This article is part of our NFL Picks series.
Now that we have Week 1 and the obligatory hot takes and overreactions in the book, it is time to focus on some betting angles for Week 2.
A few line at the DraftKings Sportsbook have moved 2.5 points or more since Sunday.
Those are as follows:
Seahawks +3 at 
Lions to +5.5 (-112)
Bears -1.5 at 
Buccaneers to +3 (-115)
Jets +3 at 
Cowboys to +9 (-108)
Steelers -1 vs 
Browns to +2
The Jets of course will carry on without Aaron Rodgers, and the Cowboys looked like the 1985 Bears against the Giants, hence the big move there.
Let me start with something that probably does not work -- fading Week 1 over and under performers. By that I mean, teams that wildly exceeded or fell short of Week 1 expectations. My theory was that some point spreads might move too far in response to one data point and it made sense to fade that. I defined "Big Losers" as teams that failed to come within 14 points of their week 1 spread and "Big Winners" as teams that beat the number by more than 2 touchdowns.
So how did Big Losers and Big Winners fare ATS in Week 2 going back to 2002?
- Big Losers: 33-31-2 ATS
- Big Winners: 30-31-5 ATS
OK, not a lot to see here. The markets avoid overcorrecting based on one week of results. I do like the Bears and Jets off the line moves, but there is nothing statistically to back that up.
What has worked in Week since 2002? Betting on Unders. They are 171-150-5 for a 53.2 percent clip, meaning just wagering blind on all of them at the standard -110 produced a positive return. Going with only higher total games or lower total games did not impact the results much. Using solely divisional games did pay off however.
Unders in Week 2 divisional games have gone 66-44-2 (60 percent) dating back to 2002, 21-13-1 (61.76 percent) over the last decade and 7-2 since 2019.
We have 6 divisional games on the Week 2 docket.
- Ravens-Bengals Total 46.5
- Colts-Texans Total 40 (-112 on the under)
- Niners-Rams Total 44.5 (-108)
- Dolphins-Patriots Total 46.5
- Saints-Panthers Total 40 (-115)
- Browns-Steelers Total 39.5
Stipulating a total of at least 43.5 improved divisional under results a shade, as such games have gone 36-20-1 (64.3 percent) back to 2002. The Dolphins-Patriots and 49ers-Rams totals did tick up a bit from their look-ahead lines last week. That is clearly in reaction to some better-than-expected offensive output from the teams involved, and in the case of the Dolphins, shaky defense. The Patriots rattled off plays at a 22.5 second clip, the second fastest pace of the week but mostly on account of an unfavorable game script. The Dolphins checked in at 25.2 seconds per play in a contest that was tight throughout, so riding the under here really banks on two familiar rivals mucking it up in a tight game.
Wagering on home underdogs is another classic "Pros vs Joes" play that has worked in Week 2. The "public" generally loves road favorites. It makes intuitive sense, as the visitor is rated as the better team and the two-point-ish home field lean in the typical point spread nowadays makes the favorite look cheap.
Home underdogs are 57-45-3 (55.9 percent) since 2002 and 30-20-1 (60 percent) back to 2013, though an even 6-6 since 2021. The results do improve when we stick to games with lower expected scoring. Home underdogs in games with totals under 46 have gone 20-9-1 (69.0 percent) ATS since 2002.
A whopping seven games are on the radar here:
- Texans +1 vs Colts, Total 40
- Titans +3 vs Chargers, Total 45.5
- Falcons +2 vs Packers, Total 40.5
- Cardinals +5.5 vs Giants, Total 40
- Rams +7.5 vs Niners, Total 44.5
- Panthers +3 (-105) vs Saints, Total 40
- Steelers +2 vs Browns, Total 39.5
My biggest mistake Week 1 was not properly fading rookie quarterbacks and/or rookie head coaches early in the season. The good news this week is that the Colts-Texans game features rookie everything on both sides. The home-field advantage for the Rams is minimal as SoFi Stadium will fill up with 49ers fans, but a 7.5-point cushion helps. I also like the Steelers +2. I will recuse myself on the Giants on account of homerism, but I am surprised to see no line movement after the Sunday Night debacle.
