Weekend Edition - NCAA & NFL Picks

CV's PICKS - 2010 YTD Totals (all "ATS" [against the spread - wager totals include the vig lost])

2010 NCAA Picks (aggregate): 65-42-4
2010 NCAA (unit picks differential): +4
NCAA 2010 Wager Total: (+$90)* (cv wins the "kissing your sister" trophy)

---

2010 NFL Picks (aggregate): 93-76-5
2010 NFL (unit picks differential): +31
NFL 2010 Wager Total: (+2,950)

Gameday/week writeup...

A note to all you "casual" viewers out there... By the time you get to the ARMY-NAVY game, if you haven't figured it out yet, you're basically at the end of the college football season... I've been to a couple ARMY-NAVY games, they're pretty cool... Lately, the "football" has been dominated by some pretty good NAVY teams, but this year ARMY should give then a better game... I'll be around in a week or so to do a special on the College Bowls (I don't really know why - because I'm against the bowl concept and would rather see a playoff system...

The ONLY Pick... (pick in BOLD CAPS)

ARMY (+7.5) vs. Navy - (0.5 units)

---

WEEK 14 NFL PICKS
Full game write-ups & fantasy football notes will be posted throughout the day & before Sunday kickoff

THURSDAY NIGHT FOOTBALL

 Indianapolis Colts at Tennessee Flaming Thumbtacks
Line: Colts by 3.5
Indy 30 - Tennessee 28
CV took - COLTS for (1 unit) - ($110) - Incorrect

SUNDAY EARLY GAMES


 Oakland Raiders at Jacksonville Jaguars (1:00 EST)
Line: Jaguars by 4
A couple of notes before I get to some brief comments about the games...

So far, I'm 0-2 in my "picks" this week (one NFL game, and one NCAA game)... The Colts-Titans game I only put a unit on (which I'd explained in the threads last week)... And I took Army for a half unit... I'm going to tell you why I'm "happy" about where the results stand thus far...

One thing one needs to learn about handicapping is that you're NEVER going to get all games right... Even picking a 3 team parlay (against the spread) is tough to do... Vegas pays out 6-1 on a successful three team parlay... So if they were handing out 6-1 payouts on something that was so easy to do, they'd have been out of business a long time ago...

Mostly what I'm looking for as the "margin"... To stay slightly ahead of the public's perception on teams, and of course, their willingness to lay (or take points on that outcome)... By the 12th week in the season, the public has a solid impression on who they think is good, and who they think sucks... That is usually the VEGAS DREAM, because they can then set lines to favor THEMSELVES more than accurately represent the difference between the teams...

Such was the case with BOTH Indy/Ten, and Army/Navy... In the former case, people were throwing a lot of money at the idea that Peyton Manning is a magician, and Tennessee is currently in disarray and may fire their coach at the end of the year... They were all over Navy, because Army hasn't had a good team in almost a decade, and Navy had won 8 straight of these contests (often by a wide margin)...

To make a long story short... The Titans made Vegas very happy when they came in at the end of the game and covered the spread... The Colts were never really in danger of losing this game (and were surely happy with the win)... Trust me... None of them were crying that they didn't cover the point spread (unless Pete Rose was on their coaching staff)... Army actually gained more yards than Navy in the game, and save for a fumble at the goal line that changed a touchdown, into a play that was returned 97 yards the other way for a TD... The score would have been about equal...

In any case, start considering these general angles when going through the picks this week... It's a time of year to focus attention on the "line" itself, NOT the teams involved and their players or statistics... I'm breaking down "point spreads" here, as much as "X"'s & "O"'s... Keep that in mind... Also, keep in mind that you only want to "selectively" side with the public from now until the end of the year...

In Raiders - Jaguars... It is very difficult for a west coast team to come east and play in a 1:00 time slot... The Raiders got schellacked by Pittsburgh a few weeks ago doing the same thing... The only problem with this logic is that the Jaguars might be distracted themselves... They have to play Indy next week, and they often come in flat the week before & after playing their division rival... Since the public like the Jags to the tune of 62%... I'll take the RAIDERS for (0 units), and hope they shake the 1:00 East Coast curse...

 Cincinnati Bengals at Pittsburgh Steelers (1:00 EST)
Line: Steelers by 8.5
This is just way too many points to be laying to a division rival... Especially one that is banged up in the interior line, and just had a tough game for the division lead (on TV) a week ago... You have to forget about the Bengals crappy W/L record here, and hope they show up to play... I think they will because nobody wants to spend the whole winter feeling embarrassed about a loss to an arch foe... For those of you that don't know, one of the Steelers injuries was to their punter Daniel Sepulveda... Heinz Field is a tricky & sloppy field to play on with crazy wind patterns... Sepulveda was also the "holder" on the field goal unit (where the Steelers are also auditioning a new kicker)... 8.5 points is tough to cover when your QB has a broken foot, and every drive that you make into scoring position ends with you relying on a tandem that hasn't practiced together all year... Just saying... BENGALS for (1 unit)...
 New England Patriots at Chicago Bears (1:00 EST)
Line: Patriots by 3
The whole world just saw the Patriots demolish the brazen Jets on MNF... So they're falling all over themselves to bet them here... Some forget that Soldier Field is a tough place to play (regardless of whether the Bears are good, or not)... This is a classic opportunity for the Patriots to suffer a letdown now that they're
considered to be clear favorites for Superbowl... The Bears are still in a fight to prove themselves... I'll take the BEARS for (1 unit)...

 Cleveland Browns at Buffalo Bills (1:00 EST)
Line: Bills by 1
Nobody really cares about this game unless they have Peyton Hillis or Stevie Johnson on their fantasy football team... The Bills are really "false favorites" here (getting the 3 point home field swagger)... I'm only thinking they can get it done because Jake Delhomme is back in at QB for the Browns and needs a few more picks to get into the INTERCEPTION/FUMBLE Hall of Fame... BILLS for (0 units)...


 New York Football Giants at Minnesota Vikings (1:00 EST)
Line: Giants by 3
Rumor has it that the roof has collapsed at the Minneapolis Metrodome, so this game will be rescheduled for Monday 7PM... Stay tuned...

Forget about the "Brett Favre will he or won't he" situation... My mind focuses on a couple of different things... First of all, that the Vikings are a talented team that's "out of it" (which can be dangerous in the NFL - especially if you're trying to impress a new coach for net year)... Second... that the Vikings demolished a flagging Giants team 44-7 last year... Probably the Giants want a little revenge for that... I think they may want that in "spirit", but the fact is, they're coming in without a few weapons... Lastly, you probably have to ask yourself WHO are really the playoff teams in the NFL among this list... Bears, Packers, Falcons, Buccaneers, Saints, Eagles, Giants, Rams, Seahawks, 49ers... All the Rams, 49ers, & Seahawks have to worry about is EACH OTHER (and the other two drop away)... The Bucs have to keep winning because their division title hopes are gone... The Saints are making a move... Bears & Packers may BOTH make it (barring collapse)... And the Eagles have the inside track on the Giants at the moment...

If that was all confusing... Basically, this is "do or die" moment for Giants & Bucs (who play in Washington)... That's an "overrated" emotion, because if you find yourself there, this early in the season, you're probably not that good... I'll take the VIKINGS for (1 unit)... 

 Green Bay Packers at Detroit Lions (1:00 EST)
Line: Packers by 6.5
A lot of the rest of my "picks" are going to be based on the philosophy I just gave you... The Packers are "sort" of must win territory, but here they find themselves in a spot to actually help their own cause (in the division)... They've already won 2 against the Vikings, and this is their chance to sweep the Lions... They lost a strange game to the Bears at thge beginning of the season, but will face them again in the finale... IOW - the Packers are not in "desperation mode" here, more in "take care of business" mode... Nobody ever said anything about covering 6.5 on the road against a division rival tho... It's hard to believe that Drew Stanton is going to be able to keep up with Aaron Rodgers putting points on the board... But since the public agrees with that logic to the tune of 82%, I'll take the LIONS for (0 units)...

 Atlanta Falcons at Carolina Panthers (1:00 EST)
Line: Falcons by 7.5
There's NO REASON to take the Carolina Panthers for any reason whatsoever... There are a lot of reasons for taking the Atlanta Falcons... Which is why I'm going to do the opposite of logic and take the PANTHERS for (4 units)...

 Tampa Bay Bucs at Washington Redskins (1:00 EST)
Line: Bucs by 1.5
When you think about it... This is the first chance the Redskins have to prove that they can be "men" without Albert Haynesworth... I'd keep that in mind... Especially facing a Buccaneers team that basically had their "division" hopes busted last week vs. the Falcons... The Bucs have been pretty easy to figure out this year... They can't beat teams with good records, and they handle the weaker teams... The redskins are probably closer to a "weaker" team, but they are also a veteran team... I'll take the REDSKINS for (1 unit)...

LATE GAMES

 St. Louis Rams at New Orleans Saints (4:05 EST)
Line: Saints by 9

My biggest chagrin this year is that I've failed to capitalize on just blindly taking the Rams every week this year... They've covered the spread on 10 out of 12 occasions... They're the NFL version of "Just buy the fucking dip"... Problem is, there have hardly been any dips...

To my credit, I did identify the Rams as a "better than expected" team early on (and even bet with them on a few occasions - and have DEFINITELY avoided betting AGAINST them - where REAL $$ was concerned)... But I kept making them run the gauntlet... First I wanted to see Sam Bradford "keep it close" on the road... Then, I wanted to see the actually win on the road... Then, win AS FAVORITES on the road... All were accomplished... The only thing they've failed to do was to beat a quality team at home (they lost to the Falcons - but still played well)...

This is like that game, except it's on the road again against a Saints team that is starting to get it together... The only thing that make me hesitant to take the Saints here is the near double digit line, and the fact that the saints end the season with the Ravens, Falcons, & Bucs... They may not take this Rams team as serious as they should and fail to cover the spread... The Rams have benefitted this year by creating a lot of sacks... But with "quick release" Drew Brees, that advantage might be negated... It's not like they're trying to sack jason Campbell who all but needs to use his index finger to count all the route progressions as a play develops...

Since the public has caught on to the Rams (66%) as a sure thing (in the same way they've discovered that the price of gold can't go down)... I'll go ahead and lay the high points with the SAINTS for (0 units)... That also playes into a "feeling" I'm getting that the NFC West will come down to a 3 way tie between Rams, Seahawks, & 49ers at 8-8, or 7-9...

 Seattle Seahawks at San Francisco 49ers (4:05 EST)
Line: 49ers by 5.5
See above write-up (on NFC West)... If that happens, then it follows that the "likely" result is that the 49ers beat the Seahawks here... But do they cover the pointspread? Who cares? Let's just say that since CV is siding with VEGAS on almost all of the 1:00 games... If those are "correct", then some give back will be needed... In that case, taking SEATTLE & the CHARGERS are the likely afternoon bets to side with the public on... I'll go with the SEAHAWKS for (0 units)... Unless I'm getting schellacked in the 1PM games...

 Miami Dolphins at New York Jets (4:15 EST)
Line: J-E-T-S Jets, Jets, Jets by 5.5
Curiously, the news was this week that Tony Spagnolo (Dolphins head coach), allowed the players to come to New York (and, in fact, chartered a plane) A DAY EARLY, so they could... Get this... TAKE IN SOME BROADWAY SHOWS... WTF?????

OK..... All I know is... If your coach lets you do that... You'd better effin' suit up and play football on Sunday or your life is going to be sugar glazed hell for the rest of your sorry existence...

The Jets are coming off an embarassing loss on MNF to the Patriots... The public LOVES to bet these teams because they think that team will come out with fire and brimstone next time out... Sure, that's true... But if you're looking for that angle, wait until the next Jets-Pats matchupm in the Meadowlands next year... Thinking the Jets have anything to PROVE against the Dolphins would be akin to kicking your dog because your boss yelled at you... Actually, it was the Jets who EMBARASSED the Dolphins in South Beach (on Monday Night Football) earlier this year... I gotta think the Dolphins are MORE pissed (or, at least they will be after they get done with the Broadway Show)...

Teams who get blown out on MNF (Jets), don't have a very good record in covering spreads the next week... Just saying... I'll take the DOLPHINS for (5 units)...

 Denver Broncos at Arizona Cardinals (4:15 EST)
Line: Broncos by 4
As you can see, CV has all kinds of "angles" to football games (that go beyond "X"'s & "O"'s)... One such angle is to AVOID teams that are making a coaching substitution in the middle of the season... This is especially true when the coach is not fired prior to a bye week (meaning the team has little time to adjust to the new system)... Josh McDaniels (he of, I'll trade away my franchize QB Cutler, my All-Pro wide receiver Brandon Marshall, and I'll let Peyton Hillis get away and become an All-Pro in Cleveland because he was hitting on my wife  fame)...

Alright, as soon as you cut through all my comedy, you "football saavy" types will remind me that Leslie Frazier (Vikings), and Jason Garrett (Cowboys) stepped into similar roles this year and have fared rather well... I'll grant you that, but I'll also remind you that both of them had long been considered "head coaches" in waiting... Frazier's name has been discussed for many years as a possible head coach and the only reason he hasn't gotten a job (until now) was because the NFL are a bunch of racists... Now that America has voted for a black POTUS (the most capable "policy & decision making" POTUS of all history)... The spotlight is on the NFL as being deficient in this category... Garrett, for his part, turned down the HC job of the Ravens, Dolphins, & other teams to stay in waiting for the Cowboys top job...

In any case, the situation in Denver is a little different... Furthermore, when Garrett was bumped up, the Cowboys were double digit dogs to the Giants on the road... No pressure there... Frazier managed to topple the Redskins & Bills (at home)... But both were hapless teams who matched up poorly...

Arizona might be just as hapless, but they're a team that's just two years removed from the Superbowl, and has won it's division for many years straight before falling on hard times this year... They've gotta be a little miffed that a team that's won 5 out of it's last 19 games, and fired their coach last Sunday is coming in to their house FAVORED by 4 points... 

There's something called PRIDE in the NFL, (or at least there ought to be)... I'll take the CARDINALS for (3 units)...

 Kansas City Chiefs at San Diego Chargers (4:15 EST)
Line: Chargers by 7
The Chargers are my "other" afternoon pick where I'm siding with the public... I forget the exact number, but Phil Rivers is like 16-1 in the month of December... The Chargers didn't show up to play last week against the Raiders, but I'm sorry, I'll revert to the previous trend thank you... So Phil Rivers loses ONE GAME in december and all of a sudden next week he's a bumbling idiot?

Speaking of bumbling idiots, Matt Cassel had to undergo an emergency appendectomy this past week (that's a note for all you FANTASY FOOTBALL owners - who should be required to undergo a LOBOTOMY if you had Matt Cassel on your team in the first place)... The Chiefs will be going with Brodie Croyle here... I expect the sack happy Chargers to attempt to give him a lobotomy all afternoon)...  The Chiefs beat the Chargers in the first week of the season in a rowdy & rainy Arrowhead Stadium... The Chiefs failed to score an offensive touchdown in that game (relying on a punt return for a TD, a pick 6, and two end zone picks tossed by Phil Rivers in the RED ZONE)... Even so, the Bolts had a chance to win at the end of that game... I'll go with the CHARGERS here for (3 units)... It would be 5, except that I don't like laying a TD or more in division matchups... Rules, Rules, Rules...

SUNDAY NIGHT FOOTBALL

 Philadelphia Dog Killers at Dallas Cowboys (8:25 EST)
Line: Dog Killers by 3.5
Picks will be posted before kickoff

MONDAY NIGHT FOOTBALL

 Baltimore Ravens at Houston Texans (8:35 EST)
Line: Ravens by 3

17 comments:

Bruce in Tennessee said...

WASHINGTON—The U.S. government ran its 26th straight monthly budget deficit in November amid wrangling over a package that would extend big tax cuts to Americans trying to recover from recession.

The Treasury Department, in its regular budget monthly statement, said the government spent $150.4 billion than it collected in the second month of fiscal 2011.

Economists surveyed by Dow Jones Newswires had expected a shortfall of $126.5 billion. November is traditionally a month for deficits.


...Very interesting day yesterday. The government is doing all it can to produce financial armageddon. The history books will look back at this time and wonder what happened.

Anonymous said...

Bruce,

it's called "Raping & Looting" -- of the People, by the Gov't..

AAIP

ben22 said...

Sayings change over time, this is from Reminiscences for those that haven't read it:

"A man can't spend years at one thing and not acquire a habitual attitude towards it quite unlike that of the average beginner. The difference distinguishes the professional from the amateur. It is a way that a man looks at things that makes or loses money for him in the speculative markets. The public has the dilettante's point of view toward his own effort. The ego obtrudes itself unduly and the thinking is not deep or exhaustive. The professional concerns himself with "doing the right thing rather than with making money", knowing that the profit takes care of itself if the other things are attended to. A trader gets to play the game as the professional billiard player does - that is, he looks far ahead instead of considering the particular shot before him."

ben22 said...

keeping with the lennon thread from before, people can interpret these comments how they like, I just found them interesting:

PLAYBOY: On the subject of your own wealth, the New York Post recently said you admitted to being worth over $150,000,000 and----

LENNON: We never admitted anything.

PLAYBOY: The Post said you had.

LENNON: What the Post says -- OK, so we are rich; so what?

PLAYBOY: The question is, How does that jibe with your political philosophies? You're supposed to be socialists, aren't you?

LENNON: In England, there are only two things to be, basically: You are either for the labor movement or for the capitalist movement. Either you become a right-wing Archie Bunker if you are in the class I am in, or you become an instinctive socialist, which I was. That meant I think people should get their false teeth and their health looked after, all the rest of it. But apart from that, I worked for money and I wanted to be rich. So what the hell -- if that's a paradox, then I'm a socialist. But I am not anything. What I used to be is guilty about money. That's why I lost it, either by giving it away or by allowing myself to be screwed by so-called managers.

PLAYBOY: Whatever your politics, you've played the capitalist game very well, parlaying your Beatles royalties into real estate, livestock----

ONO: There is no denying that we are still living in the capitalist world. I think that in order to survive and to change the world, you have to take care of yourself first. You have to survive yourself. I used to say to myself, I am the only socialist living here. [Laughs] I don't have a penny. It is all John's, so I'm clean. But I was using his money and I had to face that hypocrisy. I used to think that money was obscene, that the artists didn't have to think about money. But to change society, there are two ways to go: through violence or the power of money within the system. A lot of people in the Sixties went underground and were involved in bombings and other violence. But that is not the way, definitely not for me. So to change the system -- even if you are going to become a mayor or something -- you need money.

Andy T said...

Ben22--

Fantastic clip there on the Lennon/Ono interview. Thanks for that.

Interesting words there.

Andy T said...

Also, good Livermore passage there. That particular passage is worth remembering.

call me ahab said...

karen-

that image from the other page . . .

that figure staggers me

b22-

this line-

The professional concerns himself with "doing the right thing rather than with making money"

not sure I buy that (when it comes to professional traders)- since making money is their job-

as opposed to a singer or dancer whose job is to sing or dance

Anonymous said...

Mark Madoff Dead

ben22 said...

ahab,

what's not to buy, who says livermore was talking about professional "traders" as opposed to just professionals, who says most traders are "professionals"? He just made money for himself.

now I get what you are saying, but I'd observe that I think what you say is exactly a big part of the problems in the industry and with the public perception of the "role" of a money manager, which is that there is this belief that succeeding in it means "making money" 100% of the time.....sometimes "doing the right thing" with an investment takes a long time to play out, sometimes doing nothing at all "keeping money" is the "right thing"

if I were to think of an example where I could illustrate the contrast

look at someone like David Einhorn and how he might present a very detailed thesis for shorting St. Joe or being long Apple or gold or whatever, then there are the various pundits that quickly suggest it's ok to buy an insolvent bank because the Fed backstopped it and that be the end of the analysis and thought on it.

on another note:

http://fridayinvegas.blogspot.com/2010/12/jp-morgan-and-massive-silver-short.html

Anonymous said...

If We Lose our Internet Freedoms Because of Wikileaks, You Should At Least Know Why
Posted on December 10, 2010 by willyloman
by Scott Creighton

Just a little more background on the “hero” Jullian Assange and Wikileaks…

Wikileaks was started up in Dec. of 2006. Oddly enough, as a supposed “leak” site, a dissident site, it was given a great deal of immediate mainstream attention from the likes of the Washington Post, TIME magazine, and even Cass Sunstein the now infamous Obama administration who wrote a paper on how to “cognitively infiltrate” dissident groups in order to steer them in a direction that is useful to the powers that be.

The TIME magazine article is curious because it seems that right off the bat they were telling us how to interpret Wikileaks in such a way that sounded strangely familiar to George W. Bush back just after 9/11…


“By March, more than one million leaked documents from governments and corporations in Asia, the Middle East, sub-Saharan Africa and the former Soviet Bloc will be available online in a bold new collective experiment in whistle-blowing. That is, of course, as long as you don’t accept any of the conspiracy theories brewing that Wikileaks.org could be a front for the CIA or some other intelligence agency.” TIME Jan. 2007

Now remember and read closely… this article was written PRIOR to Wikileaks’ first big “leak”, which according to the article was to occur sometime in March of 2007. So why would TIME magazine be writing about them in the first place if they hadn’t done anything yet? Also, let’s not pass up on that delicious irony: this is TIME magazine singing the praises of a supposed “leak” site which will supposedly expose all kinds of “conspiracy theories” while at the same time telling their readers NOT to believe in those silly “conspiracy theories” circulating about Wikileaks. Just so long as you believe the “right” conspiracy theories, you’ll be alright I guess. This of course perfectly matches Jullian Assange’s own statements about 9/11....
http://willyloman.wordpress.com/2010/12/10/if-we-lose-our-internet-freedoms-because-of-wikileaks-you-should-at-least-know-why/

AAIP

call me ahab said...

b22-

fair points- I am not in the "money management" business- so-

maybe the objective in many cases is to just tread water -

but the quote gave me the impression that if a trader just does the right thing-

then the money will follow-

but sometimes maybe doing the right thing also means the money will "definitely" not follow-

and so . . . we have Madoff- his son ending his life-and I wonder if Bernie is wishing he could go back in time and choose to do the right thing

bob said...

Hello everyone, I trust you are all doing well. I've been busy with other things, and any trading I do is out of time with you guys. I still check in to see how things are going.

AAIP

I have followed them from before the beginning, I remember them asking john young to host for them. If you want to see tin foil squared, look for that exchange.

What I find really odd is that no one is asking how they obtained these state department cables. I am not talking about the "bradley manning" affair now, no person in the military has access to diplomatic cables, especially from around the world.

TOR is how I think it happened. TOR and wikileaks share a lot of the same people. There was also a story a few years ago about people who were running TOR nodes that were seemingly "picking" state department cables off of their own equipment, plain text. It seems that the state department was using TOR as a one stop shop for communication, only TOR was never designed to be used in that way. It only maintains anonymity if your name isn't in the package.

Were these documents hacked, or simply picked off of the interwebs?

And how has TOR managed to stay away from this story?

Anonymous said...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mtKqx0whZY0&feature=player_embedded

I wonder when Katie Couric's piece is going to be out ?

only Russia Today can cover this?


AAIP

ben22 said...

no doubt CV the playoff race in the NFC is getting very interesting, should be a good week.

cv said...

Chargers line has moved to Chargers (-9.5)...

That is more of a correct line, so I'm moving the UNITS down to (1 unit)... Still on Chargers...

I'll withdrawl my Giants/Vikings pick pending host site of game now that we know that Minneapolis residents, besides being flip floppers on every issue known to mankind, also don't know how to properly construct a roof to put over their heads...

and even when they do... the outfield looks like a black trash can bag (baggie)...

Bruce in Tennessee said...

Matt Ryan looks like the real deal.

Andy T said...

cv and friends:

Sort of struggling a bit today. We hosted our annual Xmas party last night--25 of our closest drunk friends were here. My last memory was slow dancing with my wife at 3AM....

The Sunday Evening Post might be a little late.

I have some 3 and 4 team parlays working today with Dolphins anchoring all of them. Hope they cover.

Post a Comment

Disclosure/Warning

This blog should not be interpreted as investment advice of any kind. The authors are NOT representing themselves CTAs or CFAs or Investment/Trading Advisor of any kind. The authors may or may not trade in the markets discussed. The authors may hold positions opposite of what may by inferred by this blog.The information contained in this blog is taken from sources the authors believes to be reliable, but it is not guaranteed by the authors as to the accuracy or completeness thereof and is presented here for information purposes only. Commodity trading involves risk and is not for everyone.