clock menu more-arrow no yes mobile

Filed under:

Steelers Fans, Let's Pick 'Em

Well, that lengthy post on Darnell Stapleton seemed to put y'all to sleep, so let's try something else. How about some good old fashioned American gambling. Let's pick the over/under on NFL team' win totals this year.

* Disclaimer - BTSC does not condone gambling and will not be held responsible for monetary losses incurred from advice contained within. If you win and want to send me money, well that's ok I suppose :)


The numbers in colums 2 and 3 represent the payouts for each selections. So in the case of the Steelers, you would have to bet $1.40 to win $1 if you selected the over, or $140 to win $100. In other words, it's not even money, and Vegas believes more bettors will select the over. If you take the under (+110),  you win $1.10 for every $1 bet, or $110 for every $100.  Finally, for teams with a whole integer for their win total (no decimal point), your money is returned in the event of a tie. So if Pittsbugh won 9 games, you'd get your money back regardless of whether you took the over or the under.

If I were a gambling man, here are some of the selections I would make:

1) I'd probably take Green Bay with the over (8.5). The money's right (+120) and that's a young, nasty defense in a fairly weak division. Sure Aaron Rodgers is untested, but he'll only have to be solid, not spectacular, provided the running game's humming.

2)  For my safe bet, I'd probably take Seattle. The bet doesn't pay well (-155), but with two games against SF, STL, and AZ, plus games against Miami and the Jets, I like their chances to win their typical 9 to 10 games.

3) I'll go with the over for Pittsburgh, but I will say that I'd not be the least bit surprised if we win 9 games this year, which would result in a push.

4) Indianpolis seems like the best bet on this board to me at 11 wins (+135).  Sure it's a tough schedule with that loaded AFC South plus games vs Pittsburgh, SD, NE, GB, @ MIN, @ CLE, but when's the last time a Peyton Manning quarterbacked team didn't win at least 12 games? That's right, 5 years ago in 2002.

5) San Diego's also a safe bet imo.

6) I'll finish with one more AFC team - Oakland. The money's right for me to take the under (+140). Lane Kiffen's doing some nice things in Oakland, but JaMarcus Russel will still essentially be a rookie in 2008 and I just can't see them winning 7 games, even in the fairly soft AFC West. I could see them winning 6 games, but that'd be a push. 7 seems like a stretch for a team still just one year removed from a historically bad offense. And in 2008, they won't have a Daunte Culpepper to help win a few close games.

Your turn.