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 (Week 8, 2015):
NFL Picks (Week 9, 2015):
NFL Picks (Week 10, 2015):
NFL Picks (Week 11, 2015):
NFL Picks (Week 12, 2015):
NFL Picks (Week 13, 2015):
NFL Picks (2015):
92-107-7 (-$6,775) 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 Dec. 14, 5:50 p.m. ET. Follow @walterfootball
Go to Week 14 NFL Picks - Early Games
Oakland Raiders (5-7) at Denver Broncos (10-2)
Line: Broncos by 7. Total: 43.5.
Las Vegas Hilton Advance Point Spread:
Walt's Calculated Line:
Sunday, Dec 13, 4:05 ET
Comment on this game
The Game. Edge: Broncos.
Emmitt on the Brink
is back for Season 8! Episode 13 is posted. Kim Jong-un makes a startling announcement, prompting Emmitt and his friends to invade Jared Fogle's manor.
Everyone's ranting and raving about Brock Osweiler. And sure, he's been better than Peyton Manning, but a one-legged chimpanzee would've been an improvement over the NFL's most-decrepit quarterback. Osweiler made some nice connections to Demaryius Thomas and Emmanuel Sanders to beat the reeling Patriots two weeks ago, but after seeing Sam Bradford do the same thing last week, was it really that impressive? In his two other starts, Osweiler has scored 17 points twice, and his team hasn't averaged more than 5.7 yards per play in either contest, which is just an average number. Denver's YPP figure at San Diego was just 4.4, which was very disappointing, to say the least.
I know the Raiders have struggled defensively ever since losing Aldon Smith to that ridiculous suspension, but if Osweiler wasn't exactly lights out against the Bears and Chargers, I don't see why he would automatically torch the Raiders mercilessly. Granted, he has two awesome receivers who will be able to get open against Oakland's poor secondary, but I don't trust Osweiler to connect with them all the time.
I don't see the Broncos running the ball well either. C.J. Anderson is banged up, while Ronnie Hillman could struggle to find running room against an Oakland defense that has somehow improved versus the run lately, limiting its previous three opponents to just 3.07 YPC - one of the top figures in the NFL in that span.
Like the Broncos, the Raiders will have issues scoring. Denver's defense is amazing, and it should be able to limit Oakland, especially if Derek Carr begins playing like he has a concussion, which is what appeared to be happening in the fourth quarter of last week's loss to the Chiefs.
Carr's performance could depend on whether Rodney Hudson will play. Hudson has been injured since Week 10, and Oakland has gone 1-3 since, with the lone victory being a bogus win at Tennessee. Hudson went through Tuesday's walkthrough, so that's a good sign. He's one of the top centers in the NFL, and center is one of the most important positions in football, though the public wouldn't think that. Having Hudson around to protect Carr will be extremely important against Denver's ferocious pass rush. He'll give time to Carr so that he can connect with his talented receivers and not heave pick-sixes like an idiot.
Hudson's presence will also bolster the running game. Well, at least it will in the future. Latavius Murray has struggled recently, and history will repeat itself against Denver's No. 1 ground defense.
As mentioned, Osweiler has been an upgrade over Manning, but his victory over the Patriots and subsequent win against the Chargers has pushed the Broncos into overrated territory. They're favored by too much here, especially considering that they've scored just 17 points in two of Osweiler's three starts. Denver's just not potent offensively enough to cover these high spreads.
The Raiders, meanwhile, are definitely underrated. They're much better than their 5-7 record, especially if they get their Pro Bowl center back. They outgained the Chiefs legitimately and should have won that game. Had they been victorious, they wouldn't be getting more than a touchdown here. They also have motivation on their side; they're seeking revenge, while the Broncos have to battle the Steelers and Bengals after this contest.
I'm going to pencil the Raiders in for three units. If Hudson is cleared to play, I'll bump this up to four units. If not, I'll drop the unit count a bit.
I'm surprised there isn't more public money coming in on the Broncos. It's only a slight lean on Denver.
I said that if Hudson is cleared to play, I'll bump this up four units. That's exactly what I'm going to do. The sharps are in love with the Raiders as well, as they've bet this game so much that they knocked the spread below +7. It's a good thing +7 is still available on Bovada. I'll definitely jump on that.
The Raiders are one of the top sharp plays of the week. I still like them a lot at +6, but I hope you were able to lock them in at +7. Or, if you're fading me, congrats on your Denver victory!
The Psychology. Edge: Raiders.
The Broncos battle the Steelers and Bengals after this game, so this is a Breather Alert.
The Vegas. Edge: Raiders.
A good amount of action on the Broncos.
Percentage of money on Denver: 63% (13,000 bets)
The Trends. Edge: None.
History: Road Team has won 11 of the last 15 meetings (Broncos last 8).
Opening Line: Broncos -7.
Opening Total: 43.5.
Week 14 NFL Pick: Broncos 17, Raiders 16
Raiders +7 (4 Units) -- Correct; +$400
Under 43.5 (0 Units) -- Correct; $0
Raiders 15, Broncos 12
Dallas Cowboys (4-8) at Green Bay Packers (8-4)
Line: Packers by 7. Total: 42.5.
Las Vegas Hilton Advance Point Spread: Packers -9.
Walt's Calculated Line: Packers -7.5.
Sunday, Dec 13, 4:25 ET
Comment on this game
The Game. Edge: Packers.
A reminder that Jerks of the Week for this week is up, so just click the link. This week's jerks entry is Famous Dave's.
GREEN BAY OFFENSE: A little birdie told me that Aaron Rodgers was legitimately injured with a slight tear in his shoulder prior to the Thursday night game, so I backed the Lions. It was the right pick - Detroit dominated the game, but lost because of a blown call and a fluky play - but as you can imagine, I was surprised that Aaron Rodgers was able to reach the end zone with his Hail Mary.
Having said that, I'm not convinced that Rodgers is fully healthy. There's something wrong with him, as he hasn't looked quite right since the Monday night blowout against the Chiefs all the way back in Week 3. The good news, however, is that it appears as though Bryan Bulaga and T.J. Lang will return this week. Dallas' defensive front can generate immense pressure on the quarterback, so having the offensive line at full strength is crucial in this matchup.
Still, it's hard to remain convinced that the Packers will just turn things around because Richard Rodgers caught a fluky Hail Mary. Aaron Rodgers' weapons suck, and his blockers didn't perform all that well even when they were healthy.
DALLAS OFFENSE: The best news the Packers received in terms of the injury report regarding this contest was two weeks ago when Tony Romo broke his collarbone again. Matt Cassel is so incredibly limited that he couldn't expose Washington's poor defensive backfield Monday night. Cassel didn't turn the ball over, which is a positive, but it's hard to imagine him playing mistake-free football once again.
Limiting the Cowboys' aerial attack won't be much of a problem. Cassel will hit Dez Bryant and Jason Witten occasionally, but the Cowboys will punt often if they don't establish Darren McFadden and keep the chains moving that way. This is obviously good news for the Packers, who struggled against the run for a stretch before improving against it recently. One of the reasons for this has been the insertion of Jake Ryan into the lineup. The fourth-round rookie linebacker has been a major upgrade over Nate Palmer, who was a huge liability when he was on the field earlier during the season.
RECAP: This is a lot of points for the Packers to cover when considering their offensive futility for most of the year. They've failed to beat the number as huge home favorites this year, so I'm going to take the Cowboys, who typically thrive in the role as big road underdogs.
This is a zero-unit play for me, however, as the Packers have enjoyed much more time preparing for this game than the Cowboys have. The extra days may have allowed the coaches to scheme better or for Rodgers to get healthy, so while I'm picking Dallas, it wouldn't shock me if Green Bay came out and ripped the Cowboys apart.
WEDNESDAY THOUGHTS: Someone's betting the Cowboys, as this spread has fallen from +8 to +7. As we saw in the Bears-49ers game last week, however, that could change closer to kickoff.
FINAL THOUGHTS: The Cowboys are another highly bet sharp side. I'm going to place a unit on Dallas and lock it in at +7 -115, which is available on Bovada. A touchdown is too much for a quarterback with a torn shoulder to cover, and Dallas has the better defense.
SUNDAY NOTES: The Cowboys are another top sharp play, which makes sense. Rodgers is injured. Cobb is injured. Eddie Lazy is fat. This team has lots of problems.
The Psychology. Edge: None.
No edge found.
The Vegas. Edge: Cowboys.
Lots of action on the Packers.
Percentage of money on Green Bay: 76% (29,000 bets)
The Trends. Edge: Cowboys.
The underdog is 58-33 ATS in Cowboys games since 2010.
Cowboys are 27-19 ATS as an underdog since 2009.
Jason Garrett is 7-2 ATS in his second-consecutive road game.
Packers are 25-15 ATS in December home games since 2000.
Packers are 28-17 ATS at home since 2010.
Aaron Rodgers is 65-40 ATS since 2009 (9-6 ATS as a favorite of 12+).
Opening Line: Packers -8.
Opening Total: 44.
Week 14 NFL Pick: Packers 21, Cowboys 17
Cowboys +7 -115 (1 Unit) -- Incorrect; -$115
Under 42.5 (0 Units) -- Correct; $0
Packers 28, Cowboys 7
New England Patriots (10-2) at Houston Texans (6-6)
Line: Patriots by 6. Total: 45.5.
Las Vegas Hilton Advance Point Spread: Patriots -3.5.
Walt's Calculated Line: Patriots -1.
Sunday, Dec 13, 8:30 ET
Comment on this game
The Game. Edge: Texans.
I used to save my trolling escapades for this space, but I've been banned from posting on ESPN boards as Mario Migelini by the facist douches who are in charge of policing Facebook posts. Fortunately, others are still trolling. Or at least I think so. Facebook friend Luke T. found a couple of posts worth checking out. See them on the NFL Trolling pages.
NEW ENGLAND OFFENSE: When will enough be enough? Apparently losing Rob Gronkowski was the camel that broke the straw's back, to quote a Hall of Fame running back. Poor straw.
The Patriots struggled offensively against a Philadelphia defense that had been torched in consecutive weeks by the Buccaneers and Lions. This wasn't a surprise, as Tom Brady has poor protection and barely anyone to throw to. Danny Amendola is his best option, yet he struggles with drops. Scott Chandler and Brandon LaFell are sub-par talents. Keshawn Martin couldn't even see much action with the Texans. The blocking, meanwhile, doesn't stand a chance against J.J. Watt and the Texans, who have done a great job of pressuring opposing quarterbacks recently.
I'm sure New England would love to establish the run to keep the heat off Brady, but that hasn't worked lately. LeGarrette Blount sucks now that the opposition can actually pay attention to him. The Texans had done a great job of limiting ground attacks prior to battling LeSean McCoy. They had issues with McCoy, but it's safe to say that Blount is definitely a downgrade from the Buffalo runner.
HOUSTON OFFENSE: The Patriots also have endured issues on defense. Thanks to injuries to their linebackers, especially Dont'a Hightower, they haven't been able to stop runs to the outside. That would explain why Chip Kelly used Darren Sproles over DeMarco Murray. The Texans have been rushing the ball well lately, so I have to imagine that they'll be able to take advantage of this liability.
Of course, the Patriots will also have to deal with DeAndre Hopkins. Bill Belichick usually is able to erase the best aspect of the opposing team's scoring attack, but putting the clamps on Hopkins, especially with a secondary that hasn't handled top receivers well, is a very tall order.
I think it also should be noted that Bill O'Brien has knowledge of New England's schemes, having coached there before. Granted, it's been a while, but I'm sure he, as well as Brian Hoyer, aware of the tendencies of that coaching staff.
RECAP: "Pats by three? Gronk and Edelman are out, but they can beat the Texans!" That's seemingly everyone's mentality concerning this game, as nearly 90 percent of the action is on the Patriots. It's as if New England is completely healthy and doesn't happen to be troubled at all.
The Patriots, with a healthy Gronkowski and a better offensive line, would be able to dispatch the Texans quite easily. Unfortunately for them, they're hurting everywhere. The line can't block and the receivers can't catch. Meanwhile, other negative aspects of the roster are being exposed, including the special teams.
I'm picking the Texans to cover this spread, though it won't be for any units. I may have sounded confident thus far, but I'm really not. In a near-pick 'em game, it's difficult to doubt Belichick and Brady, especially coming off two losses.
WEDNESDAY THOUGHTS: Everyone and their evil stepsisters are pounding the Patriots, yet the spread isn't moving up. Hmm...
SUNDAY NOTES: Rob Gronkowski will play, so I'm wondering if this spread will rise to -6. I think I'd take +6 for a unit or two. Check back before the game or follow me @walterfootball.
FINAL THOUGHTS: Sharps on the Texans, public on the Patriots. This spread is +6 -105 on Bovada, so I'll take a shot for one unit with that. I'm aware that Rob Gronkowski is supposedly playing, but it doesn't make much sense to me. Why risk him, especially since a bye week is all but guaranteed, given that the Broncos and Bengals play soon? Maybe I'm wrong, but I think Gronkowski could be severely limited or completely absent. If so, we're getting a great number with the Texans that I just can't turn down.
The Psychology. Edge: None.
No edge found.
The Vegas. Edge: Texans.
The public is pounding the Patriots.
Percentage of money on New England: 81% (86,000 bets)
The Trends. Edge: Patriots.
Tom Brady is 184-61 as a starter (138-102 ATS).
Tom Brady is 15-11 ATS on Sunday Night Football.
Tom Brady is 33-15 ATS off a loss (5-8 ATS as -7 or more).
Tom Brady is 25-11 ATS off a loss since 2003 (5-7 ATS as -7 or more).
Opening Line: Patriots -3.5.
Opening Total: 44.5.
Week 14 NFL Pick: Patriots 24, Texans 23
Texans +6 -105 (1 Unit) -- Incorrect; -$105
Over 45.5 (0 Units) -- Incorrect; $0
Patriots 27, Texans 6
New York Giants (5-7) at Miami Dolphins (4-8)
Line: Giants by 1. Total: 47.
Las Vegas Hilton Advance Point Spread: Pick.
Walt's Calculated Line: Giants -3.5.
Monday, Dec 14, 8:30 ET
Comment on this game
The Game. Edge: Giants.
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 Miami, home of the Dolphins. Tonight, the New York Giants take on the Miami Marlins. Guys, this would be the worst Monday night game I've ever broadcasted if it wasn't for Ravens-Browns. Why are we at ESPN getting such terrible games? An announcer of my caliber should be getting all the best games. Like Al Michaels, who can flex whichever games he wants. I hate that a**hole. He once said something about my Philadelphia Eagles, and I've considered him a trader ever since.
Herm: YOU DON'T MEAN TRADER! YOU MEAN TRAITOR! DIDN'T MEAN TO SAY TRADER! MEANT TO SAY TRAITOR! A MISTAKE TO SAY TRAITOR! I MEAN A MISTAKE TO SAY TRADER! HAD TO SAY TRAITOR INSTEAD! SHOULD HAVE SAID TRAITOR INSTEAD! MUST HAVE SAID TRAITOR INSTEAD! THE WORD IS TRAITOR! NOT TRADER! TRADER IS SOMEONE WHO TRADES! TRAITOR IS SOMEHOW WHO TRAITS! TRAITS NOT THE SAME AS TRADES! TRADES NOT THE SAME AS TRAITS! THEY'RE DIFFERENT! THEY'RE NOT THE SAME! THEY MEAN VARIOUS THINGS! THEY DON'T MEAN THE SAME THINGS! THEY DON'T MEAN IDENTICAL THINGS! TRADES IS TO MAKE A SWAP! TRADES IS TO MAKE A DEAL! THAT'S NOT WHAT TRAITS MEANS! TRAITS IS A CHARACTERISTIC! TRAITS IS SOMETHING THAT DESCRIBES! SO A TRADER IS SOMEONE WHO SWAPS! AND TRAITOR IS SOMEONE WHO DESCRIBES! WAIT, THAT DOESN'T MAKE ANY SENSE! HERM MESSED UP SOMEHOW! HOW DID HERM MESS UP!? DOES ANYONE KNOW HOW HERM MESSED UP!? CAN ANYONE TELL HERM HOW HERM SCREWED UP!?HERM'S GONNA TRY TO FIGURE OUT HOW HE SCREWED UP! GONNA GO OVER HIS STEPS! GOTTA REVIEW THE STEPS! GOTTA LOOK... steps... uhh... umm...
Reilly: I know the difference between traitor and trader, you dick! God damn it, I hate you so much, Herm. Almost as much as I hate this game. Does anyone know why we're even doing this?
Tollefson: I know why, Kevin. It was all that Bill Simmons guy's fault. Bill Simmons had to open his stupid mouth and criticize Roger Goodell for the Ray Rice thing, and now ESPN is being penalized. Simmons is narrow-minded as far as I'm concerned. How could he criticize Rice for hitting his girlfriend in an elevator? If there's any criticism, it's that he didn't punch her multiple times. Sometimes a man needs to tell a woman who's boss if she refuses to cook and clean naked for him.
Reilly: Calm down, Tolly, the only reason to hit a woman is if she's a VaGiants or Cowgirls fan. Anyone who roots against my Philadelphia Eagles deserves to get knocked out. But I never heard of this Bill Simmons guy.
Emmitt: Mike, or... uhh... Rocket, Bill Simmons is a former basketball player in the MBA who write the book about basketball. The book real interesting. I look at all the picture. The book about where basketball comed from and who invention basketball and what material baskeball made out of. I learn from the book that basketball made from alligator.
Wolfley: YOU KNOW WHAT ELSE IS MADE OUT OF ALLIGATOR? ODELL BECKHAM'S SCROTUM. THE MAN HAS ALLIGATOR TESTICLES THAT ARE OUT OF THIS WORLD. I BET HIS ALLIGATOR TESTICLES EAT LIVE FISH FOR BREAKFAST.
Millen: Do not listen to this man! I repeat, do not listen to this man! I asked Odell Beckham Jr. if he wanted to stuff some kielbasas into backsides with me last night. He declined, which brought tears to my eyes. I did not have any 100-percent USDA Men lined up last night, so I snuck into Odell's hotel room when he was asleep last night, and I took pictures of his backside and scrotum. I can 100-percent confirm that he does not have alligator testicles. This is all propaganda, sir, and I'm ashamed of you. If you want to talk about someone who has alligator scrotum, let's discuss Bill Simmons. My pictures of his testicles reveal that he does, in fact, have alligator scrotum.
Reilly: The hell? How did we get on this subject? We were discussing how crappy this game is!
Charles Davis: Sounds like you want to discuss subjects, Kevin. Let's do that, Kevin. Let's talk bout all the subjects in school, Kevin. There's math, Kevin. That's one of the primary subjects, Kevin. How about science, Kevin? That sounds like a subject to me, Kevin. What about English, Kevin? Totally a subject, Kevin. How about gym, Kevin? May not sound like a subject, but that's definitely a subject, Kevin. One-hundred percent, Kevin. No doubt about it, Kevin. How about one more subject, Kevin? I'll give you three choices, and you tell me which one's the school subject, Kevin. First option? Pineapple, Kevin. Second option? History, Kevin. Third option? Megaphones, Kevin. Oh, you think megaphones is the correct answer, Kevin? Wrong answer, Kevin. Answer's history, Kevin. Can't believe you thought megaphone was a subject in school, Kevin!
Reilly: I NEVER SAID MEGAPHONE WAS A SUBJECT IN...
Fouts: I have to disagree with you, Charles Davis. Here's what my junior schedule looked like in high school. My first period, which was the first period, as in the first one, was math. This meant we had to add numbers. Sometimes subtract, too. Second period was chemistry. There were potions involved. Third period was pineapple class. We learned about pineapples in that class, and we sometimes ate them. Fourth period was lunch. We learned about lunch in that class, and sometimes we ate our lunch. After lunch class, we had chemistry again. More potions. And our final period was megaphone class. We shouted into megaphones the entire time, and sometimes we ate them. So, as you can see, Charles Davis, looks like Kevin was right after all.
Reilly: HA, I KNEW IT! F*** YOU, AND YOUR STUPID QUIZZES, CHARLES DAVIS! I'M GOING TO PULL A MILLEN AND SHOVE A MEGAPHONE UP YOUR A**! We'll be back right after this!
NEW YORK OFFENSE: The Giants have struggled offensively the past two weeks because of issues on their offensive line. They got some blockers back last week, so they were more effective than they were against the Redskins, but they still were stagnant at times. I imagine they'll be even more productive in this contest, based on the matchup.
Miami's pass rush has been lacking ever since the team lost Cameron Wake in a Thursday night game against the Patriots. It still has Ndamukong Suh and Olivier Vernon, but Wake was such a crucial piece of that defensive line, especially considering that the secondary is in shambles.
The Dolphins' defensive backfield is the primary reason why I think Eli Manning could have a tremendous game. They just don't have the personnel to slow down Odell Beckham Jr. I guess you could say that about most teams, but Miami's secondary is especially brutal. Outside of Reshad Jones, the team has nothing. Brent Grimes is the top corner, yet he has struggled immensely this year.
MIAMI OFFENSE: It seems like the Giants match up well with the Dolphins on this side of the ball, too. The Giants have a lackluster pass rush, but they might be able to put heat on Ryan Tannehill as a result of how poor Miami's offensive line is. Only a handful of teams have surrendered more sacks, thanks to all of the injuries the Dolphins have incurred up front.
Tannehill struggles with pressure, so even though he has a matchup against a poor secondary, I don't think he'll be able to take advantage of it. Tannehill had a dream battle against the Ravens last week, yet he performed pretty woefully, despite the emergence of DeVante Parker.
Aside from Matt Schaub's fluky pick-six, the reason the Dolphins beat the Ravens was because Lamar Miller ran well, as they showed a greater effort to establish him under the new offensive coordinator. The Giants are somewhat decent versus the rush, so they should be able to keep Miller in check for the most part.
RECAP: I'm trying not to go with so many public sides anymore, but this is an exception. This game appears to have been mispriced, as the Giants should be field-goal favorites at the very least.
The Giants might be one of the best 5-7 teams in league history. They're the unluckiest for sure. They easily could've won every single game they've lost, with the exception of the Monday night game against the Eagles in which Beckham aggravated an injury. If they had won some of the games in which they sustained fluky losses, what would this spread be? Giants by -3, -3.5 or -4? Quite possibly.
The Dolphins, on the other hand, are dreadful. They nearly lost to Matt Schaub. Ryan Tannehill sucks, while both lines haven't been the same since they've sustained injuries. They happen to match up poorly against New York, as referenced earlier.
I'm taking the Giants for four units. My only concern here is the amount of public money coming in on the Giants, but it's not like the sharps have been taking the Dolphins. And I don't see why they would, given how dreadful Miami's homefield "advantage" is. This number is just way too short.
WEDNESDAY THOUGHTS: I'm thinking of breaking a fake story so that the public stops betting the Giants. What's better: Eli Manning won't be able to play because of a vag infection, or Tom Coughlin face getting so red that it finally explodes?
SUNDAY NOTES: This spread keeps rising. The public is on the Giants, but the sharps aren't taking the Dolphins. That could change Monday though.
FINAL THOUGHTS: I've been asked if I'm concerned about the public money on the Giants. I am. I was also concerned about the spread moving in Miami's direction, but not nearly as much. The movement seemed very artificial, as going from -2.5 to +1 was meaningless. I thought it was the sharps messing with the contrarians/shraps, and surely enough, this spread has moved back in New York's direction.
I believe the Giants are the right side. They're the better team, and Miami has a homefield disadvantage. This line is too low as well. Think about it: The Giants would be 9-3 if their games were 75 seconds shorter. Even if they were 7-5, they'd be -3 at the very least. Thus, we're getting some value with the superior squad, so that sounds good to me.
The Psychology. Edge: Giants.
A must-win for the Giants.
The Vegas. Edge: Dolphins.
Lots of money coming in on the Giants.
Percentage of money on New York: 79% (45,000 bets)
The Trends. Edge: Giants.
Giants are 44-26 ATS on the road since 2006 as long as they're not favored by 3.5 or more.
Eli Manning is 36-25 ATS as an underdog since 2007. ???
Underdog is 64-35 ATS in the Dolphins' last 99 games.
Dolphins are 10-30 ATS at home against teams with losing records since 2003.
Opening Line: Pick.
Opening Total: 47.5.
Week 14 NFL Pick: Giants 27, Dolphins 13
Giants -1 (4 Units) -- Correct; +$400
Under 47 (0 Units) -- Incorrect; $0
Giants 31, Dolphins 24
Week 14 NFL Picks - Early Games
Minnesota at Arizona,
Buffalo at Philadelphia,
San Francisco at Cleveland,
Detroit at St. Louis,
New Orleans at Tampa Bay,
Tennessee at New York Jets,
Pittsburgh at Cincinnati,
Seattle at Baltimore,
Indianapolis at Jacksonville,
San Diego at Kansas City,
Washington at Chicago,
Atlanta at Carolina
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: Steelers +8.5, Panthers -2 (1 Unit) -- Correct; +$100
The thinking here is that we're getting both teams through two key numbers. The Steelers go through +3 and +7, while Carolina goes through -7 and -3.
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)