Week 10 NFL

I've procrastinated on my NFL betting blog, so I'll just go through all of my picks individually and say which ones I plan on betting:

Ind -3 at Jax - Took Jax - thought it would be a trap game for Indy. Wrong.

NYG -4 at Cin - May bet Cincy +4. This goes off of my betting system (Cincy hasn't covered in three straight games). Also, I think Cincy can take advantage of an over-rated NYG defense (NYG allows 6.1 yards per play - tied for fifth worst in the league. Bottom 5 in passing yards allowed/bottom 10 in rush yards allowed).

Ten +6 at Mia - Lean Miami (not sure how rusty Locker will be) but not going to bet this either way.

Det -2 at Min - Detroit has covered in four straight games, Minnesota has failed to cover in four straight. System play is Min +2.

Buf +11 at NE - Lean Buf +11. I think New England may relax a little against Buffalo, who is capable of scoring in bunches like NE. The Pats haven't covered their previous double digit spreads at home this year (lost straight up to Arizona and squeaked by NYJ in overtime).

Atl -2.5 at NO - I lean Atlanta -2.5 here. New Orleans was fortunate to escape their MNF game with a win (allowing only 6 points in 5 defensive red zone opportunities versus Philly). Their defense is horrible. Atlanta has something to prove still despite their perfect record.

SD +3 at TB - I lean SD +3 here. System play based on TB covering last two games by average of 14+. San Diego should be able to take advantage of TB's weak secondary (allowing 3rd-worst 7.5 yards/pass play).

Den -4 at Car - Ultimate trap/fool's gold game here. Denver's been rolling (three straight covers), which is exactly why this is a good time to fade them, especially with an important divisional game coming up. Carolina coming off of a couple decent performances (almost beat Chicago, beat down Washington). Should be a field goal game. Fool's Gold Pick: Car +4

Oak +7.5 at Balt - Lean Baltimore here, but you never know what kind of effort you'll get from Oakland. In year's past, this is a spot that Oakland comes up with a straight up win - wouldn't be shocked if they did.

NYJ +6 at Sea - I think the Jets will cover and have a good shot at winning. Rex Ryan has had a couple of weeks to prepare for a rookie QB. Seattle may win, but 6 points is too much.

Dal -1.5 at Phil - No touch game here. I'd lean Phil based on the no-covers in three straight system, but for this game, I don't want to test that out. Each team likes to shoot itself in the foot - hard to bet on teams like that.

Stl +11.5 at SF - SF has been a money machine at home in Harbaugh's stint w/ SF, but something tells me to lean St Louis here. System play here would be StL losing by average of 14+ in last two games. I think Jeff Fisher will have his team well-prepared after the bye.

Hou +1.5 at Chi - Liking Houston here. Only way Bears can win here IMO is to force several turnovers, which Houston has avoided well this year. Houston's D-Line vs. Bears O-Line will decide the game. I think this is a low-scoring game (17-13), with Houston winning. Is this the game where Chicago starts regressing a little? San Fran next on the schedule.

KC +12.5 at Pitt - System tells me to pick KC, especially since they're coming off of three straight double digit ATS losses and Pitt is on a 3 game ATS streak, but I may need 14+ points to take KC here.


Likely bets: Cin +4 (maybe Cin ML), SD +3, Car +4 (fool's gold pick), NYJ +6, Hou +1.5 (lots of dogs)
Still considering: Atl -2.5, Min +2

Good luck this week and have a good weekend.

Politics (Not) As Usual - My First Year w/ Interest & Some Fun Political Stories & Facts

From the onset of 2012, this felt like a different year to me.

A year where I started to feel that standing on the sidelines as it relates to the political process was no longer an option.

Sure, it started with the trendy SOPA stuff--and from everything I've learned about politics in the past year, Congress will attempt to pass through similar legislation that could continue to threaten freedom of speech. But as I learned, sometimes it takes something relevant to an individual to say, "Wait a minute, maybe I should start educating myself on this stuff."

There are also plenty of other things I learned over the course of this year (and election season) that has me both optimistic about the future of our country and some things that have me disgusted with the process. I get that people are passionate about their politics. But please - (a) keep it civil, (b) keep it factual, and (c) keep it positive.

In too many cases, folks on both sides of the major parties could recite more negative stuff about the other guy than positive about their own. That's not a good sign for your guy if you're doing that.

Anywho, onward to the talking points:

The True 1%

While everyone was clamoring to see whether Obama would be able to survive this election season against his Republican opponent, history was made of a different kind for the bronze medalist in the presidential race.

Libertarian candidate Gary Johnson received over a million votes (a record for Libertarians) and about 1% of the vote (just short of the party record). Considering the two big dogs spent almost 1000 times more combined than Johnson's campaign (2 billion to 3 million -> source) and got about 1000 times more coverage than former New Mexico governor, it is quite the accomplishment.

I don't know the exact number of votes he got from me and people I know, but it was at least a half dozen. Considering my circle of people isn't all that big, it's much larger than the national percentage. If Gary gives it another run in 2016, I will likely vote for him again, barring some other solid candidate would enter the race.

And no, once again, I wouldn't be wasting my vote.


Stat in the Hat

If you voted for Romney and didn't see this coming, you haven't been studying the stats.

And no, I don't mean the partisan polls on these slanted news networks. I mean Nate Silver's 538 blog, which was running on the NY Times website throughout the election.

If you haven't heard of him, Nate became a polarizing figure over the election cycle with his projections of the election through personalized statistical models, all of which showed Obama taking the electoral college by a much wider margin than expected and winning the popular vote by 2+% (both of these occurred).

Before the election, Republicans argued to no end that his statistical models were wrong and that Romney would win the election with no problem. As is the case with politics as I've found out, people get really f-ing angry when what they are reading or seeing doesn't correspond with a favorable view/rating of the person they are supporting (at least this holds up in general). If you take a look at the comments Silver got from the right, you'd think Silver just made up the stats.

Sports folks among my friend base might recognize Silver's name from his work as a sabermetrics guy and occasional author on various sports websites. In Silver's first analysis of the electoral college in 2008, he projected 49 out of 50 states correctly (he projected Indiana for McCain). He also predicted all 35 Senate races correctly that year.

I'm not sure how many swing states there were in 2008, but all things considered, missing one state in two elections shows me that this guy has a damn good statistical model going here. Stay tuned for his blog in 2016 to see what we should expect.

More Fun Political Stats

Here are a few fun political facts and figures that I found as I kept a really close eye on the Google Election Center, by far the most detailed political map that I came across as I looked for updated statistics on the election:

1. Roseanne Barr finished fifth overall in the popular vote. Yes, the sitcom star and everyone's favorite husky 1990s TV mom finished behind Obama, Romney, Johnson and Jill Stein (Green Party) in the popular vote. Barr's vote total was just a shade under 50,000, which was roughly eight times less than Stein's total. It's not like she came close to winning, but she finished fifth. Her name was on the ballot in Florida, Colorado & California. Welcome to Uhmerica.
2. "None of these candidates" is a voting option in Nevada. If you didn't want to vote for any of the candidates listed on the Nevada ballot, you can place a vote for nobody. Yes, there's an option on their ballots to vote for "None of these candidates". Interestingly enough, this "candidate" finished fourth behind Obama, Romney and Johnson. Sorry Virgil Goode - the Constitution Party candidate literally got beat by no one (None of these candidates got almost double the votes as Goode did in the state).
3. Nothing screams "I'm Fiscally Responsible" like spending billions on a presidential election. As of 10-26-12, Barack & Mitt spent over $2 billion combined on their campaigns combined (source). I'm guessing that total rose over the final couple weeks of the election. In fact, if you break it down by state, Obama spent the most in Illinois (over $39M), which is considered his adopted home state. Likewise, Romney spent the most in his state of Massachusetts ($115M). In both states, the winner was fairly well known before the election began (Obama). Why spend that much in your home states? The site doesn't break down costs, so it's hard to say what this was spent (or wasted) on. Still, it seems ridiculous that each guy would spend so much in a state whose winner was widely known before the election even began.

And one more thing...

Let's not make a mention of the 2016 election for a while. We don't need to encourage these bozos to make this a non-stop thing. My Gary mention is not included in on this - mainly because it's my blog and I'll cry if I want to.

That's all I got. I hope you're as happy as I am for this season to be over. Now, time to watch the Colts/Jaguars game.

On second thought, maybe another election cycle isn't so bad to watch.

My "Useless" Vote - The Same As Your "Useless" Vote

My vote doesn't matter. At least that's what I've been told.

My guy Gary Johnson. is likely to get about 1% of the national vote, while the Siamese twin Mittrack Obamney will get the other 98.999999%. Sorry Green/Constitution Party and Independent advocates - you'll likely muster the other .0000001%, give or take ten zeros.

Your vote on either of these two really only matters in 15 states, argues political expert/doofus/moron Brian Bolek

Oh wait, I forgot about a problem with the argument that my vote doesn't matter. Yours likely doesn't either. In fact, I think we're both wasting our time debating whether our vote actually matters (at least when it comes to Illinois).

The 36 Strong

This can be said for about the 35 states (and DC, which gets 2 votes) whose electoral votes are clearly going to one particular candidate, and thus, getting all of the electoral college votes from them. These states are highlighted on this page: http://elections.nytimes.com/2012/electoral-map. The definition of "clearly" would be over a 95% chance that the state will be won by that particular candidate (Here's a detailed NY Times blog that is tracking this). If you notice the state of Illinois - it is 100% certain that Obama will win this state. Therefore, I would argue that your vote, which matters none in the national vote of a candidate (since the electoral college neuters this and ties someone's vote directly to their state and their state only), is just as useless as mine if you're voting for anyone other than Obama.

(Note: there are two states that allow for electoral votes to be split between candidates - Maine and Nebraska. Both states give two electoral votes to the winner of the state, and then allow their respective state districts decide the rest. For what it's worth, all of Nebraska's "votes" will go to Romney, while Obama is likely to take Maine and both of its districts - although Mitt has a slight chance in one district. Both of these states are among the 35 mentioned above.)

Even if Romney gets 40% in Illinois (just to throw a number out there), sure, he's a hell of a lot more popular to the voting public than any third party candidate, but he gets the same number of electoral votes from Illinois as my 1% does - zero.

If you ditch the electoral college and go straight to popular vote (it'll never happen), then I argue your vote would carry more weight. But since it only matters in the state which you reside, you aren't going to influence the vote.

The 15 That Matter Most

This leaves a total of 15 states who pollsters still have some question on who will carry the state's electoral votes. Many of these states have particular leans already - some Obama, some Romney - while others are statistically up in the air until Tuesday. These states compromise 173 of the electoral votes out of the 538 total (32%). So assuming that the election plays out as it should in those 35 states where Romney and Obama have a guaranteed hold on the votes, this leaves about one-third of the nation's voters with a meaningful vote.

If you break it down based on this site's "too close to call" states (that can be up for debate, especially with the flaws that polls represent), there's at least seven of those states, whose electoral votes total 89 - 16.5% of the electoral votes. This number might be a little higher or lower depending on what data you use, but this is a good estimate.

These are the states where the candidates have been spending the most time and money on, the ones where each candidate will essentially do whatever they can to get a vote (up to and including fellatio...just guessing). I feel sorry for the ads that those states have to deal with on a daily basis - Illinois' close race ads are brutal enough, couldn't imagine the stuff that Romney and Obama have come up with in the swing states.

Those 35 states (and DC) whose electoral votes we can count already as all but certain - each campaign knows better than to waste their time pandering across those states when their vote is (near) certain.

Of course it matters

What I am arguing here, is that in spite of your non-Illinois Obama vote not really playing a role into the election at all, your vote does matter. Mine does too, even if it's only one of about 1% of the vote for Johnson. It's easy to say "Your vote means shit" when you're in a non-swing state and you're voting for a candidate who is certain to lose that state. But your vote is more than just a statistic - it's a representation of your beliefs in who will be the best person to best represent my country (or state/district/town/etc.).

Well - at least that's what it's supposed to be. I'd love to believe that the general public votes FOR candidates rather than AGAINST them (i.e. voting for Candidate A because you believe in him/her and not just because you hate Candidate B that much), but we all know that these anti-votes occur.

I digress.

When you vote, whether you vote in a swing state or not, whether you're voting on any candidate who has a legit shot or not, you are voting for your ideal representatives (unless you're a dumbass).

If you are an Illinois resident and you believe Romney best represents your views on how the country should be run, then by all means vote for him. Meanwhile, I will vote for Gary Johnson who best represents my views.

The expected three top-vote getters in the 2012 election. The guy in the middle (Gary Johnson) will get about 1/49th the votes of each of the guys (Obama/Romney) who sandwich him.

Another digression alert: (And no, my vote for him is not a vote for Obama or Romney - it is a vote for Johnson. I HATE!!! the notion that bi-partisan politics have brought upon the voting culture where you can't just vote for a third party candidate because, I don't know, You actually want to vote for that candidate! The idea that my vote is stealing a vote away from one of these guys is baffling to me. If I wanted to vote for one of those candidates, I would, you know, vote for them. My vote is not stealing a vote away from either because, simply put, I wouldn't vote for either guy if Johnson wasn't on the ballot).

Anywho, enough of this babbling. Go out and vote November 6th for the candidate(s) who best represent your views. And yes - your vote matters.

And so does mine.

If I Ain't Broke, I'm Not Fixing It (Week 9 NFL)

Looks like this little system for the NFL is having some short term luck for me.

Last week's bets went 7-5, would have been much better if I made bets strictly along the lines of the system.

In short, as I mentioned last week, this system is built where you end up betting against teams who have either (a) won two games in a row against the spread by a significant margin - thus creating an inflated line that you can gain value betting the other team or (b) won 3 straight games against the spread. We'll call these guys Fade Material - since that's exactly what you'll want to do in that next game.

The latter (b) has been a cash cow, with teams going 1-10 in their fourth game if they've covered against the spread three in a row (Houston is the only team to cover 4 games in a row). I guess to figure out (a), you'd have to define what a significant amount is against the spread - I'd say exceeding the spread by an average of 14 points or more. Using this number, teams have gone 2-9 against the spread if they've covered their previous two games by an average of 14+ points. The Bears and Vikings are the only teams to record against the spread wins in these scenarios, with both teams losing their following game.

The other half of the system is the opposite (The Biggest Losers) - betting on teams who have had (a) multiple losses against the spread by a significant margin or (b) lost 3 straight games against the spread. In the case of (b), teams are 5-2-2 in that fourth game (Baltimore is the only team this year w/ a 5-game losing streak ATS). And using the same significant margin idea (2 losses in a row against the spread by an average of 14+), these teams bounce back to the tune of a 7-2 record.

Fade Material for Week 9

(a) Won two games in a row ATS by avg of 14+ - None, although Denver (Average ATS win of 13) is close and I'll be betting against them anyways (see below).

(b) Won three straight ATS - Detroit....Bet Jacksonville +4 (hard to do, I know)

Biggest Loser Material for Week 9

(a) Lost two game in a row by avg of 14+ - Unfortunately, no one fits this bill either. Kansas City did (lost previous two by average of 17 per game), but San Diego's streak (lost three straight) took precedence. Kansas City will be a bet next week.

(b) Lost three straight ATS - Cincy (+3.5), Baltimore (-3.5), SD -7 (won Thursday).

We'll see how this goes, but I'm optimistic that this system at least has some common sense behind it. It goes off the premises that people hate to bet teams that have looked like crap the past couple weeks (likely means they've lost ATS in those games), which gives that team a little bit more value in the next game or two. Likewise, if a team is playing so well that it looks like it can't lose, gamblers fall in love with that team and want to keep betting them (riding out the streak), thus making the point spread on them in the following week or two a little inflated, giving value to their opponent.

For this week's bets:

Fool's Gold (6-5 for the year)

Denver -3.5 at Cincy - Christ, how could anyone bet against Peyton Manning? Dude has been money this year, much better than anyone could have thought coming off of his 97th neck surgery in the past 2-3 years (number may be exaggerated). They're coming off a pair of impressive victories (huge 2nd half comeback against San Diego and a drubbing of New Orleans on Sunday Night Football). Meanwhile, Cincy has lost three straight overall (and against the spread, as you read above). They had a first quarter lead in all of those games, only to fail to win any of them. I expect them to play with a sense of desperation as they look to avoid falling completely out of the AFC North with a beat-up Ravens and potentially over-rated Steelers squad ahead of them (each playing road games). I think the Bengals will surprise the Broncos and take this game, but just to be safe, I'll take Cincy +3.5 (may bet the ML as well).

Other Bets: Baltimore -3.5, Jax +4, Dal +4

Considering: Car +3.5, Oak -1.5, Min +4

NCAA Outlook:

Finally had a decent Saturday. College ain't really my cup of tea this year, so tread lightly on following these.

Bets: California -4 (fading the major results of last week - Cal's big loss and Wash's impressive win against previously unbeaten Oregon St), Ariz State +4 (Oregon St will be proven a phony), OK State +8.5 (K State will be challenged), Iowa State +12.5 (let down for Oklahoma), Pitt +16.5 (let down for ND)

Considering: WV -5 & their Over (68), Florida -17

Check my Twitter for updated bets - these are subject to change.

Have a good weekend everyone, and good luck w/ your fantasy leagues/wagers and all that other crap.

Reheat: NBA Preview 2012

With such a short offseason compared to other major sports, it never feels like NBA is out of season.

The freshest things in mind are the ones I'll touch upon. I have friends who I'd consider bigger basketball junkies than me - I'll give you a simpleton's point of view with this past offseason.

The Dwight Stuff

It only took what seemed liked decades, but Dwight Howard finally got his wishes to leave Orlando when his old team traded him to the Lakers. Howard joins veteran Steve Nash as the big acquisitions to the Lakers, who are gearing up for at least one more Kobe title run before he hangs it up in a few years. Anyone who thought the Lakers were not the favorites to land Howard all along (rumors had him going to the Nets as they kick off their inaugural season in Brooklyn). I believe the Lakers will make it far, but I believe their championship will have to wait a year.

Agony of the Heat

Speaking of champions, America's least favorite team - ok, maybe more so Chicago area's least favorite team - is the reigning NBA champion. They added sharpshooting veteran Ray Allen to the mix - a great move in my opinion. I foresee a lot of Lebron kick-outs to a wide open Allen for three this season. With the championship taste still in their mouths, I expect the champs to repeat en route to what should be a dynasty that features at least 4-5 championships (assuming LeBron stays there and doesn't opt out in a couple years).

Thunder Struck

Just a few days ago, the Oklahoma City Thunder traded away James Harden to the Houston Rockets, with the key player coming to the Thunder being Kevin Martin. A lot of people are wondering why the Thunder would make such a move, but apparently Harden turned down a contract with them (wasn't a max contract). With the trade, he can make about 50% more over the life of the contract (signing a max deal w/ Houston over the deal the Thunder offered) if I've read everything right. So he goes from a championship caliber team to a rebuilding one - the classic "Should I chase money or rings?" argument. He can't convince me or anyone else that he thinks he'll even come close to sniffing a conference finals, yet alone contend for a title, in the next 3-4 years, where with OKC, he's likely guaranteed a few more title appearances if he stays. More power to him for taking the money. We all say we'd go for the ring if we were these guys, but WE aren't talented basketball players capable of being in a position to make these choices. Good luck Harden - you'll need it.

Flop It Like It's Hot

One of the biggest rule changes that took place over the offseason was the NBA instituting a fine system for players who attempt to flop on fouls in their attempt to eliminate it from the game. I forgot what journalist said it (I think it was Bomani Jones) who said this will likely create a class in the NBA of those who can afford to flop and those who can't. Players can be fined up to 30K if they are caught flopping up to five times. A guy making six figures won't chance flopping that many times. Should be interesting to see (a) how often this gets enforced and (b) who are guys who get hit with the most fines.

Predictions By Division (in predicted order) - numbers represent their predicted seed in playoffs

Eastern Conference

Atlantic: 2. Boston, 5. Philly, 7. Brooklyn, New York, Toronto

Central: 3. Indiana, 6. Chicago, 8.  Cleveland, Milwaukee, Detroit

Southeast: 1. Miami, 4. Atlanta, Washington, Orlando, Charlotte

Notes: Yes, probably a little shocked to see Cleveland in the playoffs. I was initially surprised to put them there, but then remembered several playoff teams from last year (New York and Orlando) who I eliminated from consideration. Kyrie should take the next step and show why Cleveland picked him number 1.

Otherwise, my picks are pretty bland. I picked all of the favorites to win their respective divisions here. The most likely division for a long-shot winner would probably be the Atlantic. The Heat should clinch the Southeast title by the end of March, if not sooner. If Rose can return and shake off the rust quick, I could see the Bulls finishing top 2 or 3 in the conference. My projection is that if he does return, the rust will take a while to shake.

Western Conference

Northwest: 2. Denver, 3. Oklahoma City, 7. Utah, Minnesota, Portland

Pacific: 1. LA Lakers, 6. LA Clippers, Golden State, Phoenix, Sacramento

Southwest: 4. Memphis, 5. San Antonio, 8. Dallas, Houston, New Orleans

Notes: I threw a curveball and have Denver and Memphis as division winners. I think I'm buying into Denver based on Hollinger's projection more so than my own analysis. I also think it could take some time for the Thunder to get used to playing without Harden. The Lakers should roll this division but will likely save their energy for the playoffs, so 56/57 wins should be expected as opposed to 60+.

Eastern Playoffs Round 1: Miami over Cleveland, Boston over Brooklyn, Chicago over Indiana, Atlanta over Philly

Western Playoffs Round 1: Lakers over Dallas, Denver over Utah, OKC over Clips, San Antonio over Memphis

EP Round 2: Miami over Atlanta, Boston over Chicago

WP Round 2: Lakers over Spurs, OKC over Denver

Eastern Conference Finals: Miami over Boston

Western Conference Finals: Lakers over OKC

Finals: Miami over LA in 6

NBA MVP: LBJ.......Sleeper: Kyrie Irving 

NBA 6th Man:  Manu Ginobili. San Antonio.....Sleeper: I don't know this category well enough to predict it.

Defensive Player of the Year: Serge Ibaka, OKC.....Sleeper: Andre Iguodala - Denver

Coach of the Year: George Karl, Denver....Sleeper: Larry Drew, Atlanta

Rookie of the Year: Anthony Davis, New Orleans

Most Improved Player: Kyrie Irving, Cleveland

Random prop questions:

1. Will anyone get flop fines up until/past the fifth flop? No
2. Will the Bobcats set an NBA record for losses in a season? No, but barely
3. Return timeline for Derrick Rose - All-Star Break (Before or After): After
4. Biggest Longshot w/ a title hope: Denver at 50/1
5. Biggest Favorite w/ little title hope: Chicago at 16/1 (No Rose, No Shot)

Bets made before season: Denver to win Northwest division +540 (50/270); Denver Over 51.5 wins (130/100)

Spoiler Alert - Why Bad Teams Should Take Pride in their Squads

We're at that point in the year where there's three types of fantasy football owners:

Those preparing for the playoffs: These are the teams that are about 6-2 or 7-1. Barring a catastrophic collapse, these teams should make the playoffs. There's a large margin of error, where these owners can afford to drop a game or two (better now than in the playoffs, right?) Owners of these teams are now worried about making sure they win their division and get a good seed for the playoffs. A top 2/3 seed is very likely.

Those fighting for a playoff spot: These are the teams around the 3, most likely the 4 or 5 win mark. None of these teams can afford a multiple game losing streak for fear of falling to the bottom bracket. These are the owners that are most meticulous and insane about making sure they set the right lineup each week. One wrong move could boot you from a chance at the Geno Bowl. One right move, and your path to nerd glory is a step closer from being achieved.

Those who likely don't give a shit anymore: These are the teams at about 2 wins or below. Checking the lineup isn't as fun anymore, especially when half of your starting team from Week 1 is either hurt or underperforming.

Being a spoiler (especially in fantasy football games) should be fun for bad teams.

I came here to discuss the last group, those who feel like they are out of it.

I say - take some pride when you set your lineups each week. Don't you wanna piss off one of these folks one of these groups above you, just to hear them whine as your Nick Foles pick-up netted you 30 points in a come-from-behind win that devastated someone's playoff hopes like your own? I mean, c'mon, how fun is it to beat someone who was expecting to beat the shit out of you?

If your team starts fading in the next couple weeks, don't give up. Keep in mind that you can ruin someone else's playoff dreams. And as they* always say, ruining someone else's dream is the American dream.

Take pride in your team from beginning to end. I know your team didn't turn out the way you wanted it to, but give yourself the last smile, the last laugh. Take out that sweaty mess of an owner who needs one more win to make the playoffs. Show him or her that you shouldn't fuck with my bad team. You mess with the bull and you get the shit.

Besides, do you really want to keep losing, you big fat loser that no one likes, not even your mother**?

*Yeah, I've heard a lot of people say this. And by a lot, I mean...shut up and read.

**I'm just assuming this. Why should your mother love you if you suck at fantasy football? Mine wouldn't.

Never Leave the Table When You're On a Heater - Week 8 Picks

It only took me three weeks of NFL to give myself a personal bye from gambling. It was that bad of a run.

After that week break, it only took me a couple weeks for me to finally say that I'm about to hit my in-season run of a lifetime.

With the help of a spreadsheet I've created that shows how much a team wins or loses against the spread on a weekly basis (thanks to Covers.com for the numbers), I've figured out a good way to find great spots to bet teams who are either coming off of two or three straight games where they don't cover or even better, fading teams who are riding 2/3 straight covers.

The bigger the covers, the more likely I fade them.

The bigger the losses, the more likely I bet them.

We'll see if it works, but I'm liking the results so far.

From Week 6 to Week 7 -

Houston goes from getting destroyed by the Packers (losing to the spread by 22) to winning by 23.5 against the spread against Baltimore (look to bet Baltimore in Week 9 - they've lost five straight games against the spread - the only team with more than three straight games without a cover).

Jacksonville lost two straight games against the spread by a total of 48 points. They get a bye week and an inflated line against a subpar Oakland squad who was spotting Jacksonville 6 points against the spread. Jacksonville holds the lead most of the game, blows it, but still covers the spread by a field goal.

Pittsburgh has a prime-time loss against the lowly Titans, giving the Steelers their third straight non-cover. In Week 7, they fell behind 14-3 against the Bengals but took over the game from the second quarter one and ended up winning and covering. Like Baltimore, I plan on betting Cincinnati after their Week 8 bye since they have failed to cover in three straight.

The Bears got a week to rest in Week 6 after three impressive wins (covered by an average of 17 points/game). They were covering most of the Detroit game but lost it on a touchdown with less than a minute left, allowing Detroit backers (like this guy) to cash in. Sure, the Bears could (and should) have covered it, but they didn't. And since they failed to cover by the slightest of margins, perception of them is still positive. I find a second-week fade of the Bears to be in the works.

I don't know if I've stumbled into something good to use for the rest of the year and perhaps in future years or if I'm over-thinking this stuff. It's worth a shot for now since I've taken a look at this year's data and saw that there's great value in fading teams with (1) a mini-streak against the spread or (2) coming off a couple huge wins against the spread. Likewise, while it may feel icky to bet crappy teams like Jacksonville to cover, betting teams who have racked up several bad losses in a row are likely to have a point spread that is more of a reflection of their recent streak than what the team actually is. Even if you gain a couple points based on this perception, you gain an advantage.


Week 9 Picks

Fool's Gold (5-4 record) - Pick 1 Car +7.5 at Chicago...You look at the line and you can't believe it. How is Carolina not a 10+ point dog to the Bears, considered by many to be a top-3 team in the league? After all, Carolina's offense is a mess/the Bear's defense capitalizes on team's mistakes like no other. The Bears have a good rushing attack and a QB who hasn't made as many mistake this year, save the Packer debacle. Some interesting stats between the two teams: Carolina (5.9 yards/play - T6th), Chicago (5.2 y/p - T23rd); Chicago D (4.9 y/p - T-3), Carolina (5.5 - T 17th). Both teams average more per play than they allow on defense. What this means, I don't know. Just really wanted to distract you from the fact that Carolina is my Pick in this Fool's Gold that is begging for Chicago money.

Pick 2 Atl at Phil (-3) - Say what? The league's remaining undefeated team is an underdog to a team who has limped to a 3-3 record, a team who hasn't won a game by more than two points? Both teams are coming off of a bye, but Andy Reid prepares as well on byes as he does on increasing the size of his thighs on a daily basis. Atlanta allows the 8th most yards per play (5.9) while the Eagles are one of the better teams (5.1). I expect Vick to have his best game against the Falcons game (no turnovers). I also expect McCoy to have his best day of the year against the Falcons (only the Bills allow more than the Falcons' 5.2 per carry). Philly wins by two scores.

Other Picks: Det -1, Pitt -4.5 (Already bet TB +6.5)
Other Possibles: Dallas (if it gets up to 3+), Denver -6 (NO has had 3 straight covers), Mia +2 (NYJ has had 3 straight covers), KC -2


Limited NCAA leans: Penn St, Oklahoma, Kentucky, Nebraska. With my bad Saturdays lately, I'm looking to cut back. Feeling my NFL roll right now