NFL Playoffs Betting Picks: Three Pooches Worth Considering in the Wildcard Round

NFL Betting Picks: Taking the points with the Panthers, Jaguars, and Steelers in the opening round of playoff action

The 2025-26 NFL Playoffs look dramatically different than the prior year's proceedings. Perhaps most notably, for the first time in the Patrick Mahomes era (and the first time since the 2014-15 season), the Kansas City Chiefs will not be vying for the Lombardi Trophy. The Ravens have similarly fallen from glory and are destined to observe postseason action from the sidelines, for only the second time since Lamar Jackson entered the fold in Baltimore. The Steelers, Lions, Vikings, Commanders, and Buccaneers also failed to qualify for this year's playoffs, though they all secured berths last year.

In contrast, the Broncos, Seahawks, Patriots, Jaguars, Bears, Rams, 49ers, Texans, Bills, Chargers, and Packers all made the postseason cut this year, after missing the mark in 2024-25. This reversal of fortunes informs an angle that has delivered a long-term ATS win rate that is statistically significantly higher (at the 95% confidence level), despite the relatively small sample size, than the 52.3% cover rate required to break even at the standard vigorish, per a single proportion z-test. The system detailed in the following graphic has delivered a 31% long-term return on investment.

We suspect the strong and consistent profitability of this angle owes to the betting public's tendency to overvalue favorites...even objectively overpriced favorites. Substantiating the market bias toward better teams, Shank (2019) observed that not only does the betting public gravitate toward favorites, but this propensity strengthens as betting volume increases. Similarly, Dawnhauer, et al (2017) concluded that bettors tend to prefer favorites, despite the profitability associated with backing underdogs.

Relatedly, evidencing the importance of playoff pedigree, Steve Makinen, writing for VSiN, reported that between the 2003-04 and 2024-25 NFL seasons, QBs making postseason debuts delivered a meager 27-47 ATS record (since this examination was published, Jayden Daniels led Washington to a win and cover in Tampa Bay in last year's Wildcard Round, while Bo Nix and the Broncos were trounced in Buffalo).

The following wagers are triggered for the opening round of the 2025-26 NFL Playoffs, per this simple set of criteria.

LA Rams @ Carolina Panthers +10.5

Green Bay Packers @ Chicago Bears +1

Buffalo Bills @ Jacksonville Jaguars +1

LA Chargers +4 @ New England Patriots

Houston Texans @ Pittsburgh Steelers +3

Corroborating four of these picks, an updated piece by Steve Makinen notes that home dogs are 11-2 versus the number since 2016, after a perfect 3-0 ATS run last year. The sample size is small; however, this observed cover rate likewise proved statistically significantly different than the 52.3% theoretical breakeven rate for spread bettors.

Additionally, evidence has been documented that postseason bettors overvalue road teams with superior regular-season records. Since 2003, traveling teams that amassed more wins than their opposition through week 18 are an underwhelming 11-22-1 ATS (33%) in the playoffs. We suspect this result is a manifestation of recency bias, a well-documented and exploitable characteristic of sports betting markets—see Durand, et al (2021), Kreiger, et al (2021), and Metz & Jog (2022) for evidence of recency bias in NFL betting. The Bills and Texans meet these criteria (meaning these teams' opponents, Jacksonville and Pittsburgh, are expected to cover). And though the 67% win rate associated with fading teams in this spot falls just shy of the 95% threshhold for statistical significance, we think it is likely that this finding will eventually find statistical validation, as the sample size grows.

Additional contextual support for the Panthers' expected cover is found in the knowing that home teams that average fewer than 22.5 points per game are 15-5-1 ATS (75%) in the postseason since 2009 (this win rate is statistically significantly different than breakeven). This observation, too, appears consistent with recency bias. We hypothesize that casual bettors shun low-scoring teams and ultimately bid spreads too high for more offensively prolific squads, ultimately creating contrarian value.

Further, a play on the Jaguars +1 was also triggered by another of our own high-conviction situational setups, which we detail here.

As a cross-check to the situational signals we have discussed up to this point, we overlaid on our handicapping effort a quantitative approach rooted in the evaluation of neutral-field projections from three well-respected sources: the ESPN FPI, Jeff Sagarin NFL Ratings, and Massey-Peabody NFL Power Rankings. We adjusted each of these 'raw' forecasts for home field advantage using nflelo.com's Home Field Advantage Tracker, which assesses home field advantage individually for each team in the League based on point differentials at home and on the road. The results of this exercise are indicated in the following table.

Home field advantage (HFA) numbers represent weighted averages for the last 16 games (roughly two seasons), the last five years, and over the entire life of teams' current stadiums (with greater weights applied to the shorter terms). You might have noticed that these estimates represent marked departures from the approximately 2-3 point industry standard value assumption for teams competing in their own building. Rationalizing our unconventional take, consider that Jacksonville's average margin of victory was roughly 16 points in home games this season (compared to five points in away games), implying the Jags fared much better at home recently than their long-term average or the League norm this year. For comparison, consider that Washington's margins were worse at home than on the road (i.e., the Commanders exhibited a negative home-field advantage) over the last couple of seasons, and their cover margins in their building were below-average over longer terms.

The disparity in home game performance between the Jaguars and Commanders underscores the importance of analyzing the value of home-field advantage at the team level, as opposed to applying a single, static number to all teams. And while deviations of the magnitude of this comparison should not be expected to persist indefinitely, extremes probably should not be ignored altogether either (which, we think, justifies our application of a weighting mechanism that considers location-based performance over short, medium, and long terms).

The results of our analysis of leading power rankings methodologies validate taking the points with the Panthers, Bears, Jaguars, and Steelers, but do not indicate a favorable disposition toward the LA Chargers' prospects. Also at odds with the potential of a Chargers cover, Steve Makinen notes that road teams averaging less than 22.5 points per game are an abysmal 11-24 ATS (31%) since 2009 (likewise statistically significant). To whittle the list further, Chicago's Caleb Williams will make his inaugural postseason start when the Bears host the Packers this weekend, which, we learned earlier, offers an ominous indication.

Thus, our NFL Wildcard Round betting picks include the Panthers plus 10.5 (i.e., north of a key number), the Steelers plus a field goal, and the Jaguars plus a point. We are laying off the Bears and Chargers, as a result of mixed messages from the data.

Happy betting!!