2022 Week 11 NFL Handicapping: All Picks ATS and Survivor Pool Pick
I was on the verge of one of my best weeks of picking all year…and I’ve been pretty stellar this season. Had the 49ers covered their -7.0 (won by 6.0), then I would have booked an 11-3 ATS record on all picks and a 4-1 Blazing Five. But I cannot complain too much with my Week 10…10-4 ATS on all picks…another winning record B5. Correctly called three out of 4 underdogs to win outright and the banged-up Titans pulled through for my Best Bet.
My Survivor pick flopping (ATL) was about the worst news of the handicapping week.
We’re onto Week 11, where the board looks OK. Not as great as I felt about Week 10, but better than I felt about Weeks 8-9 (but still did well those weeks). Onto Week 11…let’s keep this hot streak going!
Week 10 results…
FFM All picks straight up: 8-6
FFM ATS: 10-4
FFM Best Bet: 1-0
FFM Blazing Five (no TNF): 3-2
FFM Calling a dog for an outright win: 3-1
Chris ATS: 6-8
Ross ATS: 10-4
Chris Best Bet: 0-1
Ross Best Bet: 0-1
When All 3 analysts agree: 4-2
When both analysts disagree with my pick: 2-2, for me
FFM Survivor: ATL(L)
Chris Survivor: TEN(W)
Ross Survivor: KC(W)
All Underdogs ATS = 9-5
All picks straight up: 106-53-1
ATS: 85-61-4 (58.2%)
Best Bet: 7-3
Blazing Five (no TNF): 32-16-2 (67%)
Calling a dog for an outright win: 12-7
Chris ATS: 94-52-4
Ross ATS: 74-72-4
Chris Best Bet: 8-2 (maybe you should listen to the expert!)
Ross Best Bet: 5-5
When All 3 analysts agree: 38-21-1
When both analysts disagree with my pick: 13-14, for me
FFM Survivor: BAL(W), BUF(W), LAC(L), PHI(W), TB(W), CIN(W), KC(W), MIA(W), ATL(L)
Chris Survivor: BAL(W), GB(W), LAC(L), PHI(W), TB(W), LAR(W), CIN(W), DAL(W), BUF(L), TEN(W)
Ross Survivor: DEN(L), XXX, BUF (L), GB(W), PHI(W), SF(L), LV(W), DAL(W), TB(W), KC(W)
All Underdogs ATS = 81-65-4
Week 11 Picks….
DAL (-1.5) at MIN
The Computer says: MIN by 3.9 (a 5.4 spread differential)
Minnesota at home is an underdog? You have to be joking. Minnesota will run the ball all over them…if Darrisaw can play (concussion protocol).
Chris ‘Bet The Close’ Podcast: DAL
Ross Jacobs: DAL
PHI (-6.5) at IND
The Computer says: PHI by 1.7 (a 4.8 spread differential)
Bad timing for Philly…a defense that was on the field all game on an MNF game, a defense that got destroyed, a defense that cannot stop the run faces a team that has rediscovered their run game and O-Line. The Colts run for 200+ yards and win or get close in this game.
Chris ‘Bet The Close’ Podcast: IND
Ross Jacobs: IND
LV at DEN (-2.5) *UNDERDOG OUTRIGHT WIN*
The Computer says: LV by 1.1 (a 3.6 spread differential)
Denver is tragically bad, and Vegas is due for a bounce back. The Raiders are playing better than their record.
Chris ‘Bet The Close’ Podcast: DEN
Ross Jacobs: DEN
LAR at NO (-3.5)
The Computer says: NO by 6.9 (a 3.4 spread differential)
I think the Saints will blow the doors off a Rams team with no O-Line or Cooper Kupp or run game. Love this play this week at New Orleans with NO’s season on the line.
*FFM SURVIVOR PICK*
Chris ‘Bet The Close’ Podcast: LAR
Ross Jacobs: LAR
NYJ at NE (-3.5)
The Computer says: NE by 0.3 (a 3.2 spread differential)
This game is a toss up, but I think it will be close, so take the points. I wouldn’t be surprised if NYJ blew out NE here, but not the other way around.
Chris ‘Bet The Close’ Podcast: NE *BEST BET*
Ross Jacobs: NE
TEN at GB (-3.0) *UNDERDOG OUTRIGHT WIN*
The Computer says: TEN by 0.2 (a 3.2 spread differential)
I just believe that the Titans are one of the 2-3 best teams in football, and the injury report is the only thing holding them back from blowing out a poorly coached Green Bay team coming off a sloppy/lucky win to break up a big losing streak -- missing center Ben Jones is massive, but getting back Kristian Fulton with Elijah Molden (back last week) is huge…and if Jeffrey Simmons can go, the Titans D can dominate to a win.
Chris ‘Bet The Close’ Podcast: GB
Ross Jacobs: GB
CAR at BAL (-13.0)
The Computer says: BAL by 11.0 (a 2.0 spread differential)
So many points to give in today’s NFL…just taking the points.
Chris ‘Bet The Close’ Podcast: BAL
Ross Jacobs: BAL *SURVIVOR*
CLE at BUF (-7.5)
The Computer says: BUF by 9.1 (a 1.6 spread differential)
The weather makes me reel this in a bit, or I’d say Buffalo by 12-14+. The Bills are going to wreck their next opponents after two fluky losses in a row. Only the weather could stop them, but the snow may be all done and removed by 1pm kickoff.
Chris ‘Bet The Close’ Podcast: CLE
Ross Jacobs: BUF
CHI at ATL (-3.0)
The Computer says: ATL by 2.2 (a 0.8 spread differential)
Two evenly matchup teams, so I’ll be happy to take the points.
Chris ‘Bet The Close’ Podcast: CHI
Ross Jacobs: ATL
DET at NYG (-3.0)
The Computer says: NYG by 2.5 (a 0.5 spread differential)
Detroit is a decent team, so I’ll take the points with the team that’s on a recent roll.
Chris ‘Bet The Close’ Podcast: DET
Ross Jacobs: DET *BEST BET*
CIN (-3.5) at PIT
The Computer says: CIN by 3.1 (a 0.4 spread differential)
This will be a war…at Pitt, I’ll take the points in a war.
Chris ‘Bet The Close’ Podcast: CIN
Ross Jacobs: PIT
SF (-8.5) v. ARI (in Mexico)
The Computer says: SF by 8.8 (a 0.3 spread differential)
Everything says to take the Cardinals and the points, but with unknowns at QB and the broken O-Line…you have to take the 49ers as an early THU pick.
Chris ‘Bet The Close’ Podcast: ARI *SURVIVOR*
Ross Jacobs: SF
WSH (-3.5) at HOU
The Computer says: WSH by 3.3 (a 0.2 spread differential)
This feels like a trap/letdown game for Washington…and HOU is better than perceived, but still not-great.
Chris ‘Bet The Close’ Podcast: HOU
Ross Jacobs: HOU
KC (-5.5) at LAC
The Computer says: KC by 5.4 (a 0.1 spread differential)
The Chargers last stand. If they get back Allen-Williams, they can keep this close/win. A must-win game, but LAC is so overrated/bad that I don’t feel good about it.
Chris ‘Bet The Close’ Podcast: LAC
Ross Jacobs: LAC
All rights reserved. All content is for entertainment purposes only and TFA is not responsible or liable for personal adverse outcomes nor are any game results or forecasting guaranteed. Past results do not predict future outcomes. We are not held liable for any personal loses incurred. We are solely here to produce and provide content for recreational purposes. No part of this publication may be reproduced, distributed, or transmitted in any form or by any means, including photocopying, recording, or other electronic or mechanical methods, without the prior written permission of the publisher, except in the case of brief quotations embodied in critical reviews and certain other noncommercial uses permitted by copyright law. For permission requests, email the publisher at email@example.com.