NFL Picks (Preseason 2015):
NFL Picks (Week 1, 2015):
NFL Picks (Week 2, 2015):
NFL Picks (Week 3, 2015):
NFL Picks (Week 4, 2015):
NFL Picks (Week 5, 2015):
NFL Picks (Week 6, 2015):
NFL Picks (Week 7, 2015):
NFL Picks (2015):
54-63-5 (-$4,100) 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 Nov. 2, 5:20 p.m. ET. Follow @walterfootball
Go to Week 8 NFL Picks - Early Games
New York Jets (4-1) at Oakland Raiders (2-3)
Line: Jets by 3. Total: 45.
Las Vegas Hilton Advance Point Spread :
Walt's Calculated Line:
Sunday, Nov 1, 4:05 ET
Comment on this game
The Game. Edge: Raiders.
Emmitt on the Brink
is back for Season 8! Episode 7 is posted. Emmitt meets up with Dianna Marie Russini, who has a plan to steal the key to North Korea's nuclear facility.
I was at my sister's wedding last Sunday, so I couldn't watch the games live. Matvei texted me during the Chargers-Raiders contest, however, informing me that Derek Carr was having his best game, and that he looked like Aaron Rodgers. Carr was definitely impressive, though it must be noted that the Chargers were missing Eric Weddle, one of the top safeties in the NFL. San Diego was also flat following a devastating loss to the Packers.
The Jets could be equally flat - more on that later - but their secondary is definitely much better, ranking first in terms of YPA, while the Chargers are 28th. Thus, moving the chains aerially will be much more difficult, although I don't think it's impossible. I actually like Carr's matchup versus the Jets, since New York's defensive front can't get to the quarterback without blitzing - especially versus a stout front like Oakland's - and Carr has actually been very good versus the blitz thus far.
Unfortunately for Carr, he won't have Latavius Murray as a great complement this week because the Jets' ground defense is first versus the rush in terms of YPC, and it's not even close. They surrender 3.07 YPC, while the second-best team, the Broncos, is at 3.41. The Patriots had one measly rushing yard versus the Jets, so I can't see Murray doing anything in this contest.
NEW YORK OFFENSE:
As with Carr, Ryan Fitzpatrick has enjoyed some pretty terrific blocking this season, but things might be different this week. That's because there's a good chance that Nick Mangold might be out. The general public may roll their eyes at this, but center is probably the second-most-important position on offense. Nick Mangold happens to be one of the top centers in the NFL, and the Jets don't have another true center on their roster.
It goes without saying that Mangold's absence will be enormous. It'll severely limit the rushing attack, as Chris Ivory suddenly will have much worse blocking in front of him. The Raiders actually do stop the run well - they're seventh in YPC, and no opponent has rushed for triple digits against them since Week 2 - so containing Ivory will be much easier for them.
If Ivory is stymied, Ryan Fitzpatrick will obviously have issues. Fitzpatrick hasn't killed his team yet because he's been in many favorable passing situations, but a stagnant ground attack will force him to throw more often, which could be problematic if his pass protection isn't nearly as good if Mangold is out. It needs to be noted that the four games the Jets have won were against teams currently ranked 20th or worse versus the run. The two defeats have been against teams ranked above that figure.
The public is smitten with the Jets, pounding them with reckless abandon. More than 85 percent of the money is on New York, which is a dangerous figure in a late-afternoon game.
That's one of a few reasons why I like the Raiders. I mentioned some of the others already. First, a missing or hobbled Mangold will be a huge downgrade for the Jets' offense. Second, New York blitzes often, and Carr is good against the blitz, so that obviously favors Oakland.
Third, the Jets are in an obvious flat spot in this situation. They just gave it their all in their early-season Super Bowl at New England, but came up short despite leading in the fourth quarter. It's hard to imagine them bouncing back from that after a long flight out to the West Coast. Oakland is very underrated right now - the team could easily be 5-1 - so it appears to be primed to pull the upset.
I like the Raiders enough to wager three units on them. They've struggled following victories in the past, but they seem different now under Jack Del Rio. They're also not terrible anymore, which could impact the way they respond following wins.
The public pounded this up to -3, and the sharps jumped on +3, perhaps knowing how ridiculous this spread was. I'd lock it in right now as well. I doubt the books are going to risk a middle by moving to 3.5. Nick Mangold likely being out is huge. Without Mangold, I'd say these teams are about even, so there's great value with the Raiders at +3.
As stated earlier, both the public and sharps have bet up the Jets. With Mangold out, that doesn't make much sense to me.
The Psychology. Edge: Raiders.
Both teams appear to be in bad spots. The Jets just had an emotionally draining loss, while the Raiders could be flat coming off a win, like they usually are.
The Vegas. Edge: Raiders.
Everyone's pounding the Jets.
Percentage of money on New York: 73% (40,000 bets)
The Trends. Edge: Jets.
Raiders are 9-24 ATS after a win since 2009.
Opening Line: Jets -1.5.
Opening Total: 44.5.
Week 8 NFL Pick: Raiders 19, Jets 13
Raiders +3 (3 Units) -- Correct; +$300
Under 45 (0 Units) -- Incorrect; $0
Raiders 34, Jets 20
Seattle Seahawks (3-4) at Dallas Cowboys (2-4)
Line: Seahawks by 5.5. Total: 42.
Las Vegas Hilton Advance Point Spread : Seahawks -5.5.
Walt's Calculated Line: Seahawks -6.
Sunday, Nov 1, 4:25 ET
Comment on this game
The Game. Edge: Seahawks.
A reminder that Jerks of the Week for this week is up, so just click the link. This week's jerks entry is the Shirtless A**hole Brigade.
SEATTLE OFFENSE: I don't know if the Seahawks think they got back on track, but despite blowing out the 49ers, they didn't look quite right last Thursday. The issue continues to be the offensive line, which surrendered a ridiculous five sacks to a depleted defense that didn't register a single sack in the two games prior. Wilson, as a consequence, rushed some throws and was guilty of a couple of turnovers. Fortunately for him, the 49ers were so incompetent on the other side of the ball that it didn't matter.
If the Seahawks couldn't protect against the 49ers' skeleton-crew defense, how will they possibly fare well against Dallas' potent pass rush? The defensive line has gotten so much better ever since Greg Hardy returned from suspension to terrorize his special-teams coaches, and it figures to swarm Wilson pretty relentlessly. The Cowboys couldn't come up with turnovers last week, but things might be different this Sunday.
Fortunately for the Seahawks, they'll be able to pound the ball with Marshawn Lynch to perhaps avoid too many sacks and give-aways. The Cowboys have been very sloppy versus the run, surrendering 5.14 YPC to their previous four opponents - the fifth-worst figure in that time frame - so Lynch could easily go off. Dallas, after all, had trouble tackling someone named Orleans Darkwa, who sounds like some sort of mallard super hero.
DALLAS OFFENSE: The Cowboys would've won last week had Matt Cassel not made some terrible throws. I don't know why Cassel thought he was the second coming of Joe Montana against the Giants, but instead of being the careful, conservative quarterback he should be, he recklessly fired passes downfield into triple coverage that were picked off. The thing is, New York has a weak pass defense, so if it was able to do this to Cassel, the members of the Legion of Boom will be licking their chops, even though most of them haven't played well this year.
The thing is, Cassel didn't even have to do all that much versus the Giants. Darren McFadden ran all over them, so Cassel could've kept feeding the ball to his suddenly rejuvenated running back. The Seahawks, meanwhile, won't be nearly as porous. They're fourth versus the rush in terms of YPC (3.71) - the Giants are 19th - so they'll clamp down on the McFadden nonsense and force Cassel to beat them. Call me crazy, but I don't think he'll be able to.
RECAP: Both offenses figure to struggle here in what should be a low-scoring game. I can't see the Seahawks doing much, as Dallas will dominate the trenches on both sides of the ball. The one issue is Cassel, who could give this game away. However, he has a nice cushion as a six-point underdog.
I like the Cowboys for a couple of units. As I said, this should be a low-scoring affair, so taking the points seems like a good idea. Also, the underdog in Dallas games has covered at a two-thirds rate this decade, while the Seahawks just aren't good enough to be laying this many points on the road.
FINAL THOUGHTS: The sharps are all over the Cowboys. They've dropped this spread from +6 to +5/+4.5, and I expect the line to continue to fall.
SUNDAY NOTES: Pinnacle, the sharpest book on the Web, is begging for Seattle action. It's listing this spread at -4.5, despite it being -5 elsewhere, and -5.5 at Bovada.
The Psychology. Edge: None.
No edge found.
The Vegas. Edge: Cowboys.
All the action is on the Seahawks.
Percentage of money on Seattle: 79% (18,000 bets)
The Trends. Edge: Cowboys.
Seahawks are 25-36 ATS on the road since 2006 if they're not coming off an away loss.
Cowboys are 25-16 ATS as an underdog since 2009.
The underdog is 56-28 ATS in Cowboys games since 2010.
Opening Line: Seahawks -5.
Opening Total: 40.
Week 8 NFL Pick: Seahawks 20, Cowboys 17
Cowboys +5 (2 Units) -- Correct; +$200
Under 42 (0 Units) -- Correct; $0
Seahawks 13, Cowboys 12
Green Bay Packers (6-0) at Denver Broncos (6-0)
Line: Packers by 2.5. Total: 46.5.
Las Vegas Hilton Advance Point Spread : Packers -3.
Walt's Calculated Line: Pick.
Sunday, Nov 1, 8:30 ET
Comment on this game
The Game. Edge: Packers.
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.
GREEN BAY OFFENSE: Aaron Rodgers didn't look like quite himself prior to the bye. He was responsible for three turnovers against the Rams, and then he struggled to separate himself from the Chargers, who hung around and nearly sent the game to overtime. There were some issues on the offensive line - he took eight sacks in the three contests prior to the bye, a high number, considering he releases the ball so quickly - and some of his weapons being hurt didn't help matters.
The second problem should be resolved. Davante Adams is coming back, while Randall Cobb and Eddie Lacy have enjoyed a week off to heal their injuries. If at least one of those two happens to be healthy - and there have been glowing reports about both of them - it'll help a lot against Denver's defense, which is second against the run and third versus the pass. The Broncos allow just 3.41 YPC to the opposition, so I wouldn't expect a big game from Lacy, but with the Broncos being so focused on Rodgers, Lacy might find some lanes to burst through.
As for the other issue, I'm not sure the Packers will be able to properly pass protect against the Broncos. Denver has accumulated a league-high 25 sacks, including four versus Cleveland prior to the bye. I bring that up because DeMarcus Ware was out. It's not clear if Ware will play this week, but it's sounding like he has looked good in practice. Having him on the field will obviously be huge.
DENVER OFFENSE: Even the biggest Peyton Manning fans will tell you that the future Hall of Famer has been miserable this season. I'd say he has a decaying arm, but it's completely gone, and all he can do is throw noodle-armed passes. It doesn't help, of course, that his offensive line has been in shambles. That's going to be huge in this matchup.
The Packers, like the Broncos, generate tons of pressure on the quarterback. I mentioned that the Broncos have the most sacks. Well, the Packers are tied for second. They're going to disrupt the passing attack and bring down Manning on numerous occasions. Manning will move the chains occasionally by getting the ball out quickly and hitting Demaryius Thomas and Emmanuel Sanders, who will make some plays, but the drives will mostly be inconsistent.
It would help Manning tremendously if he had a strong rushing attack to take some pressure off him, but that hasn't been the case this season. Ronnie Hillman has been better than C.J. Anderson, but he doesn't have great blocking. The Packers, meanwhile, have surrendered 60 or fewer rushing yards to four of the six opponents they've played this season, and that includes the Seahawks (Marshawn Lynch) and Chiefs (Jamaal Charles), so I wouldn't expect Hillman to be much of a factor.
RECAP: My initial reaction to this game was to join the public and take the Packers. Then, I thought about it, and figured there might be good value with the better defense as a three-point home underdog. But then I thought about it even more, and I've moved back to Green Bay. Denver's stop unit is better, but the Packers' defense has been tremendous for the most part this season.
Both teams are going to have major issues pass protecting in this game, but the difference is that Rodgers is still great. Manning, on the other hand, sucks. He really sucks. I can't see him matching Rodgers on the scoreboard, and the Packers may have a trick up their sleeve, as Mike McCarthy is 9-0 against the spread coming off a bye, which is remarkable.
Having said that, I'm having trouble mustering the courage to bet on this contest. This spread is inflated because the books know that they're going to get flooded with Green Bay money, so we have no value with the Packers. Also, the amount of betting action we're seeing in a stand-alone primetime game could be enough for some shenanigans to happen, so I don't want to be on the other side of that.
FINAL THOUGHTS: The sharps like the Broncos, though it seems like they're just betting a number. I don't have a strong opinion here, as the line is inflated, but I would still take the Packers.
SUNDAY NOTES: Be careful with this game. There is so much money on the Packers, and this spread has been inflated, so there is no value with the visitor. I would take Green Bay if I had to, but fortunately, we're not required to bet every game. I would sit this one out. The sharps are doing so as well at 2.5, though it's worth noting that some professionals took Denver at +3.
The Psychology. Edge: None.
No edge found.
The Vegas. Edge: Broncos.
The Packers will be receiving the most bets this week, and it's not even close.
Percentage of money on Green Bay: 76% (135,000 bets)
The Trends. Edge: Packers.
Aaron Rodgers is 63-36 ATS since 2009 (9-5 ATS as a favorite of 12+).
Aaron Rodgers is 25-19 ATS on the road as long as he's not favored by 6.5 or more points.
Mike McCarthy is 9-0 ATS off a bye.
Peyton Manning is 14-7 ATS as an underdog since 2003.
Peyton Manning is 16-9 ATS on Sunday Night Football since 2004.
Peyton Manning is 5-3 ATS as a home underdog.
Opening Line: Packers -2.5.
Opening Total: 43.
Week 8 NFL Pick: Packers 24, Broncos 20
Packers -2.5 (0 Units) -- Incorrect; $0
Under 46.5 (0 Units) -- Correct; $0
Broncos 29, Packers 10
Indianapolis Colts (3-4) at Carolina Panthers (6-0)
Line: Panthers by 5. Total: 45.5.
Las Vegas Hilton Advance Point Spread : Panthers -3.5.
Walt's Calculated Line: Panthers -6.
Monday, Nov 2, 8:30 ET
Comment on this game
The Game. Edge: Panthers.
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 Carolina, home of the Panthers! Tonight, the Panthers take on the Colts. Guys, Sam Bradford won't stop throwing interceptions for my Philadelphia Eagles, so I want to approach one of these young quarterbcks tonight and ask them to join my team. I know they're under contract, but I could bribe them with some Eagles posters since I don't have enough space on the walls in my room, and my mom is making me get rid of some of those posters. I also have some extra bobbleheads. Guys, do you think I can get Andrew Luck to play for my Philadelphia Eagles for eight Philadelphia Eagles posters and six bobbleheads?
Emmitt: Mike, or... uhh... Juan, I think it gonna take a li-bit more to get Andrew Lucks to play for the Eagle. And by a li-bit, I mean a lot-bit! Andrew Lucks gonna get a $100 billion dollar contract the next time he is a free agency, so why would he except the poster and the head bobbles?
Millen: I would have to agree with Emmitt here, Juan. I approached both Cam Newton and Andrew Luck prior to the game and asked them if they wanted to join me for some kielbasa-inserting magic tonight, but both declined. I then offered them the option of ramming me with kielbasas first, but they turned me down again. These scoundrels just can't be bargained with!
Wolfley: SPEAKING OF SCOUNDRELS, JUAN, THERE'S A SCOUNDREL ON THE FIELD IN THIS GAME, AND HIS NAME IS JONATHAN STEWART. WHAT A SCOUNDREL. I BET HE PUTS WHITE VINEGAR ON THE NUTS BEFORE HE TAKES THE BATTLEFIELD.
Reilly: My name's not Juan! Why's everyone calling me Juan!?
Charles Davis: Kevin, did you know that Juan is Spanish for John, Kevin? Let's discuss some other Spanish-to-English names, Kevin. How about Carlos, Kevin? That's Spanish for Charles, Kevin. What about Domingo, Kevin? That's Spanish for Dominic, Kevin. Let's discuss Eduardo, Kevin. That's Spanish for Edward, Kevin. Let's not forget Esteban, Kevin. That's Spanish for Stephen, Kevin. How about Francisco, Kevin? That's Spanish for Francis, Kevin. What about Jeronimo, Kevin? That's Spanish for Jerome, Kevin. Kevin, what do you think Kevin is in Spanish, Kevin? How does Kevin translate to Spanish, Kevin? Oh, you think it's Juan, Kevin? That's John, as I said earlier, Kevin. Give up, Kevin? Trick question, Kevin! There is no Spanish name for Kevin, Kevin!
Reilly: Shut up! I hate you! Just shut up!
Fouts: And here's what he means by "shut up." "Shut up" is a term when you tell someone to be quiet. And quiet is a state where there aren't any noises. And what I mean by noises is, anything that makes a sound that your ear picks up and sends a signal to your brain is a noise. "Shut up" is much different than "shut down," even though one of the two words is the same. That's 50 percent, which is bad if you're taking a test, but great if you're talking about batting averages. If you shut down, you could also shut up, as long as the thing that was shutting down was making noises, which I defined earlier. And by earlier, I mean something that happened before the present, but not the sort of present you get on your birthday or Christmas.
Herm: THERE ARE OTHER TIMES WHEN YOU CAN GET A PRESENT! OTHER TIMES! DIFFERENT TIMES! NOT THE SAME TIMES! VARIOUS TIMES! HERM CAN THINK OF A FEW VARIOUS TIMES! HERM CAN THINK OF A FEW TIMES THAT ARE NOT THE SAME! THEY'RE DIFFERENT! HERE ARE SOME THAT ARE DIFFERENT! HERE ARE SOME THAT ARE NOT THE SAME! HERE ARE SOME THAT ARE VARIOUS! VALENTINE'S DAY, FOR INSTANCE! YOU CAN GET PRESENTS ON VALENTINE'S DAY! WHAT ABOUT MOTHERS' DAY!? IF YOU'RE A MOTHER, YOU'RE GETTING A PRESENT ON VALENTINE'S DAY! I MEAN MOTHERS' DAY! BUT MAYBE VALENTINE'S DAY, TOO! UNLESS YOU'RE DIVORCED ON VALENTINE'S DAY! THEN YOU'RE NOT GETTING A PRESENT! UNLESS YOU HAVE A SECRET ADMIRER! HERM HAS A SECRET ADMIRER! HERM GOT A FLOWER IN THE MAIL TODAY! HERM DOESN'T KNOW WHOM IT'S FROM! COULD BE ANYONE! COULD BE THE WOMAN ACROSS THE STREET! COULD BE HERM'S THIRD COUSIN WHO IS KIND OF HOT BUT HERM DOESN'T TOUCH BECAUSE THIRD COUSIN! COULD BE HERM'S MAILMAN! NOT THAT THERE'S ANYTHING WRONG WITH THAT! NOTHING WRONG! CAN'T FIND ANYTHING WRONG! DON'T SEE ANYTHING WRONG! DON'T... uhh... what...?
Tollefson: Herm, I think you should bang your third cousin and then tell her to cook and clean naked, since that's all women are good for. And Kevin, I can con Andrew Luck into playing for your Eagles. All I need you to do is find some of his mail and I'll be able to steal his social-security number, and then I'll offer him this great time share. Once he visits, I'll knock him out, tie him up and get a hypnotist to tell him to sign with the Eagles. I only ask one thing: I want your newborn daughter to cook and clean naked for me when she turns 18.
Reilly: Done deal! Ha, I really won that trade! We'll be back after this!
INDIANAPOLIS OFFENSE: Andrew Luck was dreadful last week, failing to move the chains against the Saints' horrendous defense until garbage time. He's clearly injured, which definitely explains why he's been so poor this season. An abysmal offensive line, put together by one of the worst general managers in football, isn't doing Luck any favors. When you have a franchise quarterback, it makes sense to protect that player, yet Ryan Grigson doesn't understand this concept.
The thing is, if Luck couldn't do anything versus the Saints' atrocious stop unit, how's he going to move the chains versus one of the NFL's premier defenses? Carolina's ferocious front, led by Kawann Short, who is having a terrific year, is going to swarm Luck in the backfield and make life very difficult for him. Meanwhile, on the back end, Josh Norman will erase one of his receivers, limiting his options. It's not going to be pretty.
The Colts have been able to rely on Frank Gore in some games. That's their only hope here, and it might not be far-fetched; the Panthers just allowed 171 yards on the ground to the Eagles, and in their previous four contests, they've surrendered 4.55 YPC.
CAROLINA OFFENSE: Everyone is marveling at the Panthers' scoring attack, citing how it's difficult to stop because when the quarterback runs the ball, there's an extra blocker. Sure, but that's always been the case with mobile signal-callers. This is not a new concept.
Unfortunately for the Colts, they can't really defend this concept. Their defense sucks for the most part. They've been abysmal versus the run lately, so containing a red-hot Jonathan Stewart will be difficult enough for them. Locking in on Stewart will open things up for Newton with these designed runs.
Newton will also have success aerially. The Colts have accumulated the third-fewest sacks in the NFL this season, so Newton will have all day to throw if he needs to. Indianapolis has surrendered an average of 323.8 passing yards per game the past five weeks, which is a joke.
RECAP: This is a tough one. On one hand, the Panthers should be able to pressure Luck heavily and perhaps force him into a couple more turnovers, all while running all over Indianapolis on the other side of the ball. On the other hand, the Colts could keep drives alive with Gore and perhaps stay within striking distance, especially if the Panthers are distracted at all with the Packers coming up.
I'm going to pick the Panthers, but I won't be betting them. The spread seems like it's right where it should be, and it feels like this is set up perfectly for yet another Monday night back-door cover, which have been killers this season. I could see Carolina being up around 10-14 points throughout the second half and then winning by just six because of a late Luck touchdown in garbage time.
I hate to not have a play on a Monday night, but this is one of my least-favorite games of the week from a betting perspective.
FINAL THOUGHTS: The sharps are all over the Colts, or at least they were at +6 and +6.5. Not so much at +5. However, the pros have been going against the Panthers each week, yet they keep losing. Carolina is the much better team and should be favored by more. I won't be betting them though, as this is a bad spot for them. The Panthers have the Packers next week, and they're not used to being big favorites like this. Besides, their center is out, and Andrew Luck is more than capable of throwing a back-door touchdown at the end. I wouldn't touch this game.
The Psychology. Edge: Colts.
The Panthers play the Packers next week and could be looking past the Colts, who lost at home to the Saints. Indianapolis will be looking to bounce back.
The Vegas. Edge: Colts.
Who wants to bet on the Colts right now?
Percentage of money on Carolina: 68% (65,000 bets)
The Trends. Edge: Colts.
Andrew Luck is 13-4 ATS off a loss.
Opening Line: Panthers -5.5.
Opening Total: 46.
Week 8 NFL Pick: Panthers 29, Colts 20
Panthers -5 (0 Units) -- Incorrect; $0
Over 45.5 (0 Units) -- Correct; $0
Panthers 29, Colts 26
Week 8 NFL Picks - Early Games
Miami at New England,
Detroit at Kansas City,
Tampa Bay at Atlanta,
Arizona at Cleveland,
San Francisco at St. Louis,
New York Giants at New Orleans,
Minnesota at Chicago,
San Diego at Baltimore,
Cincinnati at Pittsburgh,
Tennessee at Houston
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.
Moneyline: Falcons -400 (0.5 Units) -- Incorrect; -$200
Moneyline: Chargers +180 (0.5 Units) -- Incorrect; -$50
Moneyline: Titans +155 (0.5 Units) -- Incorrect; -$50
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)