NFL Picks (Preseason 2016):
NFL Picks (Week 1, 2016):
NFL Picks (2016):
25-10-1 (+$3,025) NFL Picks (2015):
133-138-10 (-$2,360) 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. 19, 5:50 p.m. ET. Follow @walterfootball
Go to Week 2 NFL Picks - Early Games
Tampa Bay Buccaneers (1-0) at Arizona Cardinals (0-1)
Line: Cardinals by 7. Total: 50.
Las Vegas Hilton Advance Point Spread:
Walt's Calculated Line:
Sunday, Sept. 18, 4:05 PM
Comment on this game
The Game. Edge: None.
THE ADVENTURES OF TOM BRADY'S HAIRCUTS
I've been citing that Tom Brady has lost his "clutch" ability over the past few years, but I guess I can't do that any longer because he recently won his fourth Super Bowl. Or, can I...? Brady, after all, reached the "Big Game" with the help of his deflated footballs.
Brady was stuck on three Super Bowls for a long time before he resorted to cheating. So, what happened? The obvious answer is his wife. But more specifically, it's the haircuts that his wife forces him into getting. It's unknown to the media, but Brady's haircuts are much more than just silly fashion statements; each haircut gives Brady a new persona or tells a new story. Including this one...
To see the story behind this one, check out the new Adventures of Tom Brady's Haircuts
TAMPA BAY OFFENSE:
I saw some fantasy football publications recommending Jameis Winston owners to unload their quarterback for value in the wake of his four-touchdown performance at Atlanta. I couldn't disagree with that more. In fact, I think there's a decent chance Winston will duplicate that touchdown count in this contest, or at least come very close.
Winston is evolving into one of the best quarterbacks in the NFL. He has the talent and intelligence, and his work ethic from this summer is definitely paying off. Mike Evans is trying just as hard, attempting to make amends for his drop-plagued 2015 campaign, and it's showing as well. However, it's not all about Winston, as the Cardinals are not as good defensively as everyone makes them out to be. They have an absolutely huge liability at cornerback across from Patrick Peterson in Brandon Williams. I also wasn't impressed with Tyrann Mathieu last week, as he looked very ordinary coming off his injury.
Winston should have enough time in the pocket, as I like his tackles to protect him against Chandler Jones and Markus Golden, and this will allow him to exploit Arizona's liabilities. Doug Martin could have a decent game as well. I wouldn't expect him to go wild or anything, but LeGarrette Blount picked up 70 rushing yards, and Martin is infinitely more talented.
The Cardinals' secondary issues aren't their only concerns, as Carson Palmer doesn't appear to be himself. Palmer was woeful in the preseason, and while he was a bit better in the opener, he still nearly threw four interceptions. Larry Fitzgerald bailed him out with some amazing catches. While I expect that to happen again, I think that Arizona once again won't be consistent on this side of the ball.
Another problem here is Evan Mathis' health. Mathis left Sunday night's game early when he was carted off, and he's undergoing an MRI on his foot. If he misses action or isn't 100 percent in his return, that'll be a huge problem, given that Gerald McCoy happens to be on the other side of the line of scrimmage. McCoy dominated the trenches last week, and I'd expect something similar from him if Mathis is absent or less than completely healthy.
The Cardinals will still score some points via Fitzgerald and David Johnson, who is too good not to have a great game in this matchup. The Buccaneers restricted the Atlanta rushers last week to just 2.2 yards per carry, but Johnson is a completely different animal.
This is my top pick this week. I love the Buccaneers, though I wish we were getting +8.5 like we were on the advanced line. I might have had to make this a bonus NFL Pick of the Month under those circumstances!
The Buccaneers, as I've mentioned, are criminally underrated. They outgained 13 of their 16 opponents last year in terms of yards per play, but lost some contests because of horrible luck. That was to be expected given how young they are, but Winston and Evans are now more experienced, and I expect them to reach the playoffs and even win the NFC South.
My personal spread for this game is -3, and that might even be too high. While the Buccaneers are underrated, the Cardinals are overrated. Palmer is not the same passer, and the defense has taken a step backward. I have these teams right next to each other in my NFL Power Rankings
, and so I'm loving the value we're getting at +6.5.
I still love the Buccaneers, and there's some sharp action on them. The good news is that some +7s have appeared, and I will gladly lock in my wager.
Tampa is still my top play, but I'm upset that the sharps haven't taken them (they're not on Arizona either.) Perhaps that wull change Sunday mornig.
This is one pick I locked in too early because the Buccaneers are +7 -105 at Bovada. I'm disappointed the sharps haven't taken Tampa, but they haven't been betting on Arizona either.
The Psychology. Edge: None.
No edge found.
The Vegas. Edge: None.
Percentage of money on Arizona: 58% (25,000 bets)
The Trends. Edge: Buccaneers.
Road Team is 65-40 ATS in Buccaneers games since 2009.
Bruce Arians is 31-20 ATS as head coach of the Cardinals.
Opening Line: Cardinals -7.
Opening Total: 49.5.
Week 2 NFL Pick: Buccaneers 24, Cardinals 23
Buccaneers +7 (5 Units) -- Incorrect; -$550
Under 50 (0 Units) -- Correct; $0
Cardinals 40, Buccaneers 7
Seattle Seahawks (1-0) at Los Angeles Rams (0-1)
Line: Seahawks by 6. Total: 38.
Las Vegas Hilton Advance Point Spread: Seahawks -4.5.
Walt's Calculated Line: Seahawks -1.
Sunday, Sept. 18, 4:05 PM
Comment on this game
The Game. Edge: Seahawks.
If you're unaware of this, you can publish your own articles on this Web site and have them promoted via Twitter, Facebook and this page! Check out our Open Rant feature, where articles get promoted all the time. Some readers' articles have gotten more than 3,000 views, so if you want to get your opinion heard, here's a great way for you to do so!
Some recent Open Rant articles:
Objective Take on the Colin Kaepernick Controversy
DFS Wide Receiver Value Picks: Week 2
DFS Tight End Value Picks: Week 2
DFS Quarterback Value Picks: Week 2
If you want to create NFL Mock Drafts and NBA Mock Drafts, we have you covered as well. Check out the Mock Draft Builder. Some mocks on here have gotten more than 6,000 views!
Some featured NFL Mock Drafts in the MDB:
SwaggyPeter's Mock Draft
CTAwesome's Mock Draft
Mock Draft Man's Mock Draft
SEATTLE OFFENSE: There's currently no line posted on this game because of Russell Wilson's situation. Wilson is currently considered to be likely to play, so the lack of a point spread is frustrating, to say the least.
Wilson, of course, sustained a sprained ankle against the Dolphins in Week 1. He remained in the game, but wasn't nearly as effective because he lost his mobility. He was still able to lead the Seahawks down the field for a game-winning touchdown to preserve everyone's Survivor Pool entry, but his inability to maneuver the pocket made him less effective. Wilson's ability to shift around is part of what makes him so great, so his current condition presents a problem.
An even greater issue is Seattle's offensive line. The unit was overwhelmed against Miami, and the same thing will happen against the Rams, who undoubtedly will be extremely furious about being embarrassed on national TV. Los Angeles' defensive front is still one of the best in the business, and it'll dominate the trenches, making life very unpleasant for the hobbled Wilson and his running backs.
LOS ANGELES OFFENSE: Ehh... well... I don't know if we can exactly call this an "offense," except that it was offensive to those who watched the late Monday night game. Between the Rams' incompetence and Chris Berman multiple blunders, I felt like I was dying a slow, painful death.
The one silver lining is that the Rams can't possibly be worse, and I don't think they will be despite having to battle the Seahawks. I believe Los Angeles will be able to score some points for a change. Todd Gurley is a beast, and Case Keenum wasn't completely incompetent last year. I just think the Rams looked a lot worse than they really are because like the Vikings last year, they were sleepwalking through a late game on a Monday night against an opponent that was way more amped for the contest.
Despite the tough matchup, I expect Gurley to run well, setting up some easier throws for Keenum. The Seahawks stopped the run well versus the Dolphins, but Gurley had some strong performances against good rush defenses in 2015, and I don't see why that would suddenly change.
RECAP: There's no line on this game, so I can't give out an official pick. However, I'm thinking that this will either be a three- or four-unit selection on the Rams. Everyone is focused on how horrible Los Angeles was in the opener, but I expect the team to perform better after being so thoroughly embarrassed on national TV. Meanwhile, no one is paying attention to the Seahawks. Their offensive line is a mess, and Wilson is injured. I don't see them producing much offense either.
This is going to be a low-scoring game, so I'm hoping to get the Rams at +6 or so. That's worth three or four units to me. It's just way too much value, as the advanced spread on this game was +4.5, which I thought was high to begin with.
I'll have an official pick posted when a line is available. Check back, or follow @walterfootball for updates.
THURSDAY THOUGHTS: The spread has been released, and it's +6.5! That's kind of nuts. It's way too high, as the Seahawks are too offensively limited. This is a four-unit play for me, as the Rams will show that they're not nearly as bad as they looked Monday night.
SATURDAY NOTES: No surprise that there's a crap ton of professional money on the Rams. The public wants no part of Los Angeles after its misleading showing on Week 1. Casual bettors also haven't caught on to the fact that the Seahawks are not nearly the same team this year. They'll struggle to cover the spread until they fix their offensive line issues.
SUNDAY MORNING LOCKED-IN: This spread is falling. It's +5 in most places, so I'll grab the +6 -115 at Bovada and lock it in.
FINAL THOUGHTS: It turns out that locking this pick in wasn't necessary, as the public bet the Seahawks so heavily at -5.5 that it bounced back up to -6 in most places. Not at Pinnacle though; the sharpest book on the Web still has -5.5 listed.
The Psychology. Edge: Rams.
The Rams are going to be pissed about being embarrassed on national TV.
The Vegas. Edge: Rams.
The public is all over the Seahawks.
Percentage of money on Seattle: 72% (25,000 bets)
The Trends. Edge: Rams.
History: Seahawks have won 17 of the last 22 meetings (Home Team won 4 of last 5).
Seahawks are 29-39 ATS on the road since 2006 if they're not coming off an away loss.
Jeff Fisher is 51-36 ATS as an underdog since 2006.
Opening Line: Seahawks -6.5.
Opening Total: 40.5.
Week 2 NFL Pick: Seahawks 13, Rams 12
Rams +6 -115 (4 Units) -- Correct; +$400
Under 38 (0 Units) -- Correct; $0
Rams 9, Seahwks 3
Indianapolis Colts (0-1) at Denver Broncos (1-0)
Line: Broncos by 6.5. Total: 46.5.
Las Vegas Hilton Advance Point Spread: Broncos -3.5.
Walt's Calculated Line: Broncos -4.
Sunday, Sept. 18, 4:25 PM
Comment on this game
The Game. Edge: Broncos.
This is a reminder to make your pick for the WalterFootball.com 2016 NFL Survivor Pool if you're still alive! We had 2,430 entries to start, and we're now down to 2,019 because of Cardinals and Rams, who had a combined 204 picks. Of course, the Seahawks had 978 selections, so nearly half the field would've lost had Miami prevailed!
Also, check out our Fantasy Football Who to Start Weekly Rankings for weekly fantasy start-sit advice.
DENVER OFFENSE: So much for the Broncos being terrible without Peyton Manning. Of course, anyone who paid close attention to Manning last year knew that wasn't going to be the case. Manning was horrible, and he was actually statistically worse than Mark Sanchez. Trevor Siemian beat out Sanchez quite easily in training camp and preseason, so logic dictated that Denver was going to be fine. That proved to be true last Thursday, as Siemian managed the game well, throwing some accurate passes and running around for first downs. He looked like a poor man's Alex Smith.
Of course, C.J. Anderson was the primary reason for Denver's offensive success, and he has an even easier matchup this week. Detroit's two running backs made the Colts look silly, as Indianapolis' injury-ravaged defense had no chance to contain them. The Colts' linebackers were extremely slow, while the defensive line was missing some key pieces. If the Broncos maintain a lead and stick with running the ball, Anderson could approach 200 rushing yards in this contest.
The Colts' defensive problems don't stop there, however. Their secondary is ravaged by injuries. Vontae Davis, their best defender, was already out, and other defensive backs left the game last week. Indianapolis had no chance of stopping Matthew Stafford as a result. Siemian obviously isn't as good, but he'll be able to move the chains effectively, even if the banged-up Demaryius Thomas isn't anywhere near 100 percent.
INDIANAPOLIS OFFENSE: The Colts have some issues on this side of the ball as well, or at least that's what I thought heading into Week 1. I didn't think the offensive line would be able to hold up against Detroit's defensive front, but it did for the most part. Andrew Luck enjoyed a mostly clean pocket throughout the afternoon. That, unfortunately, will probably not be the case in this contest.
The Broncos, of course, possess one of the top pass-rushing tandems in the NFL in Von Miller and DeMarcus Ware. Derek Wolfe is also a force in the interior. They should be able to dominate the line of scrimmage and place immense pressure on Luck. I wouldn't expect Frank Gore to see much running room either, though Adam Gotsis is an immense downgrade from Malik Jackson thus far.
Having said that, I think the Colts will be able to move the chains on occasion early on and perhaps extremely well in what could be considered garbage time. If the Broncos are up by a couple of scores, Luck should be able to pick up chunks of yardage versus a secondary that didn't perform particularly well in the season opener. Luck has lots of weapons at his disposal, so it'll be difficult to keep him off the scoreboard, regardless of the pressure Denver will be able to apply.
RECAP: This spread was -3.5 a week ago. Now, it's -6? What gives? I thought Broncos -3.5 was a bit short of what it should've been (-4 is my best guess), so what's up with the line movement? I guess the public believes that betting Siemian is OK now, but Denver is still too offensively limited to be laying six versus a competent opponent. The Colts stink defensively, but they'll still be able to score a healthy amount as long as Luck is healthy, and even if Denver is up 10-17 points in the third quarter, the opportunity for Luck to roar back and achieve a back-door score - like he did at Denver a couple of years ago - is a real possibility.
This line is too high, and the Broncos have had nine days off to hear about how great they are for slaying the 15-1 Panthers once again. I think there's a chance they might overlook the Colts after seeing them lose to what the public perceives to be a bad Detroit team. Luck should be able to keep the Colts close, so I like the visitor for three units.
THURSDAY THOUGHTS: This spread has risen to -6.5 despite Demaryius Thomas and Derek Wolfe being banged up. There's some concern with T.Y. Hilton as well, however, although it's not clear if he'll miss this game. I'm sticking with three units on the Colts for now.
SATURDAY NOTES: The pros are betting the Colts, though not at a very high rate. The injuries Indianapolis has sustained in it secondary are an issue, but the Broncos are laying too many points, as Trevor Siemian can't be counted on to cover a high number like this. The back door will be wide open for Andrew Luck.
FINAL THOUGHTS: I was hoping some +7s would appear, but that is not the case. It's +6.5 pretty much everywhere, as I'm sure the books are scared of pro money coming in on +7.
The Psychology. Edge: None.
No edge found.
The Vegas. Edge: None.
Percentage of money on Denver: 52% (28,000 bets)
The Trends. Edge: Colts.
Andrew Luck is 15-4 ATS off a loss.
Opening Line: Broncos -5.5.
Opening Total: 44.
Week 2 NFL Pick: Broncos 24, Colts 23
Colts +6.5 (3 Units) -- Incorrect; -$330
Over 46.5 (0 Units) -- Correct; $0
Broncos 34, Colts 20
Atlanta Falcons (0-1) at Oakland Raiders (1-0)
Line: Raiders by 5. Total: 47.5.
Las Vegas Hilton Advance Point Spread: Raiders -5.5.
Walt's Calculated Line: Raiders -4.5.
Sunday, Sept. 18, 4:25 PM
Comment on this game
The Game. Edge: Raiders.
Emmitt on the Brink is back for Season 9! Season 8 saw Emmitt going to North Korea to stop Kim Jong-un from destroying the world. It featured a mind-blowing twist at the very end that you absolutely need to check out if you haven't already.
Season 9 will deal with election stuff, and it begins with something strange happening to Emmitt while he's stuck in traffic at a protest rally. Check out the Emmitt on the Brink page to read all about it!
ATLANTA OFFENSE: I feel like the matchup on this side of the ball is packed with disappointments. The Falcons continued to struggle in the red zone despite signing Alex Mack and drafting Austin Hooper. Devonta Freeman picked up where he left off at the end of last season in terms of gaining no yardage on any of his carries. The Raiders, meanwhile, provided no pass rush outside of Khalil Mack last week against what isn't a very good New Orleans offensive line. And, perhaps most egregious of all, high-prized free agent Sean Smith was so atrocious that he was benched.
Assuming the Raiders' pass rush and Smith don't suddenly improve, the Falcons should be able to move the chains in between the 20s. Matt Ryan is still decent, and Julio Jones is terrific. However, the concern is what will happen once the Falcons reach the red zone. There's no reason to think that they won't once again bog down where it matters most.
I wouldn't expect Freeman to pick up the slack either. I just think his early-season performances in 2015 were a mirage, and the Falcons should think about using Tevin Coleman more often.
OAKLAND OFFENSE: The Raiders posted 35 points in Week 1, as Derek Carr lit up the Saints' secondary. That, however, was not difficult to do, especially with Delvin Breaux going down with an injury. I actually think that despite all the numbers, there were enough flaws in Oakland's scoring attack to make me worried. For example, Carr made some poor throws, including some on his game-winning drive, only to be bailed out by a bad pass interference call. The right tackle situation, meanwhile, is worrisome. Thanks to injuries, Donald Penn had to slide over, forcing guard Kelechi Osemele to kick out to the blind spot. It was not a pretty sight.
It didn't end up mattering much for the Raiders, given that they were battling one of the two worst defenses in the NFL (Colts). Fortunately for them, the Falcons are almost as bad. They have some talented players in Desmond Trufant, Brooks Reed and Keanu Neal, but the latter is out and Reed is questionable with a shoulder injury. Assuming he avoids mistakes, Carr figures to have another big game, perhaps even matching Jameis Winston's four touchdowns from a week ago.
I can't imagine the Falcons offering up much resistance on defense. Considering the injuries, poor run defense and lacking pass rush, this seems to be an easy matchup for the Raiders on this side of the ball.
RECAP: There sure are a lot of games this week where good quarterbacks are getting a healthy amount of points. That's the case here. I could see a situation similar to last week where the Falcons are trailing anywhere between 14 and 21 points, and then Ryan comes back and manages to trim the lead to within one score. The back door will be open here, so be careful if betting the Raiders. I'm taking the Falcons, albeit for zero units, as Oakland's troublesome defense seems like it would be quite accommodating in terms of allowing some late, meaningless scores.
THURSDAY THOUGHTS: This game could go either way, as I have no read on it. The sharps haven't touched this either.
SATURDAY NOTES: The sharps still haven't taken a side here, which is hardly a surprise. This line appears to be right where it should be, as there are some concerns with the Raiders after they nearly lost to a bad Saints team.
FINAL THOUGHTS: The pros have pounced on the Falcons, taking this line to +4. You can still get Atlanta at +5 on Bovada. I don't want to bet this game, though, as there's not enough line value for me.
The Psychology. Edge: Falcons.
The Raiders had a very emotional, last-minute win.
The Vegas. Edge: Falcons.
A decent lean on the Raiders.
Percentage of money on Oakland: 66% (10,000 bets)
The Trends. Edge: Falcons.
Falcons are 21-10 ATS following a loss of 6+ in the previous 31 instances.
Raiders are 9-31 ATS at home vs. teams with losing records.
Raiders are 12-25 ATS after a win since 2009.
Raiders are 5-21 ATS as home favorites since November 2005.
Opening Line: Raiders -4.
Opening Total: 47.
Week 2 NFL Pick: Raiders 31, Falcons 27
Falcons +5 (0 Units) -- Correct; $0
Over 47.5 (0 Units) -- Correct; $0
Falcons 35, Raiders 28
Jacksonville Jaguars (0-1) at San Diego Chargers (0-1)
Line: Chargers by 3. Total: 47.5.
Las Vegas Hilton Advance Point Spread: Chargers -3.
Walt's Calculated Line: Chargers -1.5.
Sunday, Sept. 18, 4:25 PM
Comment on this game
The Game. Edge: None.
A reminder that Jerks of the Week for this week is up, so just click the link. This week's jerks entry is the Tale of the Three Foreigners.
SAN DIEGO OFFENSE: Poor Chargers. Can they just get one healthy season? Their offense took a huge blow last week when Keenan Allen was lost to a torn ACL at the end of the second quarter. As a result, their 24-3 lead quickly evaporated, allowing the Chiefs to mount a comeback to ultimately prevail in overtime. The only silver lining is that San Diego managed to preserve the cover for my September NFL Pick of the Month.
I don't think the Chargers have a shot at making the playoffs now, but I don't think their offense will be completely defunct. I've always said that the hardest thing football coaching staffs have to do is alter the game plan for an injured player during an actual contest. The Chargers didn't have time to adjust for Allen's absence, and they were buried as a consequence. They'll have all week to adjust.
Helping matters are the injuries the Jaguars have incurred in their secondary. Prince Amukamara made some great plays against the Packers, but is currently dealing with a hamstring. First-round rookie Jalen Ramsey is bothered by his ankle. Even if they play, they may not be 100 percent, which will help San Diego's situation.
What the Chargers really need to do is establish the run and stick with it; not abandon it completely in the second half despite owning a three-touchdown lead. Melvin Gordon looked great in the opening half, so I have no idea what Mike McCoy was thinking. The Jaguars' run defense didn't appear to be overly imposing last week, so I think Gordon could have a solid showing if he actually gets the ball in his hands.
JACKSONVILLE OFFENSE: San Diego's biggest problem, despite Allen's injury, could be keeping the Jaguars from scoring. The defense was atrocious in the second half, as it had no answer for Spencer Ware, who looked like a bull against them. T.J. Yeldon is a talented back who should be able to piece together a solid game after struggling last week. The Packers stop the run well, but San Diego has no answer for the rush, apparently.
The Chargers do have some solid players on this side of the ball, however, namely Corey Liuget and the three cornerbacks. Perhaps this will bode well for containing Jacksonville's lethal aerial attack. Liuget should be able to dominate the trenches against inept tackle-turned-guard Luke Joeckel, which should force Blake Bortles into some bad throws. Bortles spent all last week targeting Quinten Rollins, but the Chargers don't play any weak cornerbacks.
It's difficult to stop Bortles throwing to Allen Robinson and Allen Hurns unless the officials are involved - not sure why Robinson got no calls last week - but another thing going in San Diego's favor here is that Julius Thomas is banged up. The Chargers' linebackers stink, so it'll be a huge bonus for them if Thomas is out or limited by his ankle sprain.
RECAP: I'm truly amazed that the Jaguars are receiving so much public action. When's the last time that happened? The 20th century? Seriously, this is weird - although I guess it makes sense in hindsight, as everyone saw them battle the Packers closely, and everyone else witnessed the Chargers collapse without Keenan Allen.
I'm actually very torn on this game. On one hand, I could see the Jaguars covering, thanks to their amazing offense and San Diego's horrible homefield advantage, which is why my projected line for this is -1.5. On the other hand, the Chargers could still rebound, and no one is talking about Jacksonville's injuries. Those could definitely be a problem.
When in doubt, fade the public. I'll do that. I just wish we were getting value. Considering all the money on the Jaguars, why didn't the line go down to pick, or something? Does the shady line non-movement mean that San Diego is actually the right side?
THURSDAY THOUGHTS: The public continues to pound the Jaguars, yet the line hasn't moved. I'm not confident in this at all, but I think the Chargers will cover.
SATURDAY NOTES: No professional money here either way, though the public continues to be all over Jacksonville. The Jaguars have some injury concerns in their secondary, as Prince Amukamara is out and Jalen Ramsey is banged up, so Philip Rivers should be able to throw on the Jaguars despite missing Keenan Allen. With a week to bounce back from Allen's injury, I expect the Chargers to have a much better complete effort this week. Their poor homefield advantage is a problem, however.
FINAL THOUGHTS: There's no line movement here. The sharps haven't touched either side, while the public continues to bet Jacksonville. It seems as though the books are terrified of lots of San Diego money if this line were to drop to -2.5.
The Psychology. Edge: None.
No edge found.
The Vegas. Edge: Chargers.
Everyone is betting... on the Jaguars!?!?!
Percentage of money on Jacksonville: 65% (24,000 bets)
The Trends. Edge: Chargers.
Jaguars are 26-54 ATS against non-divisional opponents since 2008.
Opening Line: Chargers -3.
Opening Total: 48.
Week 2 NFL Pick: Chargers 28, Jaguars 24
Chargers -3 (0 Units) -- Correct; $0
Over 47.5 (0 Units) -- Correct; $0
Chargers 38, Jaguars 14
Green Bay Packers (1-0) at Minnesota Vikings (1-0)
Line: Packers by 1.5. Total: 43.5.
Las Vegas Hilton Advance Point Spread: Pick.
Walt's Calculated Line: Pick.
Sunday, Sept. 18, 8:30 PM
Comment on this game
The Game. Edge: Packers.
Trolling will be back this year. Unfortunately, I can't post on ESPN or NFL.com because of the racist fascist who work for Facebooks disallowed this. I was still able to post on the Seahawks' team page:
Elsewhere, the guy pretending to be Herm Edwards has been making some posts, and so many people believe it's him! Check it out:
This is setting up for some wonderful trolling.
Moving on, I posted this on the Seahawks team page as well just now, so I'm hoping it gets some responses:
MINNESOTA OFFENSE: Mike Zimmer told the media that he won't announce who his quarterback is until Sunday. It almost has to be Sam Bradford, right? Shaun Hill was pitiful in the season opener, failing to move the chains for the most part. The Vikings ended up scoring 25 points, but 13 came from two defensive touchdowns. Something tells me that Aaron Rodgers will be more careful with the football than Marcus Mariota, so it'll be up to the Vikings' offense to actually score enough to win this matchup.
That could prove to be difficult. The Packers have a strong defense, especially in terms of stopping the run. They limited the Jaguars to 1.9 yards per carry last week, which is amazing. Mike Daniels and Letroy Guion were fantastic in the trenches against Jacksonville, and there's no reason to think that they'll regress in this matchup. It's not like Adrian Peterson is coming off an amazing performance either; he was bogged down, thanks in part to the offensive line struggling and the opposition playing closer to the line of scrimmage because of Hill's presence. That's another reason Bradford needs to start.
Bradford will be able to take advantage of the problems the Packers have in their secondary. Quinten Rollins was targeted often and successfully by Blake Bortles last week, while Sam Shields was knocked out with a concussion. Shields won't be needed if Hill plays, but Bradford figures to connect with the sure-handed Stefon Diggs quite often.
GREEN BAY OFFENSE: The Packers didn't have a great showing offensively last week. They were solid, but not overly imposing as many thought they'd be against the Jaguars. Jacksonville did add some new, quality pieces to its defense this offseason, however. Still, if the Jaguars can limit the Packers a bit, the Vikings could do even better than that, given how prolific they are on this side of the ball.
That said, there's a major injury concern here, as Xavier Rhodes missed last week's game after hearing a pop in his knee. His status for this contest is unclear, which is a bad omen because the Vikings will need all hands on deck versus Aaron Rodgers and his plethora of weapons. Randall Cobb was banged up at the end of the game last week, but Jordy Nelson appears healthy, while Davante Adams made some big catches versus Jacksonville.
The Vikings will at least be able to handle the slimmer Eddie Lacy, as Linval Joseph is a force inside. This will force Rodgers into more long-yardage situations, so it'll be crucial for his stout offensive line to fend off Everson Griffen, Sharrif Floyd and Brian Robison, who are prolific at rushing the quarterback.
RECAP: I think this is a difficult game to handicap. I would've made this line pick, but going from zero to 2.5 doesn't provide much value, and all this is asking is for Rodgers to win straight up. I almost feel inclined to go with the home underdog, but I can't resist the opportunity to effectively take Rodgers to just win outright.
One quick note: I think the Vikings' new stadium might serve as a distraction in this game. I've noticed that teams have struggled in the first game in their new stadium over the years, so that might hurt Minnesota's chances. That's a small sample size, however, and it won't be enough to get me to bet on the Packers. I honestly could see this contest going either way.
THURSDAY THOUGHTS: There's tons of money on the Packers, but some of it is sharp action! No one is betting the Vikings, which is scary. I'm not going to wager on this game, but it would be difficult to bet against Aaron Rodgers to just win straight up.
SATURDAY NOTES: This is a rare instance in which both the squares and the sharps are on the same team. No one is betting the Vikings, so look for something shady to possibly happen. All Aaron Rodgers needs to do is win straight up, however, so I wouldn't recommend taking Minnesota, especially with Sharrif Floyd ruled out. Floyd missing is huge.
FINAL THOUGHTS: I mentioned that the sharps and squares were both on the Packers. That changed Sunday morning. Some professional money came in on the Vikings, but not a substantial amount. Vegas still stands to lose a ton of capital if the Packers cover. That'll keep me off Green Bay, but I wouldn't want to bet against Aaron Rodgers effectively winning the game outright. Besides, I don't really see good value with either side in this game.
The Psychology. Edge: Packers.
Will the new stadium serve as a distraction?
The Vegas. Edge: Vikings.
There's once again more money on the Packers than any other team.
Percentage of money on Green Bay: 81% (101,000 bets)
The Trends. Edge: Packers.
History: Packers have won 10 of the last 12 meetings (excluding 2013 tie).
Packers are 39-20 ATS in divisional games since 2006.
Aaron Rodgers is 70-42 ATS since 2009 (9-6 ATS as a favorite of 12+).
Aaron Rodgers is 30-21 ATS on the road as long as he's not favored by 6.5 or more points.
Opening Line: Packers -3.
Opening Total: 44.
Week 2 NFL Pick: Packers 23, Vikings 20
Packers -1.5 (0 Units) -- Incorrect; $0
Under 43.5 (0 Units) -- Correct; $0
Vikings 17, Packers 14
Philadelphia Eagles (1-0) at Chicago Bears (0-1)
Line: Bears by 3. Total: 42.5.
Las Vegas Hilton Advance Point Spread: Bears -3.
Walt's Calculated Line: Bears -3.5.
Monday, Sept. 19, 8:30 PM
Comment on this game
The Game. Edge: Bears.
This week on ESPN, we're going to have some bald dude 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 aloof people like Dan Fouts. Here's what it would sound like if these seven dudes (and some special guests) were calling this game:
Reilly: Welcome to Chicago, a s***ty town where people die every day, but no one cares to talk about it because criminals are being shot by cops! But who the hell cares about that!? MY PHILADELPHIA EAGLES ARE PLAYING AND WE ARE GOING TO MAKE DESTRUCTION OF THE CHICAGO BEARS!!! And if the Bears cheat and win, I've rigged Jay Cutler's car with explosives, so he will die a bloody death if he beats MY PHILADELPHIA EAGLES HAHAHAHAHAHAA!!!
Tollefson: What did you say, Kevin? You don't care about people getting shot by cops even though most of them were criminals? That's it! I'm unfriending you on Facebook because I have high morals! Now, if you'll excuse me, I see a pretty woman in the stands I want to kidnap and force to cook and clean naked for me.
Reilly: Wait, what? You're unfriending me on Facebook because of something I said? Isn't that kind of petty? And please don't do it! I only have six Facebook friends remaining now!
Herm: MAKE IT LESS THAN FIVE! MAKE IT FEWER THAN FIVE! FEWER IS GRAMMATICALLY CORRECT! HERM MADE A MISTAKE! HERM MADE AN ERROR! HE SAID LESS! SHOULD'VE BEEN FEWER! FEWER FOR WHEN YOU CAN COUNT THINGS! LESS WHEN YOU CAN'T! BUT MAKE IT LESS THAN FIVE! I MEAN FEWER THAN FIVE! HERM SCREWED UP AGAIN! WHY DOES HERM KEEP SCREWING UP!? MAKE IT FEWER THAN FIVE! I MEAN MAKE IT FEWER THAN SIX! HERM HAS BEEN SCREWING UP THIS ENTIRE TIME! MAKE IT FEWER THAN SIX, NOW THAT'S CORRECT! WHAT'S FEWER THAN SIX!? ONE! TWO! THREE! FOUR! FIVE! FIVE IS THE KEY! FIVE IS DEFINITELY THE KEY! FIVE IS HOW MANY FRIENDS YOU HAVE LEFT! BECAUSE HERM HAS UNFRIENDED YOU! HERM HAS REMOVED YOU FROM FRIENDS! HERM AND YOU ARE NO LONGER FRIENDS! BUT WE STILL HAVE TO WORK TOGETHER SO THAT'S KIND OF AWKWARD! HERM'S FEELING AWKWARD! HERM'S NOT FEELING QUITE RIGHT! HERM IS... uhh...
Reilly: Oh no, like I care that I'm not going to friends with you! Shut up, you douche. We're only friends on Facebook because I clicked accept by accident!
Emmitt: Mario, if I happen to have a invitation to the Facebook, I would has unfriend you as well, too. Unfortunately, my modem only 56K and he cannot connect to the American on the Line right now, and I never receive a invitation to the Facebook in the mail neither.
Wolfley: I ONCE GOT AN INVITATION TO THE FACEBOOK IN THE MAIL. I WENT TO THE LOCATION THEY SPECIFIED AND IT WAS A BUILDING THAT HAD NOTHING BUT A BOOK OF FACES. THAT REMINDS ME OF JAY CUTLER BECAUSE HE LOOKS LIKE A BOOK OF FACES. OH, AND BY THE WAY, KEVIN, I'VE UNFRIENDED YOU ON FACEBOOK, TOO.
Reilly: No, now I'm down to four friends!!!!!!
Millen: Make that three, Kevin. I don't stand for people not defending criminals getting shot. It's important that these criminals survive so that I can visit them in prison. I have a special agreement with the guards so that they let me in during shower time, so I sneak around in the showers and ram an unsuspecting criminal in the backside with my kielbasa. With less criminals in prison, my shower times won't be as fun!
Herm: FEWER CRIMINALS! NOT LESS CRIMINALS! SHOULD BE FEWER CRIMINALS! NOT LESS CRIMINALS! NOT FEWER CRIMINALS! I MEAN FEWER CRIMINALS! I MEAN LESS CRIMINALS! I MEAN FEWER CRIMINALS! I MEAN... uhh... umm...
Fouts: Don't worry, Kevin, I won't unfriend you, but only because I don't have Facebook anymore, so you're down to two friends. I've always been anti-Facebook. People ask me if I'm worried about my info being public, but I don't care about that. What I do care about is Facebook sucking me into the computer and I'd be trapped there and wouldn't be able to leave. I saw this on a documentary called South Park once. It happened to a man named Stan, who graduated from the University of Phoenix. I'd have to say that South Park is one of my favorite weekly documentaries. It's much better than North Park, which is north of South Park, as well as East Park, which is east of South Park, and West Park, which is west of South Park.
Charles Davis: We'll have to make that one friend, Kevin. Don't worry, Kevin. There are plenty of other social media opportunities, Kevin. Let's discuss them, Kevin. Let's begin with Facebook, Kevin. Already been talking about that, Kevin. Let's try something else, Kevin. How about Myspace, Kevin. Do you have a top eight, Kevin? Of course you don't, Kevin. Because you only had seven friends on Facebook, Kevin. Can't have a top eight with seven friends, Kevin. Let's try another one, Kevin. I'll quiz you on this one, Kevin. This social media platform has a blue bird as its icon, Kevin. Do you know what that is, Kevin? I'll give you 18 guesses, Kevin. Oh, you think it's Napster, Kevin? Sorry, Kevin, you forfeit all of your guesses, Kevin. That would be Twitter, Kevin!
Reilly: F**K YOU, CHARLES DAVIS! AND F**K THE REST OF YOU! I ONLY NEED ONE FRIEND ON FACEBOOK! MOTHER WILL ALWAYS BE MY FRIEND ON FACE- NOOOO MOTHER UNFRIENDED ME AHHHHHHH!!! We'll be back after this!
PHILADELPHIA OFFENSE: Carson Wentz certianly had a strong debut last week, albeit with a caveat. That caveat was his opponent, as the woeful Browns didn't place any sort of pressure on him. Wentz definitely won't have that luxury in this contest.
The Bears, contrary to popular belief, are not one of the worst teams in the NFL. They do some things well, which includes putting pressure on the quarterback. They have a stout front seven, and I don't really trust Philadelphia's front to keep Wentz clean in this contest. This also applies to the line's ability to open up holes for Ryan Mathews; the Bears limited the Texans to 3.7 yards per carry this past week, and Houston has a better rushing attack than Philadelphia possesses.
Making matters worse for Wentz, Zach Ertz is expected to be out for an extended period. That definitely hurts, though I don't think Wentz would've done much in this contest because the Bears have a pair of stellar linebackers in Danny Trevathan and Jerrell Freeman. Where the Bears are weak, however, is at cornerback. Tracy Porter won't be any sort of match for Jordan Matthews, who should be able to break free for some long gains when Wentz has some time to throw.
CHICAGO OFFENSE: Another misconception about the Bears is that Jay Cutler sucks. That's definitely not the case. Cutler gets grief for his stinky attitude, but he has performed well for the most part, dating back to the beginning of this past season. There was some concern that Cutler would take a step backward without Adam Gase, but I thought he played well at Houston. He made just one mistake, an interception that was partly Kevin White's fault. And sure, Cutler didn't cross midfield after halftime, squandering a 14-10 lead in the process, but he was battling Houston's terrific defense.
The Eagles are not nearly as strong on this side of the ball. They didn't pressure the Browns very well. That could change a bit because the Bears have a horrible couple of tackles, but they are very strong in the interior, which is where Philadelphia gets a good amount of its heat via Fletcher Cox. The Bears' guards and center should be able to make room for Jeremy Langford, who will be running against a defense that surrendered more than five yards per carry to Cleveland.
Philadelphia happens to be especially weak at cornerback, which bodes well for the Bears. They have two terrific talents at receiver in Alshon Jeffery and White, so I like them to perform well Monday night.
RECAP: There was a huge amount of sharp money placed on the Bears on Sunday night. Some books opened this at -1, and they were quickly punished for it, shifting the line to -3 as a result. It sucks we lost out on all that value, but I still like Chicago for about a unit.
There's a ton of Wentz and Eagles hype, and everyone and their mom is bashing the Bears. The public is betting Philadelphia. However, I think everyone is misevaluating these teams. I think the Bears are better than the Eagles, as they own a comparable defensive front seven, a more-experienced quarterback, and better offensive play-makers.
THURSDAY THOUGHTS: There's lots of sharp money on the Bears. In fact, outside of Cleveland, there's more professional money on Chicago this week than any other team. The sharps are not buying the Wentz hype. I like Wentz, but I'm not sure he's ready to battle a real NFL defense just yet.
SATURDAY NOTES: This is a big sharp play, as they're all over the Bears. The spread hasn't moved, but the juice has risen. It'll be interesting to see if the books move this to -3.5 by Monday evening.
FINAL THOUGHTS: I'm still going with one unit on the Bears. Chicago is an underrated team. Some consider it to be ranked near the bottom of the NFL, but I don't see it that way. The Bears own a terrific front seven and also possess dynamic offensive weapons who will take advantage of Philadelphia's shaky corners. This line should be a bit higher than it's listed right now, and the sharps agree. There isn't a great amount of value though, so I wouldn't want to bet a lot on this side.
The Psychology. Edge: None.
No edge found.
The Vegas. Edge: Eagles.
The sharps are hitting the Bears pretty hard.
Percentage of money on Chicago: 65% (42,000 bets)
The Trends. Edge: None.
Eagles are 25-13 ATS as road underdogs since 2005.
Jay Cutler is 8-5 ATS on Monday Night Football.
Opening Line: Bears -1.
Opening Total: 43.
Week 2 NFL Pick: Bears 26, Eagles 20
Bears -3 (1 Unit) -- Incorrect; -$110
Over 42.5 (0 Units) -- Correct; $0
Eagles 29, Bears 14
Week 2 NFL Picks - Early Games
San Francisco at Carolina,
Dallas at Washington,
Baltimore at Cleveland,
Tennessee at Detroit,
Miami at New England,
Cincinnati at Pittsburgh,
New Orleans at NY Giants,
Kansas City 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: Dolphins +240 (1 unit) -- Incorrect; -$100
Moneyline: Browns +210 (1 unit) -- Incorrect; -$100
Moneyline: Buccaneers +270 (1 unit) -- Incorrect; -$100
Moneyline: Rams +235 (1 unit) -- Correct; +$235
Moneyline: Colts +235 (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)