walter Cherepinsky, founder of WalterFootball.com, periodically uses quotes posted on NFL.com's Game Center on his weekly articles. These quotes however could be subject to copyright piracy violations under the new bills. Under the loose definitions presented by the Senate, the use of a quote from an author without their consent on a blog or Web site constitutes piracy and thus makes the owner of site liable for civil and criminal charges.
Two people who have been quoted quite frequently were available for comment.
"This is sux!! He cant not steel my stuff!! Not right it is not. I want to protecshun from governmeant SOPAing!! My game center qoting is very intellectual properties and no steeling they shouldn't do that!!! Waltar lick penas of cach caswell and jim isray in lucos oil feld!!!" said Taton, a very concerned young man from Indianapolis.
"Peepa gong grate. purtectin my quots gong grate. no one shud be abil to steel my werk. he shud be ow eng me mony for copi write take eng. Waltar Futbol is the beest exam pol of copi write take eng. what all you theinks," said Migelini, another potential litigator.
Should these bills pass, many sites like WalterFootball.com could be in grave danger of being sued by incoherent morons. Please make your voice heard so that these travesties will not continue to exist! Tell your congressmen and the White House to say NO to PIPA and SOPA!
Anyway, if you've been following this site, you know that I make a habit of responding to my spam mails. Here are some possible previews for next year - hopefully these idiots respond:
1. Mortgage E-mail:
READ CARE FULLY
TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN, THIS IS SEKUR MORTGAGE LOAN SERVICE, SEKUR MORTGAGE
LOAN LENDERS LTD, IS A FINANCIAL COMPANY LOCATED HERE IN THE UNITED KINGDOM,
IT IS A REGISTERED AND A REPUTABLE LENDER IN UNITED KINGDOM.
OUR SERVICE IS TO GRANT OUT LOANS TO COMPANIES AND INDIVIDUALS WHO ARE WILLING
TO REMIT BACK OUR LOAN AT A DUE DATE WE BOTH AGREED ON, OUR INTEREST RATE IS 3% .
I AM IN NEED OF MORTGAGE. MY NAME IS LATRELL SPREWELL.
I HAVE NO MONEY TO FEED MY FAMILY. I NEED CHEAP MORTGAGE ON HOUSE TO FEED FAMILY.
2. Shady Business Deal:
business deal for you
That's all the e-mail said. What kind of a business deal is that? I had to decline and present a counteroffer:
I reject your business proposal.
I will counter. Give me 50 gigabytes of kielbasa porn (that would be young stallions who shove kielbasa up each other's backside), and I will give you my secret to running a great NFL team. You have three (3) days to decide.
3. Hot Chick (forwarded from Miguel H):
Hello!!Am Zinabel a lovely and nice lady,am interested to know and share ideas with you, but remember that distance, age and color does not matter, what matters is true friendship and understanding.I will be glad to send you my picture when you write.
Helloooooooo nurse!!! This sounds like the woman of my dreams. How could I possibly decline her offer?
I intercepted your e-mail to Miguel, and I've become enthralled with your words. I think I have fallen in love with you.
You say age, color and distance doesn't matter. Well, what about gender? My name is Lyla, and I've been waiting all my life to meet a lovely woman such as yourself. Could you ever love a woman?
These are some spam e-mails to possibly look forward to next year.
A reminder that Jerks of the Week for Jan. 23 and 30, 2012 are up, so just click the link. Last week's jerks were: Tango, Mia and Hollywood. This week's jerks are: Homeless Carriage Woman, Cookie Thieves and Jerks Around the Bush.
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, my friend Emily started messing around with Aaron, promising "nacked" and bikini pictures of herself if Aaron sent some to her in exchange. Here's how their conversation went down this past week:
You know, all this time, Emily and I assumed he was some stupid 12-year-old kid desperate to see naked pictures of older women. What if he's 82 instead of 12? Why did he ask Emily how she got his e-mail address when he sent it to her earlier? Is he senile?
I also love the fact that he expects Emily to have both a bra and a bikini on under her clothes. That would be an interesting outfit.
Meanwhile, Aaron3619 isn't the only perv on GameCenter. In fact, someone named DiscountDoubleChoke wants to collaborate with Aaron3619 to collect as many "nacked" and bikini pictures as possible:
Aaron3619 wouldn't have any of it, so DiscountDoubleChoke had to take matters into his own hands. As mentioned last week, I created my own GameCenter profile, TexasGirl1234, in order to have some fun with Aaron and hopefully teach him a lesson. DiscountDoubeChoke contacted me first, however:
Seattlesk8rboi can't spell "parunt" correctly, which is a concern because he apparently is a parent. Still though, he's my knight in shining armor for saving me from DiscountDoubleChoke, right?
I guess not. Here are some of Seattlesk8rboi's other posts, by the way:
Who's Mackeen? And what the hell does "Staff got bigger hose" mean? It's amazing, but this guy is even worse than Migelini.
Even the heroes on GameCenter are stupid and/or perverted. How can a girl possibly find love on GameCenter with so many weirdoes on there?
Speaking of weirdoes, it took Aaron a while, but he contacted me:
I can't possibly imagine what Aaron wants me to send to him! It can't be some sort of picture, can it!?
How did I know? And more importantly, why did Aaron ask me twice? I knew he was senile. Or maybe he asks so many women for "nacked" and bikini pics that he just loses track.
At any rate, it's Super Bowl, but we're going to have Al Michaels and Cris Collinsworth 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 Indianapolis, where the New England Patriots and the New York G... hey, wait, who are you guys, and what are you doing here?
Al Michaels: I'm Al Michaels, and he's Cris Collinsworth. We're here to broadcast the game for NBC. Who are you?
Reilly: My name is Kevin Reilly. I'm a famous football announcer and I also happen to be Michael Vick's best friend. Leave at once, or I'll ask my friends on the Eagles to bet you up!
Michaels: Watch it, pal. I have five units on the Giants, three units on the Over, and two units on heads for the coin toss. My blood pressure is 200/150, and I don't have the patience to deal with a ruffian like you.
Tollefson: Guys, guys, guys... save the aggression for the naked women I have waiting in my hotel room. I ordered them to cook and clean in the nude because women don't deserve to wear clothing. Once this game is over, we can go to back to my hotel room and have some fun. So, there's no need for fighting.
Michaels: Fine. Just let me call my bookie so I can make a bet on the Pro Bowl. Wait, damn it, the Pro Bowl happened already. Mother f***er!
Cris Collinsworth: Can we talk about the game already? I think the five-techniques for the Patriots...
Michaels: Cris, for the love of God, I'm not going to tell you again. No one knows what a f***ing five-technique is. No one!
Emmitt: Mike, I think you are mistakings. I know what a five techniques is. When somebody have four technique and then he acquire another technique, if you add them together, you get five technique, like in the example if Bobby have four apple and then he steal another orange, he have five apple. Wait, I do not do the math correct...
Herm: That's not a five-technique! That's not a four plus one technique! That's not a three plus two technique! That's not a two plus three technique! That's not a one plus... uhh... that's not a technique! It's a position! Not apples! Not oranges! Not grapes! Not bananas! Not apples... uhh...
Michaels: Who is this annoying guy who yells incoherently?
Reilly: Oh, that's just Herm. I keep him around so I can laugh at him as he eats his dinner after I poop in it.
Millen: And here's what he means by poop...
Reilly: Good God, here we go again.
Millen: And here's what he means by poop. First, you eat a lot. It helps if you eat a lot of Mexican. Acidic stuff helps too. Lots of fruits. That'll get the job done. Once you've eaten enough and let the food digest, you'll need to find a bathroom. And here's what I mean by finding a bathroom. You have to look for a bathroom that has a toilet seat. When you find that toilet seat and sit down, you squeeze your backside as tight as possible, so brown stuff comes pouring out of your backside. Once you've finished doing this, most people flush the toilet. This is a common mistake. The wise move is to collect the stool, put it in a jar, and then dump it into your instant kielbasa machine. Wait 15 minutes, and you'll have a fresh batch of kielbasa for when your young stallions come over to play.
Michaels: You know what? I changed my mind. I don't want to be here in a booth with this creep.
Reilly: Finally, someone knows how I've felt all year. We'll be back after a word from our local sponsors!
NEW ENGLAND OFFENSE: Aside from all the Brady versus Eli talk, the big story entering this contest is Rob Gronkowski's high ankle sprain. The Gronk hasn't been able to practice at all, but I'll be pretty shocked if he doesn't play. First of all, he's a tough guy who was able to come back into the Baltimore game. And second, Gronkowski's not the type of player who needs to make a lot of cuts. Concerning Gronkowski's injury, I can't help but think of Terrell Owens' performance in Super Bowl XXXIX when his status was in doubt.
Assuming Gronkowski can play at about 80 percent, the Patriots should be able to score into the 20s. New York's pass rush is amazing, but New England has really shored up its offensive line in the playoffs. Tom Brady has taken only one sack in the two games thus far, so something has to give.
Speaking of Brady, it's pretty easy to determine how well he'll play based on his facial expressions on the first drive. Against the Broncos, Brady seriously looked like he wanted to kill someone. I'm not sure if he was jealous of Tim Tebow because of the picture he took with that well-endowed chick, or what, but I got the sense that Brady was going to do whatever it took, even if it meant sacrificing orphans to R'hllor, to come away with a victory. Conversely, Brady seemed a bit lethargic versus Baltimore, and consequently had one of the worst playoff performances of his illustrious career.
I'll go into this in more detail later, but I believe Brady will once again be in F-U mode. The Giants have some liabilities in their defensive backfield - as witnessed when Vernon Davis burned them for two deep touchdowns in the NFC Championship - so it'll be very difficult to stop the Golden Boy.
NEW YORK OFFENSE: Peter King said it - Eli Manning is well on his way to becoming one of the greatest playoff quarterbacks in NFL history. Manning was simply amazing in January, and given how awful New England's secondary is, logic would state that he'll have another great performance in this contest, right?
In short, yes. Manning threw for 250 yards and two touchdowns in a Week 9 meeting against this defense. He wasn't sacked a single time - and all of this was before his receivers got healthy and his offensive line improved.
It's not all bleak for New England's defense though, as the stop unit can hang its hat on two things. First, the Patriots have stopped the run well recently; they limited Ray Rice and the Ravens to just 89 rushing yards on 27 carries, so Ahmad Bradshaw and Brandon Jacobs won't find much running room. And second, New England has done a much better job of putting pressure on the quarterback in the playoffs, notching eight sacks in the two contests. Manning won't endure the ridiculous amount of hits that he endured versus San Francisco, but he'll be taken down more than he'd like to.
Having said that, it's difficult to imagine the Giants not matching the Patriots into the 20s. There's a reason this total is 55.
RECAP: This is the most difficult game I've had to handicap this postseason. When this spread was first released, I thought I'd go big on New York. Here's why:
1. The Giants are the better team. Both offenses are lethal, but the New York pass rush gives it the edge. Thus, I liked the idea of getting the points with the superior squad.
2. As I reasoned earlier in my psychological section, the Giants had to feel disrespected as underdogs. They beat the Patriots in Super Bowl XLII and in Week 9, so why are they getting points?
3. The team that is the better seed in the Super Bowl is 1-11-2 against the spread since 1996. That's a pretty crazy trend.
Having said all that, as more and more Vegas money started coming in on the Giants, and more and more people kept picking them, I began liking them less and less. I'm now going with New England. Here's why:
1. I mentioned this earlier, but I expect Brady to be in F-U mode. Everyone is taking the Giants in this game. People are talking about Manning possibly being the better quarterback if he wins this contest. Brady's at his best when he has a big chip on his shoulder, and that's certainly the case going into Super Bowl XLVI.
2. Speaking of everyone taking New York, about 65 percent of the action is on the NFC representative. Despite this, the spread has not moved off three in most books, with only the juice changing. If the Giants cover, the books will stand to lose a lot of money to cap off what hasn't been a great year for them.
3. I gave you an awesome trend that favored New York. Here's one that goes New England's way: In the Bill Belichick-Tom Brady era, the Patriots are a strong 11-2 against the spread when playing a team they lost to earlier that season. The reasoning behind this is simple - Belichick is a genius, and no one prepares a game plan against a familiar opponent better than him.
New England -3 +105 is my pick. This is going to be a tight battle that could go either way, so it's only going to be for one unit. In all honesty, if there were other games on the slate, this would be a zero-unit selection because this contest is so evenly matched. I'm only betting a unit to make it interesting.
PROPS: I'm not a big fan of prop betting, but occasionally I'll come across a few things I'll like. For example, I found the best prop of all time three years ago:
Will Matt Millen pick the correct team to win Super Bowl XLIII during the Pre Game Show? Yes -225; No +185.
This was brilliant - if I do say so myself - because if you bet no and he picked the Cardinals, you were basically getting the Steelers money line at +185. And if he picked the Steelers, you were essentially getting a solid wager with Arizona money line. I ended up making $90 on the prop. There's nothing like capitalizing on Millen's incompetence (as long as there are no 100-percent USDA Men or kielbasas involved, of course).
Unfortunately, I don't see any locks like this one. However, I found five props I really like:
1. Will the Team that Scores First Win the Game - No +140 (5Dimes.com): In the previous 10 Super Bowls, six teams that scored first ended up losing the game. Isn't that pretty nuts? Because of this, +140 is a pretty decent bargain.
2. Will both teams make a field goal of 33 yards or more in the game - No -135 (BetUS.com): Believe it or not, both participants have made a field goal of 33-plus in only 10 of the 45 Super Bowls.
3. After Kelly Clarkson sings the national anthem, will he pee standing up during his first trip to the bathroom - Yes -440 (BetWalt.com): Don't ask me how I know this, but I know for a fact that Kelly Clarkson does, in fact, pee standing up whenever he goes to the bathroom.
3. New England wins by 1-6 points +340; New York wins by 1-6 points +365 (5Dimes): I like this scheme because there's a good chance we'll get one of these two right. I anticipate a very close game. Most of the recent Super Bowls have been close.
4. Rob Gronkowski - Over 76.5 Receiving Yards -110 (5Dimes): I think Rob Gronkowski is going to have a huge game, much like Terrell Owens in Super Bowl XXXIX.
5. Will Archie Manning proclaim Eli to be his favorite son if the Giants win the Super Bowl again - Yes -190 (BetWalt.com): Peyton used to be the favorite, but Eli is quickly closing in. Soon enough, Eli will be the preferred child of Archie and Olivia, which means Peyton will be demoted to the kids' table during family dinners.
5. Will There Be a Scoreless Quarter - No -260 (BetUS.com): In the previous seven Super Bowls, there has only been one scoreless quarter.
I'll have my annual live Super Bowl blog. Follow me at @walterfootball for updates.
The Psychology. Edge: Patriots.
Everyone is picking the Giants. Tom Brady will be angry.
The Vegas. Edge: Patriots.
Money is coming in on the Giants.
Percentage of money on New York: 61% (212,000 bets)
The Trends. Edge: Patriots.
Bad Seed: The team that is the better seed in the Super Bowl is 1-11-2 ATS since 1996.
Bill Belichick is 11-2 ATS against a team after losing to them the same year.
Patriots are 27-15 ATS vs. NFC opponents since 2001.
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.
Will the Team that Scores First Win the Game - No +140 (0.5 Units) -- Incorrect; -$50
Will both teams make a field goal of 33 yards or more in the game - No -135 (2 Units) -- Correct; +$200
New England wins by 1-6 points +340 (1 Unit) -- Incorrect; -$100
New York wins by 1-6 points +365 (1 Unit) -- Correct; +$365
Rob Gronkowski - Over 76.5 Receiving Yards -110 (1 Unit) -- Incorrect; -$110
Will There Be a Scoreless Quarter - No -260 (1 Unit) -- Correct; +$100
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.