***FRIDAY SEPT.21 UPDATE: ALL POINT-SPREAD PICKS NOW FILED.***
WEEK 2 REPORT:
WINNERS: 10-6 (.625); SEASON: 20-12 (.625)
ATS: 10-6 (.625); SEASON: 18-14 (.562)
ATS BEST BETS: 1-2 (.333); SEASON: 3-4 (.428)
Now that we're past the first week, I'm happy when I can finish above .600 in any category. I did that -- barely -- in two of my three categories last week, but for some reason I just haven't found the knack for identifying good point-spread opportunities. I was SURE the Bengals would beat the woeful Browns by a touchdown, and how were the Buccaneers going to stay within a field goal in their game against the Saints?
If you're looking for a betting trend over two weeks, it's my ATS picks in the Not Betting the Farm category. They've gone 6-1 (.857).
So the winner picks are up, with the Against The Spread update to follow later in the week...
(OUTCOME: 12-4 winners, 9-7 ATS)
Confident (Week 2: 5-2 winners, .714; 3-4 ATS, .428. Season: 9-3 winners, .750; 7-5 ATS, .583)
Buffalo (0-2) at (-16.5) New England (2-0): Patriots in a romp. ATS: More than two touchdowns is always a push, but if there was ever an on-paper matchup that made it feel right, it's this one. My fear, of course, is that the Bills will rise up like they did at home against the Broncos and keep things close, but I just don't see them finishing well. Patriots, please. OUTCOME: Right on both.
San Diego (1-1) at (+4.5) Green Bay (2-0): Green Bay could keep things close at Lambeau, but I like the Chargers to win. A loss by the Chargers this week would send the Norv Turner Era into immediate disaster mode. ATS: Winning on the road at Lambeau is no sure thing, but I think there's more than a touchdown here IF the Chargers can regain their confidence after last week's loss. Chargers. OUTCOME: Wrong on both.
Indianapolis (2-0) at (+6) Houston (2-0): The Colts may not win easily, but they'll win this game. ATS: Not having Andre Johnson hurts. Colts. OUTCOME: Right on the winner, wrong on the spread.
Jacksonville (1-1) at (-3) Denver (2-0) (afternoon): I don't think the talent is all that much better, but the Broncos complete package trumps Jack Del Rio's Jaguars at Mile High. ATS: Last year's best NFL heuristic was the binary nature of the Jaguars (good-bad-good-bad...). I don't think this year will be that extreme, but I think Denver will win by more than a field goal. OUTCOME: Wrong on both.
Carolina (1-1) at (+3.5) Atlanta (0-2) (afternoon): The Panthers are inconsistent, but not that inconsistent. ATS: I'm not interested in this series' past history in 2007, since the Falcons are in such trouble. I'm surprised this line isn't higher, but I'm guessing Vegas thinks the 'Cons will play better at home? I'll take the road dog Panthers to win by more than a field goal. OUTCOME: Right on both.
Not Betting the Farm (Week 2: 2-1 winners, .667; 3-0 ATS, 100 percent. Season: 5-2 winners, .667; 6-1 ATS, .857)
Arizona (1-1) at (-9) Baltimore (1-1): I see a lot of progress in Arizona so far this season, but I don't think they've progessed to the point where they can beat a good AFC team on the road. So Ravens. ATS: Other lines on this game are more narrow, but I think nine points is just too much to give the Cardinals in 2007. OUCOME: Right on both.
Minnesota (1-1) at (-3) Kansas City (0-2): I like the Chiefs at Arrowhead. Minnesota's defense and running game are good enough, but with its passing game all aflutter, the Vikings just can't mount a sustained attack. ATS: You won't see KC as a favorite very often this year. This feels like a close, low-scoring game, so give me the Vikings. OUTCOME: Right on both.
San Francisco (2-0) at (-10) Pittsburgh (2-0): Give me the Steelers in what should be one of the most telling games of the week. ATS: I think the Steelers will win, but this line perplexes me? Everybody's offering between nine and 10 points to the 49ers, which makes me wonder if they've been watching what San Fran's been doing on defense this month. I'll back the 49ers on this one. OUTCOME: Right on winner, wrong on spread.
Just Guessing (Week 2: 3-3 winners, .500; 4-2 ATS, .667. Season: 6-7 winners, .461; 4-9 ATS, .308)
Detroit (2-0) at (-7) Philadelphia (0-2): It's not smart to pick road winners in games like this one, particularly when the road team is the Lions, but Jon Kitna is hot right now and the Eagles are reeling. I like Detroit's chances of going 3-0. ATS: Really, what have the Eagles done this year to make them a touchdown favorite over the Lions? Put me down for Detroit. OUTCOME: Wrong on both.
Miami (0-2) at (-3) N.Y. Jets (0-2): The Jets are coming off a brutal pair of games and finally get something winnable at home. Thing is, these two teams have so much history that it's hard to feel confident. ATS: I really can't get a bead on this one, and since I think the Dolphins are entirely capable of winning this week I'll take the underdog. OUTCOME: Right on both.
St. Louis (0-2) at (-4) Tampa Bay (1-1): I can't believe I'm writing this, but I'll take the Bucs to win at home. ATS: I'm surprised to see that Vegas agrees with me. In that case, give me the Rams to beat the spread. OUTCOME: Right on the winner, wrong on the spread.
Cincinnati (1-1) at (-3.5) Seattle (1-1) (afternoon): A match-up between two mediocre, under-achieving, inconsistent teams. O joy. I'll take the homefield Seahawks. ATS: In case you're beginning to notice a trend, I'll be explicit about it: If I don't feel confident about a winner, I'm much more likely to take the underdog, even on the road. Why? Because if I put a game in this category I figure it's about 50-50 on who will win it, and if you're giving me points on 50-50, that can really tip my scale. Which is why I want the Bengals here. Call it an experiment in self-scouting. OUTCOME: Right on both.
Cleveland (1-1) at (-3) Oakland (0-2) (afternoon): Do you think the Raiders will let the Browns run wild again this week? Me neither. ATS: So in the previous item I just explained why I should take the underdog Browns in this spot. Which is why I'm... picking the Raiders to win and cover. Look, life isn't about cheap algorithms, OK? OUTCOME: Right on winner, wrong on spread. Should have followed the cheap algorithm.
N.Y. Giants (0-2) at (-3.5) Washington (2-0) (afternoon): I hate this game because Washington has been figuring out ways to win while the Giants are struggling and injured. But I'm taking the G-men on the road. ATS: I was already picking the Giants, so the points help. OUTCOME: Right on both.
Dallas (2-0) at (-3) Chicago (1-1) (SNF): It's early to say this, but the Bears really have their backs against the wall for this nationally televised game. Call it a show-me statement. They'll be fired up at home, but that knife can cut both ways, particularly if Rex Grossman struggles. One note from rewatching Sundays Bears-Chiefs game: Bears receivers dropped an awful lot of passes, killing several drives. I think the Bears come out of hibernation a little bit this week. ATS: This is the matchup we would have had in the Divisional playoff had Tony Romo not fumbled the hold on that extra point. That has nothing to do with the spread on this game. I just wanted to say it. Anyway, I'm back to using my "Take The Underdog In The Just-Guessing Category" trick. Gimme Dallas to keep it close. OUTCOME: Wrong on winner, right on spread.
Tennessee (1-1) at (-4.5) New Orleans (0-2) (MNF): I don't believe I'm writing this, but I like the Titans to win this one. Their offensive line is better than I thought, and Vince Young is a game changer. Of course the Saints could rediscover their 2006 mojo at any moment, but they looked confused and demoralized in their first two games. ATS: Once again, I'm picking the upset, which means I'm picking the Titans against the spread, too.
ATS BEST BETS: (Week 2: 1-2, .333; Season, 3-4, .428). A mention here has been the kiss of death for the past two weeks, so apologies in advance to this week's Best Bets, the Panthers and Lions. OUTCOME: This should tell you how bad I've been at this: I went .500 and IMPROVED my winning percentage.
Point spreads via USATODAY.com. For more like-minded football picking goodness try Rocky's Football Corner at IvoryTowerz and the weekly office pool at Gun-Toting Liberal.
That's a great quote: life is not about cheap algorithms!
(And thanks for the trackback, by the way.)
Well, last week, we were completely aligned. This week... back to the old differences. As you have written... we depart on four games. I'll just discuss two: usually, I would go with Denver at home, but the Raiders revealed lots of weaknesses with Denver last week. Until proven otherwise... the Broncos have slipped from the elite to the mediocre ranks. (See also the opening game against the Bills.)
Also, although the Lions have improved... well... not that much.
Posted by: Rockwell | September 22, 2007 at 08:21 PM