2001 Final Standings
NFL Edition
| Rank | Participant | Units | ||
| 1. | Football Insider (PP) | 8,120 | ||
| 2. | MAG Sports Consulting | 5,370 | ||
| 3. | Point Spread Newsletter | 4,160 | ||
| 4. | McCarren Forecast | 1,310 | ||
| 5. | Bullseye Handicapping | 1,270 | ||
| 6. | Football Trends | 1,090 |
Won-Lost Percentage Leaders
| Rank | Participant | W | - | L | Percentage | |||
| 1. | Football Insider (PP) | 57 | - | 35 | 62.0% | |||
| 2. | MAG Sports Consulting | 56 | - | 39 | 58.9% | |||
| 3. | Point Spread Newsletter | 35 | - | 25 | 58.3% | |||
| 4. | Bullseye Handicapping | 32 | - | 25 | 56.1% | |||
| 5. | McCarren Forecast | 53 | - | 42 | 55.8% | |||
| 6. | Football Trends | 33 | - | 28 | 54.1% |
NFL Over/Under Division
| Rank | Participant | Units | ||
| 1. | Point Spread Newsletter (PPP) | 2,990 |
Won-Lost Percentage Leaders
| Rank | Participant | W | - | L | Percentage | |||
| 1. | Point Spread Newsletter (PPP) | 12 | - | 5 | 70.6% | |||
| 2. | Just Pro Football (P) | 20 | - | 18 | 52.6% |
College Bowl Edition
Games Division
| Rank | Participant | W | - | L | Units | |||
| 1. | Alamo City Hotline | 8 | - | 5 | 1,250 | |||
| 2. | Football Trends | 7 | - | 7 | 120 | |||
| 3. | MAG Sports Consulting | 13 | - | 10 | 30 |
Over/Unders Division
| Rank | Participant | W | - | L | Units | |||
| 1. | MAG Sports Consulting | 14 | - | 7 | 840 | |||
| 2. | Top Play Sports | 8 | - | 7 | 480 |
Combined Games and Over/Unders Division
| Rank | Participant | W | - | L | Units | |||
| 1. | Alamo City Hotline | 8 | - | 5 | 1,250 | |||
| 2. | MAG Sports Consulting | 27 | - | 17 | 870 | |||
| 3. | Top Play Sports | 20 | - | 18 | 410 | |||
| 4. | Point Spread Newsletter | 3 | - | 3 | 180 | |||
| 5. | Football Trends | 7 | - | 7 | 120 |
Services marked with (P) have passed for the week and made no selections.
Services marked with (PP) have passed for the second consecutive week and made no selections.
Services marked with (PPP) have passed for the third consecutive week and made no selections.