Ah, the final gambling column of the season. Let me just say this: I've been stunned at the fatalism that surrounds an endeavor I've always considered fun.

No, really. I grew up gambling. My dad would bring the "slip" home every week from work. Pick four winners, win 10 bucks. My uncle used to bet a three-team parlay every Sunday for a few dollars. He bet what he could afford to lose (wasn't much), gained a different rooting interest each week, shared many stories about dumb coaches and crooked referees and won a few bucks occasionally.

I never really considered that abhorrent.

And yet the HCS (Human Comments Section) has been mostly negative toward this column. I understand that 1) the HCS is mostly negative anyway and 2) it doesn't necessarily reflect the view of the masses (let's hope not, anyway). It's just that I've never considered a few bucks on the Giants up there with pole dancing.

Here is (verbatim) what the HCS offered last week:

"So please tell me how your going to explane betting lines to a little kid who only wants to play football like his older brother. Well "Mike will say, kid you borrow 5 bucks from your dad and get an adult to give it to someone you don't know and after the game he gets to keep your 5 bucks", Sucker. It's really all about money Mike and your right there in the forefront pushing it. Why?"

Since you asked ... I would "explain" to both children that betting is an adult privilege, my childhood notwithstanding. I would explain that gambling is fun, provides varying rooting interests and when done responsibly — which I would teach at the appropriate time — is actually cheaper for many of us than paying $100 for a ticket, $75 for food and drink and $50 for parking at the actual game. It's done from your living room, which means you don't waste four hours in traffic coming home either.

I would explain that, yes, gambling addictions are a real thing. They are also the exception, not the rule. The overwhelming majority of people who gamble do so responsibly, whether it's on the Giants or jamming what they can into a slot machine.

I would explain that extremism is a pox on all our houses, especially in today's society, where places like the HCS like to present extreme cases as the norm and not what they are: extreme cases. Yes, we should view extremes as cautionary tales. But as the great Anna Quindlen once wrote, "it's like living in fear of salmonella and forgetting that food tastes good."

I would explain that, yes, it is possible to have fun at the slot machine, craps table or wagering on a football game without public shaming.

So there.

Here are the week's best bets from The Day staff:

• Ned Griffen: Alabama (+3 vs. Georgia). "Bama was the underdog against Georgia in last month's SEC title game and won 41-24. Have we learned nothing, people?"

• Chuck Banning: Georgia (-3 vs. Alabama). "Did your friends in Vegas see the same thing everyone else did when Alabama dismantled Bulldogs in SEC championship? They must know something ... Go 'Dogs."

• Gavin Keefe: Washington (-6.5 at Giants). "Giants just plain stink."

• Vickie Fulkerson: Patriots (-6.5 over Dolphins). "Did you see Bill Belichick SMILE during last week's win over the Jaguars? Since hell hasn't frozen over, the Patriots must be on a roll."

• Dave Davis: Jets (+17 at Buffalo). "It's just too many points. The Jets aren't awful, they just make a lot of stupid mistakes. Kind of like what I just did by picking them to cover."

• Mikey D: Georgia (-3 vs. Alabama). Read what Chuck Banning said. The Tide pounded Georgia a month ago and now they're an underdog? The public will bet Bama with both hands. You know what to do next.

This is the opinion of Day sports columnist Mike DiMauro.