SportsPicks
Politics • Investing & Finance • Sports
All your sports information for those investing Vegas-style in the outcomes of sports games. Predicting games against the line in all sports, especially football, American and English style.
Interested? Want to learn more about the community?

European Football Review 6th-8th November 2026

We now break for the last two games of the UEFA Nations League Group Stage, so there will be no more club football until next Friday. I will review the rest of the European games from this past weekend and I will also be looking back over the first few months of the season to determine what the biggest profitable patterns have been and what trends have been driving them.

Everton 3-1 Coventry City
Everton were favoured by three quarters of a goal going into this game and for a lot of it, this game was quite even. Coventry took the lead but as the game went on, Everton found more space around Coventry to launch balls into the box for Thierno Barry, who gave Everton the lead. With the game becoming increasingly stretched, Everton scored a third as Coventry looked to equalise and they saw it out from there. I had this game having 10 or more corners and so I was surprised to see that only four corners were managed all game. Looking back on the game, both teams had a lot of the ball in spots where corners are likely to be generated, especially as both teams attacked more in the second, but players were getting tackled before getting the cross off or the cross was being cleared outwards.

I think this game would generally have had more than just four corners but the question is whether or not 9.5 is the right median line. Coventry haven't had strong corner generation, but they have played some teams that are expected to dominate possession. Everton is a team that normally doesn't suppress corner counts through possession so I would expect this game to be slightly favourable to Coventry's corners. Main thing that makes me wonder about the over was how often Coventry's wide players were losing possession on the flanks or failing to put the cross into a dangerous area. This is something I will have to look into deeper when assessing if possession on the flanks is driving corner totals.

Arsenal 1-0 Hull City
When I saw the pre game line of Hull City +2.5 I was tempted but I stayed off it because it was possible you might have Arsenal 3-0 but in retrospect that line looks like it was too harsh on Hull, as they defended compactly and didn't concede the winner until later in the game. Hull's strength at set pieces meant they didn't give up easy chances to Arsenal while defending them and their five at the back helped them prevent themselves from getting overloaded there. My concern going into this game was that Arsenal might not have been a favourable chance creation profile for Hull, as Arsenal are also very effective at defending from set pieces. I took no on both teams to score in this and indeed from a chance creation perspective, despite getting into some promising positions, Hull created relatively little. Arsenal didn't create an enormous amount either but they did create enough to get the win but not cover the spread.

I also had corners under 10.5 in this game and corners just about sneaked over to eleven. 10.5 is a lot of corners and Arsenal had a spell in the second half where they were working the ball out to the flanks and although Hull had numbers back, they were blocking crosses that were going behind for a corner. Hull did have more corners in the first half, which they got from counterattacks that got into dangerous positions. Since Hull kept this game closer, Arsenal had to attack pretty consistently throughout the game and this may have caused enough pressure on corner totals that the over on corners may have been the play. I do think there was some value taking no on both teams to score as neither team was consistently creating chances.

Fulham 1-1 Newcastle
Fulham were favoured by almost half a goal in this game and with Newcastle's struggles to implement Matthias Jaissle's high press, I though Álvaro Arbeloa's possession based Fulham side would be able to play through the pressure. As it happened, Jaissle made adjustments from the 1-0 defeat to Everton and Newcastle disrupted Fulham's buildup in a way that Aston Villa did not in last week's 1-1 draw. Chance creation had this as a close game with Newcastle edging chance creation so I think there was some value on Newcastle to get a result here.

Nottingham Forest 3-1 Manchester City
Oliver Glasner does it again versus Manchester City and this was a much needed win. Nottingham Forest's underlying metrics were nowhere near as bad as their league position and in this case they actually benefitted from finishing variance for a change. City did have stronger chance creation but Forest were defending for much of the game and what is more prescient is how the game was played, with Forest having very little of the ball yet pressing selectively and getting the ball quickly up the pitch when Forest won the ball. That's how Glasner approached opponents like City when he was manager of Crystal Palace and those methods worked for Forest against City.

Roma 3-0 Sassuolo
I had Roma -1.5 and both teams to score in this one, the first one of these came to pass supported by good chance creation from Roma but Sassuolo did not present the transition threat the other way that I thought they would. Gian Piero Gasperini teams do play very aggressively which can lead to counterattacking opportunities but there are other times when their man orientated press is so effective that the opponent does not manage to take advantage of the space. Alberto Aquilani played three at the back due various absences for Sassuolo and their front two ended up very isolated. If they had the personnel available they had against Juventus then I would have expected them to have offered more threat on the break.

Crystal Palace 1-3 Liverpool
This was Pierre Sage's last game before being sacked as manager of Crystal Palace and it was a miserable one for Palace fans who saw their team once again get into good positions but lose out to sloppy defending going in the other direction. I had no on both teams to score because I though this may have been a spot where Andoni Iraola's side could successfully prevent Palace from counterattacking but turned out to be a game with high chance creation on both sides, even if the no on both teams to score only missed due to a needless last minute penalty given up by Liverpool.

Brighton 2-0 Brentford
This game took a decisive turn midway through the first half when Igor Thiago was sent off. After that, Brentford were missing their main outlet and Brighton were able to manage the game with possession, going 2-0 very shortly before half time. Brighton were already 1-0 before the red card from Diego Gómez' long range strike but Brentford were still threatening at that stage. There are spots where one team having a man advantage fails to take advantage of the extra man but on this occasion it allowed Brighton to play a game they were very comfortable with.

Manchester United 4-4 Aston Villa
I expected a lot of attacking in this game but I was surprised by just how much. Aston Villa starting out very aggressively, targetting Diogo Dalot who was playing at left back. He had already been caught with daylight behind him vs Roma and Unai Emery decided to have Villa target him from the off and it led to the opening goal in the first minute. Villa added a second a few minute later and in both goals, Senne Lammens could have done a lot better in goal. Villa kept up their unusually high intensity game but this gave United the chance to counter through the spaces Villa left behind and they pulled a goal back soon afterwards from a penalty won after Matheus Cunha had exploited the space out on Villa's right flank. Villa then dropped off a bit and played more cautiously but United continued to create chances and equalised just before half time.

Early in the second half Villa retook the lead through a penalty before Leon Goretzka added another soon afterwards after a Leny Yoro had headed the ball onto his own bar. Villa went back to defending and they did not give up chances at the same rate as in the first half but United upped the pressure at the end of the game and scored two goals during injury time to make it 4-4. I had United to win this game and from a chance creation perspective, they did more than enough to do so. They played more aggressively than earlier in the season but defensive vulnerabilities remain. Since Dalot had been such a weak point, it is in retrospect quite plausible that Emery would have instructed his team to target him and so rather than looking at moneyline, the play here may well have been the over as Emery's game managment did allow United a route back into the game.

Genoa 1-2 AC Milan
For this game I expected Genoa's aggressive pressure and transition threat to provide trouble for Rúben Amorim's possession orientated team and Genoa did have moments of promise in the first half but they conceded two sloppy early goals where they left a Milan player unmarked in lots of space to score. Milan's press did win possession high up the pitch and they were able to attack Genoa quickly before they could reset their defensive shape, so you can say that Amorim's system was functioning exactly as it was intended to. Nonetheless, Genoa attacked more and more as Milan tried to see out the lead and they did pull a goal back but it wasn't enough to get a result. Going by chance creation Genoa did create more than Milan, so despite Milan creating danger through their pressing, Genoa did have chances of their own and they could very plausibly have scored the two goals necessary to equalise. There is also the component of teams defending an early lead tend to give up expected goals seeing the game out but once again the mechanisms of chance creation are indicative and Milan were favoured by half a goal going into the game so Genoa's chance creation relative to Milan was significantly more than expected by the pre game line.

Monza 0-1 Atalanta
This was a game where I gave Monza good chance of getting a result with their forward Gustavo Varela having a very strong season and Atalanta being inconsistent in implementing their possession game. In the first half Monza played on the front foot and had a lot of chances. Atalanta scored early in the second half and after that they presented more of a transition threat as Monza pressed for an equaliser. It was a different game second half as Maurizio Sarri's game management helped Atalanta get the result but Monza did have a clear first half edge and they could easily have been leading at halftime. Chance creation was even overall with Atalanta favoured by half a goal going into the game so I do think there was value on Monza despite the loss.

Inter Milan 2-0 Como
This was the biggest divergence between my pre match estimations and how the game actually played out so that is why this game requires particular attention. Inter Milan were favoured by half a goal against a Como team that had been doing very well and were coming off a 9-1 win away to Lens in the Champions League. Inter Milan meanwhile had been consistently leaving it late to win games, often after trailing for significant portions of the game. Since Como were promoted to Serie A a couple of years ago, Inter Milan had won five of six meetings against them and Como's last win against Inter was in 1985.

I had Como's positional style under Cesc Fàbregas as being well placed to take advantage of the spaces Inter Milan leave when they press but on this occasion, Inter's press was effective in disrupting their build up. Como have been very effective at chance creation from patient buildup in open play but their transition threat has not been the most explosive. That may have been the point I overlooked. Inter took the lead early on as Djed Spence found space in Como's box to send in a cutback for Pio Esposito to make it 1-0. Inter Milan have been dangerous on the flanks precisely because they are able to achieve overloads that lead to a player finding enough space to get the cross in. Inter went 2-0 not long afterwards through Marcus Thuram and they remained dangerous for the rest of the game.

What was very significant was Como's chance creation, which was very low. Fàbregas did have to contend with injuries to wide players and that may well have been a big factor in Como's lack of ability to generate chances, as Inter were able to prevent Como from creating centrally. Teams defending leads can give up expected goals as they defend a lead but this simply didn't materialise. In the spot Inter Milan were the play, though when these two teams play again with Como most likely having more width options, this may well be a very different game.

https://ultimouomo.com/inter-como-2-0-analisi-tattica-chivu-fabregas

Fiorentina 2-2 Juventus
Fiorentina's dynamic transition threat provided them with opportunities vs Juventus while Luciano Spalletti's side did not always convert possession into consistent opportunities. Fiorentina led twice and both teams scored a goal from a corner with Juventus' first equaliser coming from a counterattack of their own. Chance creation was quite close and Juventus were favoured by over a quarter of a goal going into the game so I think there was a little bit of value on Fiorentina, who have been steadily improving under Paolo Vanoli.

Atlético Madrid 1-2 Barcelona
Diego Simeone approached this game more proactively than he has in the past, with a selective press on Barcelona's build up that was effective in the first half and Atlético were able to exploit the space that Barcelona leaves in their high line approach. Atlético led at halftime but Hansi Flick made adjustments in the second half, bringing on Frenkie De Jon and playing him at right back, which seemed like a defensive substitution on the face of it but really gave Barcelona the ability to have an extra midfielder active in buildup. Fermín Lopíz scored two second half goals to give Barcelona the lead and Atlético Madrid did not manage to threaten enough to get an equaliser. Chance creation was close in this game with Barcelona edging it, but since Barcelona were favoured by half a goal before the game I think there was some value on Atlético to get a result.

With another international break for the last two Nation League group stage games, club football for Europe's top five leagues will return next Friday. I will cover some Nations League in that time but not every day will have games.

Interested? Want to learn more about the community?
What else you may like…
Videos
Podcasts
Posts
Articles
Crick's CFP Rankings
00:06:11
Barnes Brothers: European Soccer Preview
00:54:00
Master Class: Prediction Markets vs Sportsbooks

In this edition of "Master Class", we're gonna look at Prediction Markets vs Sportsbooks, and why the Prediction Markets are the Future of Sports Betting!! Come join us, as we try to provide you with all the tools to STACK YOUR NICKELS TO THE CEILING!! Feel Free to drop any questions you have in the comments!! Hope This Helps My Friends!! Good Luck, Good Gamblin, & Have The Day You Deserve!!

-Crickett

00:51:21
SEC Preview Podcast

A full breakdown of every team in the SEC, including talent analysis, coordinator concern, and schedule forecasts, with win total expectations. Enjoy!

SEC Preview Podcast
Smokehouse Mike's NCAAB

March Madness final four recap and Championship preview...

Smokehouse Mike's NCAAB
Smokehouse Mike's NBA
Smokehouse Mike's NBA
OFFICIAL PICKS: Tuesday, November 10, 2026

*Note: all picks ok up to 3% points higher than listed odds

NCAAF
2% MIAOH YES Ohio 47%
2% MIAOH-OHIO UNDER 46.5 51%
2% KENTST-BOWLING GREEN UNDER 43.5 50%

NBA
2% MIL +15.5 Knicks 51%

NCAAB
2% FSU +9.5 Florida 52%
2% TEXAS TECH +2.5 Illinois 50%
2% KENTUCKY +4.5 Kansas 49%
2% KANSAS ST +2.5 Creighton 48%
2% MICHIGAN ST +7.5 Duke 51%

NHL
2% TOR YES Avalanche 41%
2% COLUMBUS YES Panthers 49%

Live Chat
2026 New Live Chat

Per popular demand.

November 09, 2026
September 14, 2026
post photo preview
Barnes Betting Report: Monday Night Football
Chiefs-Broncos
 
REB Power Ratings
CHIEFS: 7 points better than average
BRONCOS 3 points better than average
Home edge for KC: +2.5
REB Spread: Chiefs by 6.5
REB Moneyline: Chiefs 67%
REB Total: 41
PFF Talent: Favors Chiefs on both sides of the ball
 
Situational Analysis
Coaching: Reid is one of the best ever as is Spags, whereas Payton gives up playcalling for the Broncos and Joseph has had some erratic spots in his career. 
Key Market Trends: Chiefs as 3 points or less: 70% cover rate; Reid has a 65% success rate against the spread in week 1; Nix average QB rating on road is 85 while Mahomes exceeds 100 at home; Denver’s offense against top-5 defenses on the road scores a median of 17 points while Chiefs offense under Mahomes is 27. Public tickets favor the Broncos by a 2 to 1 margin. 
 
Talent according to PFF
Players I expect to have 70+ ratings this season, using PFF's past season grades and match for scheme...
 
Chiefs Defense
CB SNEED
CB WILLIAMS
S ROLAND-WALLACE
S GILMAN
LB TRANQUILL 
LB BOLTON
LB COLTRANE
DE KARLAFTIS
DT JONES
 
Broncos Offense
LT BOLLES
RG MEINERZ
RT MCGLICNHEY
TE ENGRAM
WR WADDLE
WR SUTTON
QB NIX
 
Chiefs Offense
C HUMPHREY
G SMITH
WR WORTHY
WR RICE
RB WALKER
QB MAHOMES
TE KELCE
 
Broncos Defense
S HUFANGA
CB SURTAIN
DE BONITTO
DT JONES
DE ELLISS
 

 

Read full Article
post photo preview
Forecasting the Senate in 2026

Two conflicting trends dictate the Senate outcome in 2026. The map heavily favors Republicans, as the competitive Senate seats up lean heavily Republican. By contrast, the election context heavily favors Democrats, with war, recession, realignment and scandal tipping in their direction. A deeper dive reveals why prediction markets still likely undersell Democratic prospects.

First, the idea that Senate midterms favor the party out of power in the White House is belied by both recent and a century of history of Senate elections. Unlike the House, only a third of Senate seats face election in any midterm, and that map dictates outcomes unless the election context is particularly bad for the incumbent party.

Consider that the highly unpopular Biden didn’t lost any net Senate seats in 2022 and Trump added Senate seats in the Democratic friendly cycle in 2018. Equally, Clinton didn’t lose net Senate seats in 1998 nor did W. in 2002. Even low-approval election cycles like 1966 and 1982 didn’t produce a big swing in the Senate. Indeed, since 1934, the party in power only lost 10% or more of their Senate seats (4+) less than half of the time. Democrats need a flip of exactly that — at least 4 Senate seats — to retake power in the Senate.

Then take a look at the map, and you can see the reason for optimism in GOP circles and some traders in the prediction markets. Only 2 GOP-held seats are in states Trump won by less than double digits, while 2 Democratic-held seats are in states Trump won, and one of those GOP held seats features a long-time incumbent who typically runs double-digits ahead of the GOP norm (Collins in Maine). This is why the GOP entered the year believing odds of losing the Senate were remote, and the prediction markets mostly concurred.

But this ignores the counter-trend: the degree of election dismay with the incumbent party in the White House, and the reasons for that dismay. Presidential job approval has not been a neat proxy for Senate midterms because it depends on the reason for that dissatisfaction in the electorate. Four factors drive Senatorial midterms: war, recession/cost of living, realignment, and scandal. When two of those four factors are not present and don’t dominate, then the incumbent party’s odds of losing 4+ Senate seats drops to less than 20%. By contrast, when two of those four factors are present and do predominate, then the odds of the incumbent party losing 4+ Senate seats rises to 100%. Indeed, the median number of Senate seats lost when some combination of war, recession, realignment and scandal, are present, the White House party loses at least 8 Senate seats.

A few examples: while FDR added Senate seats in 1934 midterms, he lost 9 in 1938 midterms due to the combination of recession and scandal (trying to stack SCOTUS). 1942 and 1946 gave us war and recession to cost Democrats 8 and 12 Senate seats alike. 1950 gave us war again and scandals concerning the war costing Democrats 5 Senate seats. 1958 gave us recession and scandal, costing Ike 15 Senate seats. While JFK added Senate seats in 1962 and Nixon added Senate seats in 1970, only Watergate and stagflation in 1974 or the combination of Iran Contra and vulnerable class of 1980 incumbents cost the incumbent party 4 or more Senate seats until the realignment election of 1994, where evangelicals shifted their down-ballot voting to the GOP en masse. It took war and scandal in 2006 to see the Senate switch 4+ Senate seats again.

That’s the story of 2026: a very GOP favorable Senate map versus a very Democratic friendly election cycle. The GOP enters election season with all four factor present: war, recession/cost of living, realignment, and scandal. The Iran War was already deeply unpopular, and it’s impact on the economy in gas and diesel prices turns Americans sour on their current economic prospects, as wages fall behind, housing and health care feel increasingly unaffordable, labor force participation continues to drop, the the mirage of AI keeps the GDP just above a technical recession. The Epstein scandal remains one of the worst scandals in American political history, and Trump managed to associate himself deeply with the scandal in his handling of it. Then the realignment, as the new Trump 2024 voters joined the Obama-Trump converts of 2016 in abandoning GOP identity, already evident in surveys and primary participation.

A quintet of voter groups appear to be realigning away from the Republican brand — hispanic voters, black voters, industrial area voters, libertarian-leaning voters, and war-skeptical voters alike. This realigning electorate shows up disproportionately in key Senate contests. The war-skeptical voters in states like Maine, New Hampshire, Ohio, Michigan, Iowa, Montana, Nebraska, and Alaska (these are the states W failed to gain in between 2000 and 2004 due to the Iraq War before it even turned unpopular). The hispanic voters in states like Florida and Texas. The African-American voters in states like North Carolina and Georgia. The industrial voters in Ohio and Michigan. The libertarian leaving voters in states like New Hampshire, Alaska, Texas and Florida.

Thus, many of the states that seem “Safe” on the map are anything but, as their realigning electorates shift back against the Republican brand, with all of them having recent histories in electoral cycles of favoring Democrats or being true swing states. Take states like Florida and Texas where suburban margins began to erode for the GOP in the Trump era but countered that by massive margin shifts in hispanic and black precincts. Primary participation, voter identification, and public opinion surveys show those black and hispanic voters shifting back massively away from the GOP brand, which, given the erosion in some suburban areas and losses with younger generations, makes states Florida and Texas closer to competitive than double-digit leans.

In big swing election cycles, even “safe” Senate seats can suddenly turn razor close, as Bob Dole found out in 1974, barely holding on to his Kansas seat before being the VP nominee two years later. Strong independent candidates in Kansas, Nebraska, South Dakota and Montana may pose a unique threat to GOP held seats, as the Nebraska race in 2024 showed, with Osborn running 17 points ahead of Harris’ margin in the state. Democrats field the much better candidate in Ohio with a proven track record of out-performing Democratic margins in the state, while the Texas GOP nominee faces abandonment from his own party after they spent over $100M bashing him in the state for a disliked party incumbent. Alaska primary results suggest the Democratic nominee already holds the edge in that ranked choice voting state, while the famed cross-over support for Collins in Maine appears to be fading with newer generations taking over the voter rolls. My current map would be as follows, with surprising closer-than-expected races in Montana, Kansas, Louisiana, Florida, Mississippi, South Dakota, South Carolina and Kentucky, and a median map of Democrats holding 53+ Senate seats after the 2026 elections.


 

If past is prologue, the map won’t save the GOP in 2026, and an ever bigger tsunami may be incoming than anyone in Washington expects.

Read full Article
post photo preview
OFFICIAL PICKS: Midterms, 2026
House Elections Projections
 
The House tends to be more responsive to midterm dynamics, but, like the Senate, swings hard in elections where some combination of the Four Factors are present -- cost of living crisis or recession; war; major scandal; betrayal or down-ballot realignment. A fun map to use is this simulator, which takes partisan averages from existing models, and plugs in the map based on your adjustment of the generic ballot edge for one party or another. https://globalelectionsimulator.com/#/usa-house
 
Historic Norms: When a combination of the Four Factors are present, this is the kind of swing you get:
1930: 52 seat swing
1946: 55 seat swing
1958: 49 seat swing
1974: 49 seat swing
1994: 54 seat swing
2006: 31 seat swing
 
2026 PROJECTIONS

 

Only for Supporters
To read the rest of this article and access other paid content, you must be a supporter
Read full Article
See More
Available on mobile and TV devices
google store google store app store app store
google store google store app tv store app tv store amazon store amazon store roku store roku store
Powered by Locals