Wagering money on the outcome of a football event is always morally wrong to someone. After all, gambling is the devil, just like Ben Franklin.

But the props for the 2011 NFL season that Bodog rolled out earlier this week present a moral conflict for even the most passionate degenerates lurking on street corners everywhere. The leading prop asks the question “will Brett Favre play in a game during the 2011 NFL regular season?” and gives +200 odds for a wager on “yes.”

Here’s the quandary facing the trigger-happy pigskin gambler who wants to strike early. If you pull that trigger now, you can double your money on a Favre comeback, and with the annual early August Favre buzz building–this time in South Beach–the odds of a September sighting are growing too.

The temptation is there to cash in on the little risk and high reward. Just know that by throwing down those bills you’re supporting a Favre comeback, and potentially putting us all through the pain of watching an already faded old man get planted into the turf every week again.

Major gambling websites around the Internet enjoy toying with the emotions of the innocent fan. Sports Interaction wonders if Peyton Hillis can avoid the Madden curse, but the requirement to do so is steep.

Missing a single game means the curse lives? This hardly seems fair since the Madden curse was built on cover boys like Michael Vick, who appeared in only five games in 2004. It’s even easier for a running back to miss time with the pounding they take on every carry, and Hillis played the final three games last year with cracked ribs.

But your local bookie doesn’t care about fair, and neither does the Internet. The Hillis prop will make the money-hungry gambling hounds in rival Cleveland football cities like Baltimore conflicted about throwing down their sawbuck. Anyone in Baltimore who parlays a “yes” Hillis bet with the same wager for Favre deserves their own wing at the local addiction center.

Beyond those two the props become less zany, but still intriguing.

This one from Bodog seems like an easy decision.

Sure, McNabb is in a much better situation in Minnesota. But he threw 15 interceptions in just 13 games last year, with his arm strength and mobility zapped.

However, this prop isn’t as easy as it seems with Christian Ponder ready and waiting. If McNabb sucks early and by extension the Vikings suck, then head coach Leslie Frazier may be quicker to yank the place-holding veteran and accelerate the growth of his future quarterback. McNabb’s snaps would then clearly take a nose dive, and so would his opportunities to be terrible and throw interceptions.

Perhaps this gambling thing isn’t as easy as it seems, which is why I strictly wager only alcoholic beverages.

Here’s another one that could be fool’s gold.

The instinctive reaction here is to assume that when facing a Philadelphia secondary with a surplus of elite defenders, quarterbacks will finally be forced to throw in Asomugha’s direction.

That’s likely the safest call, but Asomugha didn’t intercept any passes last year, and despite his brilliance he has only 11 picks over eight seasons (eight of which came in 2007). Asomugha’s had four years that ended with goose eggs in the interception column.

His mere presence may still be daunting enough that teams choose to test Dominique Rodgers-Cromartie on the other side of the field after his sub-par season in Arizona. Or opposing offenses could just simply shift to the running game against a weak linebacker corps that lost Stewart Bradley.

No matter what the outcome of the Asomugha prop, or others attempting to forecast Plaxico Burress’ comeback season (Bodog set his receptions at o/u 50.5), it’s just good to be addicted to something again.

Even if that something can be hazardous to bank accounts, relationships, and your child’s education.