NFL Conference Championship Sunday: Betting Analysis Thru the Pattern Walk Lens

BrownBagBets

Process in Public · Diagnostic Record, Not Forecast

January 25, 2026 · 10:00 AM ET

Markets do not arrive at clarity in straight lines.

Pattern Literacy Canon — Volume I

The foundational PDF that explains how BrownBagBets reads markets. Free, quiet, and sharp.

Join the Pattern Literacy List

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Intro

Conference Championship Sunday · teaching-first edition

If you are new: this is not a picks page. BrownBagBets is a daily diagnostic record. We log positions as they are entered, then we reconcile outcomes into a month-to-date dashboard so the archive can be studied over time. The point is not to sound certain. The point is to stay consistent.

If you are returning: today is a stress test in the cleanest environment the NFL offers. Conference Championship markets are liquid, efficient, and loud. They invite confident opinions. They rarely reward them. That’s why this post is built differently today: the same plays, the same ledger, but with an added teaching layer tied directly to how the Pattern Walk is applied.

Saturday closed 2–6, pulling January back to 60.8% bankroll. That swing is recorded plainly. No urgency introduced beneath it. Losses stay inside the dataset. The question isn’t “what went wrong emotionally.” The question is “what did the market do, and what did we learn about selection and pricing?”

What to expect on this page today: first, yesterday’s results line-by-line. Second, a diagnostic dashboard that rolls month-to-date totals forward with no retroactive edits. Third, today’s plays. Finally, a dedicated section titled Pattern Walk Review that uses the two Conference Championship games as a worked example—showing how control, volatility, and narrative get priced, and why the same framework can express itself through spreads, totals, and a moneyline without contradiction.

NCAA basketball and EPL remain in the mix, but the posture does not change with volume. The bankroll is intact. The work continues. If you are new, begin with the framework before the plays: /start-here.

After Yesterday’s Results

Bankroll: 60.8%

English Premier League

Liverpool -1.5 +220 3%

Liverpool FC at Bournemouth — Liverpool -1.5 +220 (3%)

LOSS

NCAA Basketball

Under 160.5 -110 4%

Mississippi State +7.5 -116 4%

Texas ML -135 3%

Purdue ML -140 3%

TCU +4.5 -115 4%

Alabama -3.5 -120 3%

Hofstra at William & Mary — Under 160.5 -110 (4%)

LOSS

#15 Vanderbilt at Mississippi State — Mississippi State +7.5 -116 (4%)

LOSS

#21 Georgia at Texas — Texas ML -135 (3%)

WIN

#11 Illinois at #4 Purdue — Purdue ML -140 (3%)

LOSS

TCU at Baylor — TCU +4.5 -115 (4%)

WIN

Tennessee at #17 Alabama — Alabama -3.5 -120 (3%)

LOSS

NBA

Hornets -10.5 -115 3%

Washington Wizards at Charlotte Hornets — Hornets -10.5 -115 (3%)

LOSS

Diagnostic Dashboard

MTD Through January 24

Bankroll

60.8%

Record

111–121–1

ROI (MTD)

-39.2%

Total Plays MTD

233

Average Stake

~3.8%

Market Phase

Selective

Process Status

Contained

Risk Temperature

Cooling

Splits · By Sport

NFL7–8

CFB3–3

NCAAB54–60–1

NBA13–12

NHL24–23

Other (incl. EPL)10–15

Splits · By Market

Moneyline57–60

Spread36–42

Totals25–20

Props12–11

Splits · By Stake

2%20–16

3%48–58

4%27–37

5%12–10

7%0–1

This dashboard is diagnostic, not predictive. Metrics roll forward daily with no retroactive edits. Market Phase reflects current conditions; Process Status reflects execution quality; Risk Temperature reflects variance allowance.

Today’s Plays

January 25, 2026

English Premier League

Manchester United at Arsenal — Both Teams to Score – YES -135 (4%)

OPEN

NFL Conference Championships

New England Patriots at Denver Broncos — Broncos +4 -109 (6%)

OPEN

New England Patriots at Denver Broncos — Under 43.5 -115 (4%)

OPEN

Los Angeles Rams at Seattle Seahawks — Under 46 -109 (5%)

OPEN

Los Angeles Rams at Seattle Seahawks — Rams ML +125 (4%)

OPEN

NCAA Basketball

FAU at South Florida — FAU +5.5 -110 (5%)

OPEN

USC at Wisconsin — Wisconsin -7.5 -105 (5%)

OPEN

The section below is a teaching layer. It explains what the Pattern Walk was measuring in these games—not what it “expects” to happen.

Pattern Walk Review · Two Games, One Framework

Case study · NFL Conference Championships

Start here (new readers): The Pattern Walk is a framework for recognizing where control lives in a game and how the market prices that control. It does not “call winners.” It flags moments when the number becomes more about narrative than structure—and it gives us permission to express the same idea through multiple markets (spread, total, moneyline) when they align.

What you’ll see below: we first describe what the market is reacting to, then what the Pattern Walk is measuring, then why the specific price matters. The goal is readability. The goal is repeatability.

The Three Questions the Pattern Walk asks

• Did structure change, or did the story change?
• Where does control live (pace, pressure, field position, matchup constraint)?
• Is the price describing reality—or describing sentiment?

Game 1 · Patriots at Broncos

Market headline: quarterback change in Denver. That information is public, immediate, and easily over-weighted. The question isn’t whether the downgrade exists. The question is whether the market priced it as a downgrade—or as a collapse.

Pick 1 — Broncos +4

What the market is doing: pricing the injury as a broad loss of control.
What the Pattern Walk sees: Denver’s control inputs remain intact (defense, pressure, home-field leverage, run-game protection).
Why +4 matters: not a bet on “Denver wins.” It’s a bet the points are now overpriced relative to the control window.

Pick 2 — Under 43.5

Same idea, different market: when offenses weaken and both teams benefit from lower volatility, scoring can compress faster than perception.
Pattern Walk linkage: when spread value comes from control, totals often “leak” downward with it.

Game 2 · Rams at Seahawks

Market headline: familiarity and memory. Two tight prior games invite bettors to price volatility. In championship settings, the market often prices constraint quietly while public money prices fireworks.

Pick 3 — Under 46

What the public remembers: prior chaos.
What the Pattern Walk weights: defensive constraint and matchup suppression that doesn’t need blitzing or schematic surprise.
Teaching point: when volatility is priced loudly, suppression can become the sharper side of the number.

Pick 4 — Rams ML +125

This is not a contradiction to the Under: low totals increase variance; one turnover or one fourth-down decision can flip the result.
Pattern Walk principle: when control suppresses scoring, underdogs can gain win equity without gaining spread equity. The ML expresses that.

How the four picks connect

Broncos +4 captures control mispriced by narrative.
Under 43.5 captures control compressing scoring.
Under 46 captures defensive constraint overriding public memory.
Rams ML captures low-scoring variance creating upset equity.

Same framework. Different expressions.

The Pattern Walk is not a promise. It is a repeatable way to decide when the number stopped making sense.

Pattern Literacy

Educational layer

Asterisks indicate Pattern Walk compliance at time of entry. They reflect structural alignment — not conviction.

/pattern-walk — the worldview that defines how structure is read, not forecasted.