NFL Picks (Preseason 2015):
NFL Picks (Week 1, 2015):
NFL Picks (Week 2, 2015):
NFL Picks (2015):
26-23-1 (-$1,375) NFL Picks (2014):
143-133-7 (-$1,885) NFL Picks (2013):
144-131-8 (+$5,580) NFL Picks (2012):
130-145-8 (-$5,760) 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):
If you don't quite understand the line, total or anything else, go to my
Sports Betting FAQ
Vegas betting action updated Sept. 28, 5:45 p.m. ET. Follow @walterfootball
Go to Week 3 NFL Picks - Early Games
San Francisco 49ers (1-1) at Arizona Cardinals (2-0)
Line: Cardinals by 6.5. Total: 45.
Las Vegas Hilton Advance Point Spread :
Walt's Calculated Line:
Sunday, Sep 27, 4:05 ET
Comment on this game
The Game. Edge: Cardinals.
Survivor Update: We had 2,653 people enter, and had 2,282 still alive after Week 1. And then, Week 2 happened. The Colts, Saints, Ravens and Dolphins murdered almost everyone, and now there are only 164 players remaining, most of whom chose Pittsburgh in Week 2. Congrats to all of those who survived.
If you're still alive, make sure you get your WalterFootball.com 2015 NFL Survivor Pool
I'm currently talking to my developer about a Survivor Redemption contest because almost everyone was knocked out so early. Those who are still alive in the original contest would be enter in as well. Stay tuned for updates.
Oh, and, check out our Fantasy Football Who to Start Weekly Rankings
for weekly fantasy start-sit advice.
If you ask random football fans to list some of the top quarterbacks in the NFL this year, most of them wouldn't even think of Carson Palmer. Yet, Palmer has been fantastic through two games. He has thrown seven touchdowns and just one interception, all while completing 64.2 percent of his passes on a sterling 8.8 YPA. Granted, this has been against the Bears and Saints, two of the worst defenses in the league, but it's not like the 49ers will be much tougher.
San Francisco had a strong opening night, but were aided by the incompetence of a sleepy Minnesota team. The Steelers, on the other hand, went up and down the field on them quite easily. The 49ers' secondary is shot, thanks to departures by multiple cornerbacks this season, and the defensive front isn't getting any sort of push with Justin Smith and Ray McDonald gone. As a consequence, the Cardinals should be able to shield Palmer, who will connect with Larry Fitzgerald and John Brown frequently.
One area in which the 49ers aren't bad is defending the run, thanks to NaVorro Bowman and Ian Williams. However, the ground game isn't a big part of Arizona's offense, especially with Andre Ellington out. Much like the Steelers last week, the Cardinals will advance the ball primarily through the air.
SAN FRANCISCO OFFENSE:
The 49ers cooled down on this side of the ball as well last week. They scored some touchdowns, but that all occurred late in garbage time. They couldn't pound the rock whatsoever against Pittsburgh's underrated defensive line, forcing Colin Kaepernick into making errant throws throughout the afternoon.
Unfortunately for Kaepernick, Arizona's rush defense is pretty solid. It's not great, but it was good enough to contain Matt Forte this past week. Carlos Hyde could have some success against it in theory, given how talented he is, but the 49er runner is dealing with a thigh injury that knocked him out of last week's game. Even if Hyde suits up, he may not be 100 percent, which would obviously be terrible news for San Francisco.
The 49ers need Hyde to run well because Colin Kaepernick just looks lost without Jim Harbaugh. Kaepernick compiled some junk yardage in garbage time last week, but did nothing relevant during real action. That figures to be the case again this Sunday. Arizona has a strong secondary that will overwhelm him, while its front will be able to exploit an offensive front that sorely misses Mike Iupati and Anthony Davis.
I'm torn on this one. The 49ers are in a good spot because they're in their second-consecutive road game, and the advance line movement says to take them, given that this spread has jumped to -4.5 to -6.5. Having said that, however, I still don't think this line is priced properly. I have Arizona at -9 in my projections. The Cardinals are just so much better than San Francisco right now, and they're terrific at home. I'll take them, but won't make a wager on it.
If I were betting the Cardinals, I'd hate this spread (-6.5 is historically very weak) as well as the Pinnacle spread (-6.5 +100). However, Bruce Arians, as we noted on the Podcast
is 24-10-1 against the spread as Arizona's head coach. That's insane. How do you bet against that?
The public is all over the 49ers, but the sharps haven't really touched this game. Pinnacle has a line of +6.5 -101 for the 49ers, so that might be an indication that San Francisco is the right side. But once again, I can't go against Arians.
The Psychology. Edge: None.
No edge found.
The Vegas. Edge: 49ers.
Lots of money on the host, which isn't a surprise.
Percentage of money on Arizona: 78% (37,000 bets)
The Trends. Edge: Cardinals.
History: 49ers have won 12 of the last 16 meetings.
Bruce Arians is 24-10 ATS as head coach of the Cardinals.
Opening Line: Cardinals -6.5.
Opening Total: 44.
Week 3 NFL Pick: Cardinals 24, 49ers 14
Cardinals -6.5 (0 Units) -- Correct; $0
Under 44.5 (0 Units) -- Incorrect; $0
Cardinals 47, 49ers 7
Chicago Bears (0-2) at Seattle Seahawks (0-2)
Line: Seahawks by 15.5. Total: 43.5.
Las Vegas Hilton Advance Point Spread : Seahawks -9.5.
Walt's Calculated Line: Seahawks -14.
Sunday, Sep 27, 4:25 ET
Comment on this game
The Game. Edge: Seahawks.
Emmitt on the Brink is back for Season 8! Episode 2 is posted. In an attempt to reach North Korea, Emmitt flies to the wrong location. However, he is able to stop a horrible crime.
SEATTLE OFFENSE: The Seahawks haven't been very good on this side of the ball this year, and the offensive line can be blamed for that. The team's blocking unit has been atrocious. Russell Okung is the only quality lineman on the roster; everyone else has been horrific, especially Justin Britt, J.R. Sweezy and Gary Gilliam. The latter has been the worst one, but they've all been terrible. Russell Wilson hasn't enjoyed any time in the pocket, which is why Seattle's offense has stalled so much.
That figures to happen again this week, even against the lowly Bears. This may sound weird, but Chicago matches up pretty well against Seattle on this side of the ball. Pernell McPhee and Jared Allen, who hasn't been that bad, will be able to apply pressure on Wilson. Meanwhile, the Bears have quietly been solid versus rushing attacks thus far. Shea McClellin, McPhee and Jarvis Jenkins have all played the run well, so I don't expect Marshawn Lynch to have a huge game behind some shoddy blocking.
Where the Bears struggle immensely is the secondary. There will be several plays in this game in which Wilson breaks free from pressure, rolls out, and hits one of his receivers for a big gain. No one in the Bears' secondary can cover, save for Antrel Rolle.
CHICAGO OFFENSE: Jay Cutler is out, meaning Jimmy Clausen has to start. This is the best thing that could have happened to the Bears, who now have the inside track for the No. 1 pick. Check out my 2016 NFL Mock Draft.
Unlike in past years, Seattle's defense has had a liability. It hasn't been able cover. It's crazy that a secondary featuring Richard Sherman and Earl Thomas couldn't defend, but the former has struggled immensely. Maybe he'll be able to rebound at some point, but it just seems as though Sherman didn't spend enough time preparing for this season because he was shooting too many commercials. Of course, it didn't help that the selfish, money-hungry Kam Chancellor wasn't providing any help over the top, but Chancellor has ended his holdout and reported to the team. Perhaps things will improve.
With all that said, the Seahawks could look like a Super Bowl contender again versus Clausen. They still stop the run well, so it's not like Matt Forte is going to set up Clausen with short-yardage situations with some nice runs. The best Clausen can do is safely dink and dunk in the hopes that the Seahawks' offense will turn the ball over enough to give Chicago a shot to pull the upset.
RECAP: There's no way in hell I'd ever bet the Bears in this matchup, but it seems like they might be the right side. This spread is just way too high, especially considering the struggles of Seattle's offense. Can the Seahawks even get to 15? I'm not so sure. It's worth noting that underdogs of 14.5 plus have a covering rate of about 67 percent dating back to 1989, which is as far back as my database goes.
FINAL THOUGHTS: The shraps - not the sharps - like the Bears. The best move is to stay away.
SUNDAY NOTES: This spread keeps going up. If you're crazy enough to bet the Bears, wait until right before kickoff.
The Psychology. Edge: None.
No edge found.
The Vegas. Edge: Bears.
No surprise that there isn't much action on Chicago.
Percentage of money on Seattle: 77% (37,000 bets)
The Trends. Edge: Seahawks.
Seahawks are 22-4 ATS in September home games since 2000.
Seahawks are 32-13 ATS as home favorites since 2007.
Opening Line: Seahawks -15.
Opening Total: 45.
Week 3 NFL Pick: Seahawks 20, Bears 9
Bears +15.5 (0 Units) -- Incorrect; $0
Under 43.5 (0 Units) -- Correct; $0
Survivor Pick (1-1) - NFL Survivor Pick Advice
Seahawks 26, Bears 0
Buffalo Bills (1-1) at Miami Dolphins (1-1)
Line: Dolphins by 2. Total: 43.
Las Vegas Hilton Advance Point Spread : Dolphins -3.
Walt's Calculated Line: Dolphins -1.
Sunday, Sep 27, 4:25 ET
Comment on this game
The Game. Edge: Bills.
A reminder that Jerks of the Week for this week is up, so just click the link. This week's jerks entry is Jerks of the Jersey Shore, 2015: Second Trip, Part 1.
BUFFALO OFFENSE: The Bills only have themselves to blame for their loss to New England. Save for the first possession, and a couple of meaningless ones in the fourth frame, they made multiple mistakes on every drive. They would either commit penalties, drop passes, or take big losses. The Patriots accumulated eight sacks, a ridiculously high number on a mobile quarterback.
The Dolphins might be able to give Tyrod Taylor more issues, as they have a strong pass rush. However, might is the key word, as it all depends on how focused Ndamukong Suh is. According to reports, Suh has been ignoring the coaching staff and calling his own plays, which is ridiculous. Taylor, at the very least, won't be seeing as complicated of a defensive scheme, so he could bounce back, especially given that Miami has some issues in its secondary right now, particularly with Brice McCain and Walt Aikens.
One area in which the Bills almost certainly will have success is running the ball. They were able to move the chains effectively with LeSean McCoy early this past Sunday, but the holes that were available on the first drive quickly disappeared. McCoy will have better luck this Sunday, as we've seen the Dolphins struggle versus the rush in the season opener when Alfred Morris trampled them. T.J. Yeldon didn't have as much success in Week 2, but only because Jacksonville's offensive line struggled to open up lanes.
MIAMI OFFENSE: The offensive line has also been a problem for the Dolphins, which is a major reason why they haven't been able to consistently keep drives alive. Excluding Mike Pouncey, everyone up front has struggled. And yet, Miami's two opponents thus far have been Washington and Jacksonville.
If the Dolphins couldn't block against the Redskins and Jaguars, how will they deal with Buffalo's ferocious front? The Bills' defensive line struggled against the Patriots, but there's too much talent there for them not to bounce back. The Bills should be able to easily dominate the trenches on this side of the ball and limit Lamar Miller in the process. Miller, who has struggled to run the ball thus far, will continue to post meager yardage totals. He's banged up anyway, so he might not be effective if he suits up.
Pass protection has been an even greater issue. Ryan Tannehill hasn't had enough time to throw, and I have to believe that problem will continue to persist in this contest, given the amount of heat the Bills are capable of generating. I also like Buffalo's secondary in this matchup. Save for Jarvis Landry, no other Dolphin play-maker is overly imposing.
RECAP: This is my top play of the week. I'm doubling down on the Bills, and here's why:
1. The Dolphins don't have any sort of homefield advantage unless they're playing a 1 p.m. game in September. They're starting this contest too late, so they will likely struggle as hosts again. In the past dozen years, Miami is an embarrassing 14-40 against the spread when favored at home. You read that right - 14-40! That's a 25.9-percent covering rate.
2. Another bad situation the Dolphins face is that teams have struggled the week before playing in London. As mentioned earlier, NFL teams are 6-14 against the spread prior to flying across the Atlantic Ocean, with favorites being 3-8 ATS.
3. The Dolphins have played two road games thus far, so this is their home opener. Teams hosting their first game in Week 3 have been dreadful over the years because of the traveling fatigue. They are 18-39 against the spread in this situation as long as they're not favored by double digits.
4. The Bills have owned the Dolphins of late, taking four of the previous six meetings. Rex Ryan covered both games versus Miami last year, even winning on the road. The coaching mismatch is another reason to take Buffalo.
5. I really don't like how the Dolphins are playing right now. They were super sluggish in the opener, and were lucky to win that game because of a punt return touchdown. Then, they lost at Jacksonville, which is not a good sign. Buffalo is much better than both the Redskins and Jaguars, so I don't know how the Dolphins pull this off with a London game looming, and that's not even mentioning that Suh is already providing a distraction.
This is a five-unit wager for me. Good luck to those who will be on the same side.
FINAL THOUGHTS: There's a lot to love about the Bills here, aside from the public money. The Dolphins look like a train wreck right now, and I'm not sure they'll be focused with a trip to London on deck. The Bills, meanwhile, have to be pissed off about how they played, so I think they'll rebound.
SUNDAY NOTES: You may see that a large percentage of money is on the Bills, but a lot of that is sharp action. Pinnacle is begging its customers to take Miami, listing this at -1 despite this spread being -1.5 or -2 elsewhere.
The Psychology. Edge: Bills.
The Dolphins fly to London after this.
The Vegas. Edge: Dolphins.
It's hard to be impressed by Miami right now.
Percentage of money on Buffalo: 73% (32,000 bets)
The Trends. Edge: Bills.
History: Bills have won 4 of the last 6 meetings.
True home teams are 22-12 ATS in the last 34 Bills games.
Bills are 15-9 ATS after playing the New England Patriots since 1999.
Underdog is 60-30 ATS in the Dolphins' last 90 games.
Dolphins are 3-11 ATS in September home games since 2006.
Opening Line: Dolphins -3.
Opening Total: 44.
Week 3 NFL Pick: Bills 23, Dolphins 16
Bills +2 (5 Units) -- Correct; +$500
Under 41.5 (0 Units) -- Incorrect; $0
Bills 41, Dolphins 14
Denver Broncos (2-0) at Detroit Lions (0-2)
Line: Broncos by 3. Total: 44.5.
Las Vegas Hilton Advance Point Spread : Pick.
Walt's Calculated Line: Broncos -1.
Sunday, Sep 27, 8:30 ET
Comment on this game
The Game. Edge: Broncos.
I used to love making fun of GameCenter comments. The people on there were such idiots. There were even perverts like Aaron3619, who always asked chicks for their pictures so that he could carry them around.
I planned to mess with Aaron3619 as a fake user named TexasGirl1234, but NFL.com shut down its GameCenter and implemented Facebook comments instead. This enraged me, so get revenge, I made a fake Facebook account named Mario Migelini to troll people. Other readers followed suit and made fake accounts of their own.
Unfortunately, I've only been able to post as Mario. I tried to troll as Vivian and Kevin, but I kept getting the following error:
I Googled that error, and I came across several Facebook help pages where people - real ones; not trollers - were complaining about the same issue. Unfortunately, none of them had a solution; once they were blocked, they were blocked for good.
Here's an example of the complaints:
I pretty much agree with all of that. There's nothing worse than idealistic douche bags in a position of power. The good news is that I was able to successfully troll as Mario.
Go here to see all of the NFL.com Troll Posts from myself and other trollers.
DETROIT OFFENSE: A spread was posted minutes before I began writing this. The reason it took so long to get listed is because Matthew Stafford's status wasn't completely known. Stafford sustained an injury at Minnesota, and he may not be able to play. However, he told the media that he feels great and is ready to take the field Sunday night.
That doesn't necessarily mean it's a good thing. Rushing a player back from injury is never a good sign, and Detroit has a dubious history in terms of bringing back its signal-caller before he's prepared, albeit under an old coaching regime. It doesn't help that Stafford has a horrific offensive line. His blocking has been non-existent thus far this season, with Riley Reiff struggling and right tackle Cornelius Lucas resembling a human turnstile. The Broncos have a world-class pass rush that will take full advantage of this mismatch.
The Broncos also contain the run extremely well, so I don't envision Ameer Abdullah doing much on the ground. Abdullah couldn't even run effectively versus the Vikings, who were gashed by Carlos Hyde in Week 1. The Lions' blocking is just that bad.
DENVER OFFENSE: Speaking of struggling rushing attacks, C.J. Anderson has been one of the most disappointing players in all of fantasy thus far. Much like the Detroit backs, Anderson hasn't had anywhere to run; the blocking has been abysmal. The two guards, Evan Mathis and Louis Vasquez have been fine, but the other three linemen need to step up.
The Lions struggled to contain Adrian Peterson last week, but stopping Peterson and Anderson are completely different stories. I suspect Detroit will do better versus the two Denver backs, but covering Demaryius Thomas and Emmanuel Sanders will be an issue. The Lions' back seven has struggled to defend the pass thus far, and it all starts with a lack of pressure up front. With Ndamukong Suh and Nick Fairley gone, Detroit doesn't rattle the quarterback consistently anymore, putting more pressure on its linebackers and defensive backs.
However, the one caveat is that Peyton Manning is protected poorly. Perhaps the Lions will be able to finally get some heat on an opposing passer. That would be a huge factor in this game, given how diminished Manning's arm is.
RECAP: The Lions are another one of these teams playing their home opener in Week 3, so that's one reason to take the Broncos. Another is that Manning, King of the Regular Season, has a spectacular track record on national TV. Manning is an ego maniac, so looking good in front of a big audience is important for him. I like him a bit here against the Lions, who have problems in the trenches on both sides of the ball. I'm not sure this spread has been adjusted properly to compensate for Detroit's sharp decline.
Having said all of that, I wouldn't go too big on Denver because I'm sure the public will be pounding the Broncos. Besides, I'm wary taking Manning. Even in this spot, Manning could play like crap and his arm could fall off.
FINAL THOUGHTS: What a disaster of a day. I got the Bills right, but both the Falcons and Titans came back to cost me 7.7 units. The Dallas-Atlanta game was brutal. Anyway, I still like the Broncos for two units, though it's worth noting that Pinnacle is listing this as -3 +103, so perhaps the Lions are the right side. If you like Detroit, you can have them for +3.5 at Bovada.
The Psychology. Edge: None.
No edge found.
The Vegas. Edge: Lions.
Loads of money on the Broncos.
Percentage of money on Denver: 73% (23,000 bets)
The Trends. Edge: Broncos.
Peyton Manning is 44-28 ATS as a road favorite since 2001.
Peyton Manning is 15-9 ATS on Sunday Night Football since 2004.
Opening Line: Broncos -2.5.
Opening Total: 44.5.
Week 3 NFL Pick: Broncos 24, Lions 16
Broncos -3 (2 Units) -- Correct; +$200
Under 44.5 (0 Units) -- Correct; $0
Broncos 24, Lions 12
Kansas City Chiefs (1-1) at Green Bay Packers (2-0)
Line: Packers by 4.5. Total: 47.
Las Vegas Hilton Advance Point Spread : Packers -6.5.
Walt's Calculated Line: Packers -6.
Monday, Sep 28, 8:30 ET
Comment on this game
The Game. Edge: Packers.
This week on ESPN, we're going to have Mike Tirico and Jon Gruden calling the shots instead the great preseason homers like Kevin Reilly, Ron Wolfley and Don Tollefson, inept ESPN guys Emmitt, Herman Edwards and Matt Millen, and mindless automatons like Dan Fouts. Here's what it would sound like if these seven clowns (and some special guests) were calling this game:
Reilly: Welcome to the city of Green Bay, home of the Fudge Packers! Get it, because the people here love fudge packing? You know something about that, Millen! Tonight, the Packers take on the Kansas City Royals.
Millen: Let me interrupt you right there, Kevin. I want one thing to be clear. I, Matthew Millen, do not fudge pack. That is a disgusting stereotype. What I actually do is kielbasa pack. Ramming several kielbasas into the backside of 100-percent USDA Men is both wonderful and special, and there is no way in hell any sort of fudge is involved! I don't even like chocolate!
Herm: DIDN'T MEAN CHOCOLATE! DIDN'T TALK ABOUT CHOCOLATE! DIDN'T SAY CHOCOLATE! DIDN'T INFER CHOCOLATE! DIDN'T IMPLY CHOCOLATE! NOTICE THAT I CORRECTED MYSELF! BETWEEN IMPLY AND INFER! HERM USED IT WRONG! HE GOT IT WRONG! HE MEANT TO SAY IMPLY INFER INSTEAD OF IMPLY! I MEAN HE MEANT TO SAY INFER INSTEAD OF IMPLY! WAIT, THAT'S THE SAME THING! HE SAID THE SAME THING! WHY DID HE SAY THE SAME THING!? HE DOESN'T KNOW WHY HE SAID THE SAME THING!? HERE'S NOT THE SAME THING! HE MEANT TO SAY IMPLY INSTEAD OF INFER! THAT'S THE CORRECT ORDER OF THE WORDS! THAT'S THE RIGHT ORDER OF THE WORDS! HE USED THE CORRECT ORDER OF THE WORDS! HE... WHY IS HERM TALKING IN THE THIRD PERSON!? HERM SHOULD BE TALKING IN THE FIRST PERSON! OR AT LEAST THE SECOND PERSON! OR MAYBE EVEN THE FOURTH PERSON! WHAT'S THE FOURTH PERSON!? HERM DOESN'T KNOW WHAT THE FOURTH PERSON IS!? WHO IS THE FOURTH PERSON!? WHERE DID THE FOURTH PERSON GO!? WHERE DID... where... uhh... umm...?
Tollefson: Yeah, yeah, yeah, we get it, Herm. Millen's a little fudge-packer, isn't he? That's fine though, I'm all for gay rights because that means more women for me. The more single women available, the more I can lure back to my apartment to clean and cook naked for me, which is what all women were made for. Not me necessarily, but to please men in general.
Emmitt: Mike, I think you wrongness about what womans was made for. Womans was made for a lot of good thing. All sort of thing, but making a kid in their stomach to working in big company and become SEO. Womans can be very successfulness in whatever field they working in - and not just a football field, I mean the real fields of life like the office field or the kid-making field.
Tollefson: Emmitt, stop being stupid. Women were made to be our slaves.
Wolfley: I'LL TELL YOU WHAT, GUYS, THIS ARGUMENT REMINDS ME OF A HIPPOPOTAMUS SMEARING YELLOW MUSTARD ALL OVER HIS TESTICLES. I BET THAT MILLEN LIKES TO SMEAR YELLOW MUSTARD ALL OVER THE TESTICLES OF HIS 1000-PERCENT USDA MEN.
Millen: Don't be an idiot, Wolf. There's no such thing as a 1,000-percent USDA Man. I've been searching for decades, but haven't found one greater than 500 percent.
Fouts: And here's what he means by decades! A decade is a period of time that happens to be pretty long. It's 10 years, to be exact. That's one more than nine, and one fewer than 11. A year is comprised of 12 months. You have January, February, March, April, May, June, July, September, October, November, August and December, not necessarily in that order. It could be that order in a parallel universe, but this universe happens to be perpendicular, so the order is incorrect. I won't tell you the order because I'm not sure of it, but what I am sure is that each year contains those 12 months. That's 12, one fewer than 13 and one more than 11, which was the number I used before to indicate one more than the amount of years in decade. That means there are two more months than the amount of years in a decade. Isn't that fascinating?
Reilly: No. Shut up, and stop annoying me.
Charles Davis: Kevin, did you know that the time period you're born in has to do with which sign you are? Let's begin with the Leo sign, Kevin. That's a lion, Kevin. What about Virgo, Kevin? How about Pisces, Kevin? That's a fish, Kevin. What about cancer, Kevin? That's the crab; not the disease, Kevin. Did you remember Gemini, Kevin? And let me remind you of Scorpio, Kevin. That's not scorpion, Kevin. That's Scorpio, Kevin. No "N" at the end there, Kevin. Can you name a Zodiac sign I didn't mention yet, Kevin? Wow, you give up already, Kevin? How about Aries, Kevin? You could've also mentioned Taurus, Kevin. Or how about Capricorn, Kevin? Could have mentioned that, too, Kevin!
Reilly: Here's a sign for you! It's the middle finger! Ha! We'll be back after this!
GREEN BAY OFFENSE: The Packers were able to slay their biggest non-divisional rival Sunday night, but there was a dark cloud over the loss, which was Eddie Lacy's injury. Lacy was carted into the locker room with an ankle injury early in the game and never returned. It's unclear if Lacy will suit up, as he told the media that he "hopes" to play Monday night. It'll help that he has an extra day to heal, but it's far from a guarantee that he'll be able to take the field.
James Starks is a fine replacement, but there's no question that he's a downgrade. It'll be tough for Starks to run on the Chiefs, who clogged running lanes extremely well this past Thursday night. C.J. Anderson and Ronnie Hillman had absolutely no chance, and I can't imagine Starks having any sort of success, given that neither Anderson nor Hillman could run well.
Having said that, the Packers still have Aaron Rodgers, the last time I checked. Rodgers is completely healthy and happens to be at the top of his game right now. Despite missing Jordy Nelson, Rodgers still effectively moves the chains with Randall Cobb, James Jones, Davante Adams and a couple others. The Chiefs have good depth in their secondary, but they won't be able to do much to contain the top quarterback in the NFL.
KANSAS CITY OFFENSE: The Chiefs will surrender a decent amount of points in this game, so it'll be up to the scoring attack to keep up. That might be able to happen, as Kansas City will be able to establish Jamaal Charles, who figures to have success against a run defense that was trampled by Matt Forte in Week 1. Green Bay did much better in that regard Sunday night, but perhaps that was the result of Seattle's putrid offensive line.
The Packers aren't very good in coverage either, as they've been responsible for a large number of missed tackles through two games thus far. That doesn't bode well against the Chiefs. Alex Smith will unload the ball quickly, as usual, to Jeremy Maclin, Travis Kelce and company, and they might be able to spring free for longer gains. Smith will also scramble around for first downs; Green Bay doesn't exactly have the best track record against running quarterbacks.
Something the Chiefs must do is avoid turnovers. Give-aways were their undoing against the Broncos, and they could certainly hinder them in this contest. If the Packers jump out to an early lead, Smith could force the issue and toss some interceptions again.
RECAP: I hate to not have a play on Monday night, but I'm torn on this game. On one hand, I like the Packers at home. They have such a great history covering as hosts, going 25-14 ATS since 2010. On the other hand, favorites following a game against the Seahawks have a dubious track record, and the Chiefs have played well as big underdogs under Andy Reid.
As a tie-breaker, I'm going to defer to Pinnacle, the sharpest book on the Web, which is one of the only outlets that is listing the Chiefs at +7. This means they want Kansas City money, so I'll go the other way.
FINAL THOUGHTS: This spread has dropped all the way to -4.5. Crazy. It's like last Monday night, when the spread fell despite public action on the host. Except there aren't fundamental issues with the Packers. Perhaps the Chiefs are the right side. I'm not sure myself, as I'm 50-50 on this game. But I wouldn't want to go against Aaron Rodgers on Monday night. Another thing to take into account is that Rodgers may want to embarrass Alex Smith because of what happened in the 2005 NFL Draft. Sounds crazy, but Rodgers always has a huge chip on his shoulder. Good luck if you're betting this game. If you're on Kansas City, Bovada still has a +7 -115 line.
The Psychology. Edge: None.
No edge found.
The Vegas. Edge: Chiefs.
Slight lean on the Packers early in the week, but it has increased.
Percentage of money on Green Bay: 76% (92,000 bets)
The Trends. Edge: None.
Favorites after playing the Seahawks are 7-24 ATS.
Andy Reid is 12-5 ATS as an underdog of 6.5 or more since 2000.
Aaron Rodgers is 60-35 ATS since 2009 (9-5 ATS as a favorite of 12+).
Packers are 25-14 ATS at home since 2010.
Opening Line: Packers -6.5.
Opening Total: 48.
Week 3 NFL Pick: Packers 34, Chiefs 24
Packers -4.5 (0 Units) -- Correct; $0
Over 47 (0 Units) -- Correct; $0
Packers 38, Chiefs 28
Week 3 NFL Picks - Early Games
Washington at New York Giants,
Atlanta at Dallas,
Indianapolis at Tennessee,
Oakland at Cleveland,
Cincinnati at Baltimore,
Jacksonville at New England,
New Orleans at Carolina,
Philadelphia at New York Jets,
Tampa Bay at Houston,
San Diego at Minnesota,
Pittsburgh at St. Louis
A list of some of my favorite team/player prop picks this week
(Offense & defensive ROY picks to be counted
whenever winners are announced.) Picks carried over on a week-to-week basis will be in black.
Teaser: Cowboys +7.5, Bills +8.5 (1 Unit) -- Incorrect; -$110
Moneyline Underdog: Bills +130 (0.5 Units) -- Correct; +$65
NFL Picks - Jan. 16
2021 NFL Mock Draft - Jan. 13
Fantasy Football Rankings - Jan. 11
2022 NFL Mock Draft - Nov. 15
NFL Power Rankings - Nov. 14
2020 College Football Recruiting Rankings - April 14
2020 NBA Mock Draft - Sept. 27
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 18, 2020): 1-5 (-$1,430)
Last Week's 2-3 Unit NFL Picks (Week 18, 2020): 0-2 (-$575)
Last Week's 4-5 Unit NFL Picks (Week 18, 2020): 0-2 (-$855)
Last Week Over-Under (Week 18, 2020): 2-3-1 ($0)
Last Week's Prop/ML/Teaser/Parlay Picks (Week 18, 2020): $0
2020 NFL Picks of the Month: 2-2, 50.0% (-$135)
2020 Season NFL Picks Against The Spread: 132-123-6, 52.6% (+$3,280)
2020 Season 2-3 Unit NFL Picks: 43-42-3, 50.6% (-$2,650)
2020 Season 4-5 Unit NFL Picks: 37-22-1, 62.7% (+$5,515)
2020 Season Over-Under: 137-119-6, 53.5% ($0)
2020 Season Prop/ML/Teaser/Parlay Picks: +$375
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% (+$3,585)
2008 Season NFL Picks Against The Spread: 148-140-7, 51.4% (+$6,105)
2009 Season NFL Picks Against The Spread: 151-124-9, 54.9% (+$4,235)
2010 Season NFL Picks Against The Spread: 144-131-8, 52.4% (+$5,880)
2011 Season NFL Picks Against The Spread: 137-133-12, 50.7% (-$1,335)
2012 Season NFL Picks Against The Spread: 130-145-8, 47.3% (-$7,445)
2013 Season NFL Picks Against The Spread: 144-131-8, 52.4% (+$7,825)
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% (-$3,215)
2016 Season NFL Picks Against The Spread: 148-127-10, 53.8% (+$780)
2017 Season NFL Picks Against The Spread: 137-140-8, 49.5% (-$4,300)
2018 Season NFL Picks Against The Spread: 140-134-14, 51.3% (+$845)
2019 Season NFL Picks Against The Spread: 149-128-9, 53.6% (+$1,200)
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)
2016 Season 2-3 Unit NFL Picks: 42-35-3, 54.5% (+$475)
2017 Season 2-3 Unit NFL Picks: 32-40-3, 43.8% (-$2,395)
2018 Season 2-3 Unit NFL Picks: 52-41-2, 55.9% (+$2,670)
2019 Season 2-3 Unit NFL Picks: 44-36-2, 55.0% (+$655)
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)
2016 Season 4-5 Unit NFL Picks: 21-22-5, 48.8% (-$1,465)
2017 Season 4-5 Unit NFL Picks: 20-22-1, 47.6% (-$1,595)
2018 Season 4-5 Unit NFL Picks: 27-32-1, 45.8% (-$4,735)
2019 Season 4-5 Unit NFL Picks: 37-27-2, 57.8% (+$2,185)
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)
2016 Season Over-Under: 123-141-1, 46.6% (+$95)
2017 Season Over-Under: 136-139-2, 49.5% (+$640)
2018 Season Over-Under: 118-128-3, 48.0% (-$225)
2019 Season Over-Under: 126-133-4, 48.6% (-$50)
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
2016 Season Prop/ML/Teaser/Parlay Picks: -$275
2017 Season Prop/ML/Teaser/Parlay Picks: -$510
2018 Season Prop/ML/Teaser/Parlay Picks: +$1,495
2019 Season Prop/ML/Teaser/Parlay Picks: -$1,715
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)
2016 NFL Picks of the Month: 5-1, 83.3% (+$2,780)
2017 NFL Picks of the Month: 4-2, 66.7% (+$1,040)
2018 NFL Picks of the Month: 4-3, 57.1% (-$640)
2019 NFL Picks of the Month: 3-3-1, 50.0% (-$625)
Career NFL Picks Against The Spread: 2,989-2,760-179, 52.0% (+$13,585)
Career 2-3 Unit NFL Picks: 953-858-49 (52.6%)
Career 4-5 Unit NFL Picks: 452-396-23 (53.3%)
Career Over-Under: 2,459-2,413-66 (50.5%)
Career Second-Half NFL Picks: 22-15-1 (61.1%)
Career NFL Picks of the Month: 44-29-1 (60.3%)
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.
Cowboys: 11-5 (2014-19: 47-50)
Bears: 6-11 (2014-19: 45-48)
Bucs: 7-9 (2014-19: 44-45)
49ers: 8-8 (2014-19: 53-44)
Eagles: 8-8 (2014-19: 55-46)
Lions: 9-6 (2014-19: 53-42)
Falcons: 9-7 (2014-19: 55-45)
Cardinals: 10-6 (2014-19: 45-50)
Giants: 3-13 (2014-19: 52-41)
Packers: 12-4 (2014-19: 54-46)
Panthers: 13-3 (2014-19: 47-52)
Rams: 5-12 (2014-19: 53-41)
Redskins: 7-8 (2014-19: 47-48)
Vikings: 9-7 (2014-19: 51-45)
Saints: 7-10 (2014-19: 49-50)
Seahawks: 8-9 (2014-19: 43-56)
Bills: 10-7 (2014-19: 52-42)
Bengals: 9-5 (2014-19: 42-52)
Colts: 8-7 (2014-19: 50-45)
Broncos: 9-7 (2014-19: 45-48)
Dolphins: 12-4 (2014-19: 47-46)
Browns: 7-9 (2014-19: 46-44)
Jaguars: 4-11 (2014-19: 41-55)
Chargers: 8-6 (2014-19: 46-49)
Jets: 8-8 (2014-19: 50-40)
Ravens: 5-11 (2014-19: 48-47)
Texans: 10-5 (2014-19: 48-47)
Chiefs: 12-4 (2014-19: 56-50)
Patriots: 6-10 (2014-19: 55-53)
Steelers: 7-10 (2014-19: 56-43)
Titans: 10-7 (2014-19: 49-47)
Raiders: 7-9 (2014-19: 43-52)
Divisional: 43-47 (2011-19: 405-394)
2x Game Edge: 63-60 (2011-19: 213-210)
2x Motivation Edge: 45-30 (2011-19: 347-288)
2x Spread Edge: 42-33 (2011-19: 61-55)
2x Vegas Edge: 25-22 (2011-19: 320-335)
2x Trend Edge: 18-13 (2011-19: 250-228)
Double Edge: 27-21 (2011-19: 122-107)
Triple Edge: 5-4 (2011-19: 21-18)