Nah, I think she'd be cool with it (the betting itself, maybe not so cool with the way I'm getting soaked this year). She won $50 betting on the Giants (straight up) in Super Bowl XLII, so she's got a gambler's heart.

(just in case, though: yep! All fake bets! Fake money! Promise!)

Last week I just needed to recover psychically from the dual damage of Patriots-Bengals and Seahawks-Colts. This week, I've been too swamped to look at lines, which is probably good because I would have been really tempted to take Arizona getting 7.5. Oops!

I like that we are making some fake bets here. Are we making fake bets, or did your wife find this thread on the NEW Jolt Country Dot Com?

(Confidential to Dr. Girlfriend, Cowchip, Colorado: I'm also fake betting with Greg, dear.)

Would have done fine on Dallas/SF, lost on Indy. Not too bad, certainly better than I've really been doing all year.

I stay away from college football just because I don't follow it too closely -- I watch every weekend but can't really name any players other than Manziel and Clowney, and I have a bad tendency to think that teams that were good when I was a kid are still good (BYU and Nebraska are powers, right?).

I ended up avoiding bets entirely this week. My top NFL picks WOULD have been Dallas (-5.5 vs Wash), Indy (-1.5 at SD), San Francisco (-11.5 vs Arizona). Let's see how I do when I'm only playing with imaginary money!

You haven't mentioned betting on college football, but yesterday was the OU/Texas game, one of our two biggest games of the year (next to OU/OSU). OU went into the game 5-0 and a 14 point favorite against the Longhorns.

Of course that meant that the Sooners would end up losing by 16. 20-36, total.

They key to getting rich on bets is asking me what games are "sure deals" and then bet on the opposite.

It's the .5 that gets me. It makes me think (and trying to think like oddsmakers has never worked for me before, but why not keep trying?) that they expect the Bears to win by a touchdown. And so if I take the Bears there, they'll win by 7 exactly, and I'll be sad.

Of course, the Giants are, as stated, dog shit. But they're dog shit with a lot of offensive weapons, and the Bears haven't blown anyone out except the Steelers. Who are, similarly, dog shit.

So I think I'm staying away from this one. I may stay out all week ... and watch and learn.

The Giants are 0-5 and show no signs of improving. The Bears are 3-2, but lost last week and are playing at home this week so it seems like a sure bet. What's the spread? (Checks Google.) 7.5, sigh. In their first give games, the Giants have lost by 5, 18, 38, 24, and 15 points. The Bears seem like sure bet here but I've been burned by them before, sometimes for seasons at a time.

So, again, if it looks too easy, it probably is. I missed both games on Sunday. I didn't see any of Seattle-Indy, so can't comment on that, but: I overestimated the Patriots based on past performance, underestimated the Bengals based on them being the Bengals, and didn't know that a hurricane would hit Cincinnati on game day.

In one of the lost posts, Flack suggested I start betting against the Bears on a regular basis, which is sound advice. They play the Giants this week, though, and I can't bring myself to bet on the Giants. They may actually be as bad as advertised. Furthering the "I don't know shit about football" possibility, I picked them to win the NFC East easily this year.

This week ... this week I may take a break and lick my wounds. A couple things look promising, though -- Dallas -5.5 vs Washington, Indy +1.5 at San Diego.

Denver-Jacksonville opened at -27.5. I'm tempted by that, too.

The Patriots will destroy the Bengals. That's -- go ahead and spend that money already. The bookie should just give you a blank check.

We'll get into what your bookie is like later. Or ask him to post here so he can control the narrative.

It's very hard for me to accept that there's another unbeaten team in the NFC. In 2009, after a few weeks, it was just the Saints. I felt that America was simply better for having one unbeaten team in the NFC (mine). Think back to 2009, gsdgsd. Do you remember anything about it? Of course not, you spent it blind-drunk like I did.

...

OK, this post sort of got away from me at the end. Go Seahawks and Patriots!

Other rule I'm breaking: "never bet on the Patriots to cover," but since they're underdogs, that gets overturned.

One good rule: if it looks too easy, it probably is. I'm ignoring this rule twice this weekend.

[b]Seattle -3[/b] at Indianapolis -- at the start of this season, I pegged Indy as one of two teams (along with the Redskins) that would regress from 2012. It hasn't happened -- they're 3-1! But beyond the impressive win over SF, their wins came against Oakland and Jacksonville, two of the league's worst teams. Seattle's the best in the NFC and I can't imagine they'll repeat last week's first half. Seattle in a walk.

[b]New England +1.5[/b] at Cincinnati -- I don't care how lax the Pats have looked, I don't care if they're on the road -- if you get them as underdogs against anyone save the Broncos or Seahawks (and maybe Saints), you take them.

$40 on each -- if I win both, I'm in positive territory for the year. I won't win both.[/b]

Only if I start winning! Right now our ticket out of this dump stands at -$67 for the year.

Apropos of nothing, there are three* teams undefeated against the spread this season -- Denver, San Diego, and depending what they do tonight, Miami. Four are winless against the spread: Jacksonville, Pittsburgh, St. Louis, and NY Giants.

Someone once told me that in theory, oddsmakers want every team to go 8-8 ATS. That doesn't happen in real life, but as time goes on and more Vegas tourists throw in on the Broncos, they're going to give more and more points. And on the flip side, it's going to be easier to get value on theoretically-semi-competent teams like the Steelers and Giants.

(In two weeks, the Broncos play the not-theoretically-semi-competent Jaguars in Denver. Deadspin says a preliminary line puts the Broncos as 28-point favorites, which would be the largest margin ever. I'd bet that by gametime hits it might be more than 30.)

* - unofficial figure. Spreads vary from place to place -- I'm going off CBS Sportsline, simply because the against the spread pool I'm in uses their numbers and it's easier to check . But numbers vary by date/service; this week, I saw the number for Seattle at -2.5, -3, and -3.5. I could have taken them at -2.5 on Wednesday, which would have been a win -- I decided to see if it would slide in the Seahawks' favor. Instead, I missed my chance, and it went up.

I approve of this thread. I want to live vicariously through you. This is our time. This is our ticket out of this dump.

Week 4: Just one bet, [b]San Diego[/b] +1.5 vs Dallas. Pretty easy pick, Chargers are sneakily good, Cowboys are crap but lucked out drawing some weak opposition early on. San Diego came back to make me happy (well, as happy as I can ever be about a Chargers win). Almost bet on the Bears +3 vs Detroit, glad I didn't.

2-3 for the season so far.

I don't drink excessively any more, so I don't really have any bad habits. And I don't buy comic books or hockey jerseys any more, so I'm not spending money foolishly.

What better time to start betting against the NFL spread on a weekly basis? I started with week two. Let's see how I'm doing! (not well.)

Week 2: NEW ORLEANS -3 at Tampa Bay. I like the Bucs, but they're falling apart -- everyone hates the coach, the quarterback's due to be benched at any minute, the defense is shaky, etc. Meanwhile New Orleans is rebounding from last year's disaster, with a stout defense. This was an easy pick. Unfortunately, I didn't take into account a lengthy rain delay, and the Saints never got much going. Final score: Saints 16 Bucs 14, [b]gsdgsd loses[/b]. Fun note: during this game, we were at the home of my wife's relatives. I was watching the Broncos game and checking the score on the ticker. The last I checked it was Saints 13 Bucs 7, and I figured I was safe. Imagine my delight when ICJ texted me afterwards and I found out the actual score.

Week 3: BALTIMORE +2.5 vs Houston. Easy pick. The Texans are the Falcons of the AFC -- they look great against mediocre competition, look sad against real teams. The Ravens aren't nearly as bad as they looked in the opener, the Texans have a really overrated defense based on the hype around two stars and their offensive line is banged up. Getting the Ravens as a home underdog is a gift against just about any team. Final score: Ravens 30 Texans 9, [b]gsdgsd wins[/b].

WASHINGTON -1.5 vs Detroit. I don't know why the hell I did this, other than a "feeling," and guessing that both teams are subpar so the home team would probably win. They didn't. Even without RG3's injury the Redskins were due for regression, and boy is that coming true. Lions 27 Redskins 20, [b]gsdgsd loses[/b].

ATLANTA +3 at Miami. I don't like the Falcons, and see note about the Texans, but they were in the NFC Championship last year and the Dolphins are a slightly-above-average team that's been getting fat on poor teams. Atlanta was probably only an underdog because of injuries to Steven Jackson and others, and still should have won this pretty easily. Sadly, they muffed a punt, missed an easy field goal, couldn't hold leads, couldn't contain Ryan Tannehill (!), and as a result my daughter's college fund suffers. Dolphins 27 Falcons 23, [b]gsdgsd loses[/b]. Fuck the Falcons.

1-3 so far. Join me next week, as I lose more!