What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

AFC Championship - Patriots Hold Off Jags (1 Viewer)

KarmaPolice said:
I think it's a few reasons:

1.  Blake f'in Bortles

2.  You hear people claim around here that they like the D battles, but I don't think ratings would show that - the league has turned to it being all about the QBs and points.  If it was a good D vs. Brady and people can root for a great D to beat them, that's a different thing.  The NFC rep already has a no-name QB with a good D no matter who wins, but if the Jags win then the SB will be no name QB vs. 

3.  Blake f'in Bortles.  

Just reading that possibility is making me sleepy.  
Click to expand...
NFL ratings are down in general this year, but I just don't see how Jacksonville will be a less desirable Super Bowl to watch. I think the Jags are a likable team that have been terrible for years, but they have turned their team around this year, which to me is awesome. I'd love to see them reach the Super Bowl. I don't care who their QB is, and I'd rather see Blake f'n Bortles in the SB than Tom Terrific. 

 
KarmaPolice said:
I think it's a few reasons:

1.  Blake f'in Bortles

2.  You hear people claim around here that they like the D battles, but I don't think ratings would show that - the league has turned to it being all about the QBs and points.  If it was a good D vs. Brady and people can root for a great D to beat them, that's a different thing.  The NFC rep already has a no-name QB with a good D no matter who wins, but if the Jags win then the SB will be no name QB vs. 

3.  Blake f'in Bortles.  

Just reading that possibility is making me sleepy.  
Click to expand...
:goodposting:  

MIN 10 JAX 3 would have advertisers with 2nd Half commercial placement calling demanding make-goods :lol:  

 
Last edited by a moderator:
simey said:
NFL ratings are down in general this year, but I just don't see how Jacksonville will be a less desirable Super Bowl to watch. I think the Jags are a likable team that have been terrible for years, but they have turned their team around this year, which to me is awesome. I'd love to see them reach the Super Bowl. I don't care who their QB is, and I'd rather see Blake f'n Bortles in the SB than Tom Terrific. 
Click to expand...
Top 10 rated games this year:
New England: 2 games
Philly: 1 game
Minny: 0 games
Jax: 0 games
 

 
simey said:
NFL ratings are down in general this year, but I just don't see how Jacksonville will be a less desirable Super Bowl to watch. I think the Jags are a likable team that have been terrible for years, but they have turned their team around this year, which to me is awesome. I'd love to see them reach the Super Bowl. I don't care who their QB is, and I'd rather see Blake f'n Bortles in the SB than Tom Terrific. 
Click to expand...
 You are just being obtuse if you don’t think certain teams draw more national interest than others. It isn’t a hard concept.

 
JuniorGong said:
 You are just being obtuse if you don’t think certain teams draw more national interest than others. It isn’t a hard concept.
Click to expand...
I think more people would rather see the Jaguars in the SB than the Patriots. It isn't a hard concept, Jr.

 
I suspect the magic number in this game is going to be 23 points.

In reviewing some of the outcomes for the Jags this year, the defense some weeks was lights out, but they were pretty all over the map. They allowed 10 or fewer points 9 times (IND x 2, HOU x 2, PIT, BAL, CIN, CLE, BUF). On the flip side, they had some less than stellar games (44 to SF, 42 to PIT, 37 to TEN, 27 to LAR, 27 to ARI, 24 to SEA, 23 to NYJ). Put another way, Jacksonville went 2-5 when allowing 23 or more points this season. They went 8-2 when scoring 24 points or more.

Looking at NE, the Patriots scored 20 or more points in every game but one (TB when they scored 19). They scored 23 points or more 14 times, compiling a a 12-2 record in those games. Their only losses were to KC and CAR earlier in the season when their defense was a mess. The Pats were 12-0 when allowing 23 or fewer points.

Since the dawn of the TB12 era, here are the staggering numbers involving that 23 point number. New England has gone 199-16 (.925) when they score at least 23 points. And they have gone 181-18 when they allow 23 or fewer points (.910). That's over 17 seasons and includes games without Brady with other players starting (Cassel, Jimmy G, Brissett). Let that one sink in and ruminate for awhile. If your team lets NE score 23 points you have a 1 in 13 chance of winning. If you don't score 24 points, you only have a 1 in 12 chance of winning. And that's not even taking account for home games vs. road games (don't really have time to research that as clearly it won't show that big a difference).

So for this game . . . or ANY game for that matter, a team needs to keep the Patriots from scoring 23 points while being able to score at least 24 points themselves. Looking at this year:

# of times TEAM X scored 24 points or more points AND allowed 22 or fewer points:

Jacksonville 6 times in 18 games (.333)
Minnesota 7 times in 17 games (.412)
Philadelphia 5 times in 17 games (.294)

That's the data set OVER 17 YEARS that we are looking at when it comes to beating the Patriots.

 
simey said:
NFL ratings are down in general this year, but I just don't see how Jacksonville will be a less desirable Super Bowl to watch. I think the Jags are a likable team that have been terrible for years, but they have turned their team around this year, which to me is awesome. I'd love to see them reach the Super Bowl. I don't care who their QB is, and I'd rather see Blake f'n Bortles in the SB than Tom Terrific. 
Click to expand...
I am a Pats fan, but I get what you are saying that people would be more than happy if it is any of the other 15 AFC teams besides them in the SB.  I think the vast majority of the people watching don't want a 6-3 kicker shootout between 2 subpar QBs and good Ds.   I guarantee advertisers and the NFL would have thrown up in their mouth if you told them a couple months ago they could be staring at a Bortles vs. Foles Superbowl.  

I think I read that since Foles has taken over the Eagles have been last in the league as far as yds/g?  We praised Bortles last week just because he didn't mess up, but he barely threw over 50% if I remember correctly.   Keenum has been up and down this year, but at least he has shown flashes, and is the 2nd best Qb left.  IMO best case scenario for the SB as far as actual quality of play would be Minn/NE.  Philly/Jax would be the worst outcome, and frankly is a game that I think people would have groaned if they had to watch during the regular season, now try watching it without the option of switching between games or watching RZ channel....  

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Exactly. 

I'll close any SB talk with these comments, as the Patriots are still one very tough game away from playing in it... 

We get it... people are tired of watching the Patriots Win... but: 
1) People LOVE to hate the Pats... hence the huge ratings surrounding them. 
2) Say what you want, but the Brady/Belichick era Patriots deliver an exciting Super Bowl... look back at all 7 of them. Thrillers..every last one. 

 
[icon] said:
This is a ####### awesome post, GB :thumbup:  
Click to expand...
Hmmm. Gave this some more thought and there is an error in logic. I believe I sorted things wrong. I looked at all the games that NE played and put games at that 23 point number in one bucket and games when they didn’t score 23 in another. 

BUT . . . I did not account for games where they scored MORE THAN 23 points and still won. For example, if they won 41-28, I included that as a “23 points scored = win.” Technically speaking, if they only scored 23 points in that game they would have lost. 

Will have to figure out how to better sort the results. A quick fix will be to look at games where they scored 23 and allowed 22 or fewer points.

I will look at that again later, but the premise remains that the 23 pivot point is likely the right point in inflection. 

 
[icon] said:
Then why did the patriots have two of the most watched games of the year (including the most watched), and Jax had zero? 
Click to expand...
Probably because NE has maybe 10 nationally televised games while JAX had 1 Thursday nighter against TEN/CIN/some other scrub team.

That being said, the Pats will probably draw more viewers than the Jags.  Though probably not so many more than that it would matter (1%?).  It's the Superbowl. Everyone's watching anyways.  No one would cancel their party because it's JAX vs TB (or any other combo of crap teams).

Maybe it would hurt the pregame coverage ratings more?

 
KarmaPolice said:
I am a Pats fan, but I get what you are saying that people would be more than happy if it is any of the other 15 AFC teams besides them in the SB.  I think the vast majority of the people watching don't want a 6-3 kicker shootout between 2 subpar QBs and good Ds.   I guarantee advertisers and the NFL would have thrown up in their mouth if you told them a couple months ago they could be staring at a Bortles vs. Foles Superbowl.  

I think I read that since Foles has taken over the Eagles have been last in the league as far as yds/g?  We praised Bortles last week just because he didn't mess up, but he barely threw over 50% if I remember correctly.   Keenum has been up and down this year, but at least he has shown flashes, and is the 2nd best Qb left.  IMO best case scenario for the SB as far as actual quality of play would be Minn/NE.  Philly/Jax would be the worst outcome, and frankly is a game that I think people would have groaned if they had to watch during the regular season, now try watching it without the option of switching between games or watching RZ channel....  
Click to expand...
gotta agree.

 
Ravens/Bills fan and I freakin hate the Patriots, but...my interest level would be much, much higher for the SB if the Pats are in it as opposed to the Jags precisely because of my burning desire to see Lucifer and his spawn go down in flames.  Jags vs. whomever=yaawwwnnnn

 
dutch said:
 my burning desire to see Lucifer and his spawn go down in flames. 
Click to expand...
:lol: :thumbup:  

[icon] said:
We get it... people are tired of watching the Patriots Win... but: 
1) People LOVE to hate the Pats... hence the huge ratings surrounding them. 
2) Say what you want, but the Brady/Belichick era Patriots deliver an exciting Super Bowl... look back at all 7 of them. Thrillers..every last one. 
Click to expand...
I get it... as a lifer Red Sox fan, I realize my NFL team has become "The Yankees". It's weird as #### being on this side of the fence. 

 
When Evans dropped that td and then Cundiff followed up by sh!!tting the bed not only was I pissed at those two but I glared at my tv hoping and praying I had telekinetic powers to burst both B&B's heads right there on the sideline.  My wife thought I might pass out.

 
http://www.newsweek.com/will-patriots-jaguars-and-eagles-vikings-championship-games-hand-nbc-super-781648

WILL PATRIOTS-JAGUARS AND EAGLES-VIKINGS CHAMPIONSHIP GAMES HAND NBC A SUPER BOWL RATINGS NIGHTMARE?

As Blake Bortles and Leonard Fournette sliced and diced their way through the Pittsburgh Steelers’ defense on Sunday, and Case Keenum found Stefon Diggs with seconds remaining in regulation for perhaps the most unlikely finish to a playoff game since the Music City Miracle, the fear from NBC headquarters in Manhattan was almost palpable.

Sunday’s Conference Title games present the network with an uncomfortable prospect as it prepares to broadcast Super Bowl LII from U.S. Bank Stadium on February 4. If the Jacksonville Jaguars manage to pull off a second huge upset in a row then they, not the ratings juggernaut that is the New England Patriots, will head to the Super Bowl. And if the Minnesota Vikings knock off the Philadelphia Eagles, then two small-market teams will be headed to the Big Dance.

And that’s probably not something that NBC is very keen on. In pure football terms, the Jaguars against a Vikings team playing in their own backyard would be fascinating. There’s a freshness to a matchup that would pit two dynamic, young defenses against each other. Case Keenum against Blake Bortles in a Super Bowl is just… weird too, in a good way. You could sell this matchup to a football aficionado on novelty factor alone.

But—and this may sting—it seems neither Jacksonville nor the outside world can get enthused by the Jaguars, even when they’re getting pretty good. Pro Football Talkreported in October that Jacksonville had its lowest home attendance of the season so far for the loss to the L.A. Rams, the week after the team went into Pittsburgh and pulled out a momentous win over the Steelers. While all four of this year’s wild-card games were down in ratings with the comparable fixtures from last year’s playoffs, the fact that the Jaguars’ win over the Bills on CBS was down 10 percent on the Steelers-Dolphins CBS wild-card game from January 2017 suggests the Jaguars aren’t becoming that much more of a television draw, despite their very recent success.

A Vikings Super Bowl appearance in their own stadium would be a massive deal, of course. Appearing in their own stadium against the (perceived) big, bad Patriots would be intriguing, and fresh. The Vikings defense could probably hang with the Patriots for two or three quarters, with the prospect of Tom Brady getting harried all day by a mighty defensive line potentially enough to attract an undecided casual audience. An Eagles-Patriots game would deflate the state of Minnesota faster than a pin in a balloon, but storylines would abound in a meeting of two major television markets.

None of that will matter to the Jaguars, of course, as they prepare to take on the Patriots in Foxborough on Sunday. A Jaguars-Vikings Super Bowl would be a brilliant spectacle, for the initiated. Just don’t expect the TV executives to be smiling if it happens.

 
Could be something. Could be nothing. But Tom Brady just bailed from the national media’s press conference. The reason that was announced was that he was meeting with the medical staff. He will be listed on the team’s injury report. No update on how severe or what the injury is or if it will effect his availablility for this week’s game. That’s all I got for now. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Anarchy99 said:
Could be something. Could be nothing. But Tom Brady just bailed from the national media’s press conference. The reason that was announced was that he was meeting with the medical staff. He will be listed on the team’s injury report. No update on how severe or what the injury is or if it will effect his availablility for this week’s game. That’s all I got for now. 
Click to expand...
:lmao:

 
Anarchy99 said:
Could be something. Could be nothing. But Tom Brady just bailed from the national media’s press conference. The reason that was announced was that he was meeting with the medical staff. He will be listed on the team’s injury report. No update on how severe or what the injury is or if it will effect his availablility for this week’s game. That’s all I got for now. 
Click to expand...
99.9% chance it’s nothing.

 
dschuler said:
99.9% chance it’s nothing.
Click to expand...
Thus the disclaimer it could be something or could be nothing. Today was a little different than normal, as Brady was supposed to kick off the press conference and they passed over him multiple times and said he would still be speaking. Then at the end they said, in fact, he would not be speaking and was with the medical staff. Normally they would have announced that he would not be speaking right at the beginning (or he would not have been listed as being available that day). Just a little different than how things typical go. Given that he hasn't been on the injury report in the last week or two, something changed. Could be an old injury flared up, could be a new injury, could be he has a hangnail. 

 
Anarchy99 said:
Thus the disclaimer it could be something or could be nothing. Today was a little different than normal, as Brady was supposed to kick off the press conference and they passed over him multiple times and said he would still be speaking. Then at the end they said, in fact, he would not be speaking and was with the medical staff. Normally they would have announced that he would not be speaking right at the beginning (or he would not have been listed as being available that day). Just a little different than how things typical go. Given that he hasn't been on the injury report in the last week or two, something changed. Could be an old injury flared up, could be a new injury, could be he has a hangnail. 
Click to expand...
Rapoport tweeting Brady limited at practice with right hand injury (34m ago). Likely connected? 

 
[icon] said:
Damn... this is good stuff. 
Click to expand...
Sharp has a questionable reputation in the gambling community because of his betting picks, but his website still provides an immense amount of splits and tools.

The interesting thing about the Patriots and his site is that Mike Gillislee and Rex Burkhead had the two highest success rates last year.  I don't think it's a coincidence NE signed both (and iirc they have 4/5 top RB in that category now).  It's we'll known the Patriots love analytics so it wouldn't surprise me if they actually read the articles/use his tools like this and utilize the favorable matchups.

 
If I had no rooting interest in the 4 teams left playing I would  want the Patriots in the super bowl. During the BB and TB era they have done nothing except play in high drama, and extremely competitive super bowls, whether they win or lose.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
msudaisy26 said:
If I had no rooting interest in the 4 teams left playing I would be want the Patriots in the super bowl. During the BB and TB era they have done nothing except play in high drama, and extremely competitive super bowls, whether they win or lose.
Click to expand...
I would have LOVED to have seen a Drew Brees vs. Tom Brady SB in my lifetieme.

20 years from now we'll talk about Brady vs. That other guy, ... what was his name?

Dang you Diggs!

 
Bossman said:
I would have LOVED to have seen a Drew Brees vs. Tom Brady SB in my lifetieme.

20 years from now we'll talk about Brady vs. That other guy, ... what was his name?

Dang you Diggs!
Click to expand...
I think that has been the one we all wanted to see for a long time now.

 
Pats over Jags 42-17.

The Patriots are 14-0 against teams in the playoffs that they haven't faced during the regular season.

Under Belichick the Patriots are 3-1 in the playoffs against #1 defenses.

The Patriots are 7-0 at home against #1 defenses.

Brady and Belichick have had plenty of experience against these types of defenses over the last few years. Seattle, Denver, Atlanta, Baltimore come to mind. They've beaten all of them (sans the 2015 AFC Championship in Denver). Is this Jaguars defense historic? No. Better than the 2014 Seahawks? No. Better than the 2015 Broncos? No. I expect a similar game plan from McDaniels as the last 2 Super Bowl wins. And instead of playing in Denver or on a neutral field, the Patriots will be at home. 

The Patriots defense is being criminally underestimated as well. They're top of the league in sacks over the last few games, allowing a league low 14 ppg since Week 4, and just shut down Henry who's essentially a lesser version of Fournette. If they can shut him down like they did to Henry and force Bortles to throw it most of the game, I don't see how Jacksonville escapes with a win. 

 
Anarchy99 said:
For the record, no outcome of a completed game with have a direct impact on an upcoming game (except when injuries are involved). So the bottom line will be whoever plays better will win. 

As far as BB losing to the same team twice in a season, that’s happened pretty often. In one of the other threads on NE I listed them out. I think it’s happened 7 or 8 times. 

It’s the opposite that will be a problem for whomever the Pats play moving forward. After beating the Titans, NE is now something like 16-0 in the post season when they have played teams they DID NOT face in the regular season. 

If we look at the teams NE has lost to over the years, what is the common denominator? Familiarity. They’ve lost to the Broncos, who they play almost every year. They lost to the Ravens, who they played almost every year. They lost to the Jets, who they face twice a year. Both of their SB losses to the Giants, they played in the regular season. Going farther back, they lost to the Colts, who they played regularly. 

The Jaguars may likey be stronger, faster, and physically more talented than the Pats are when looking at the entire roster. But I would suggest that NE will be better prepared, better coaches, with a better game plan. That’s what makes it fun to watch and why they actually play the games. 
Click to expand...
But what say you about the Minnie D and their absurd 3rd down conversion rate they keep holding teams to?  You didn't address that part.  I'm not sure what to make of it, tbh, I just know that it is a statistical outlier like no other.

I'm not sure it would even matter, but it is glaring nonetheless.

 
kOOk said:
But what say you about the Minnie D and their absurd 3rd down conversion rate they keep holding teams to?  You didn't address that part.  I'm not sure what to make of it, tbh, I just know that it is a statistical outlier like no other.

I'm not sure it would even matter, but it is glaring nonetheless.
Click to expand...
I haven't looked in to the Vikings all that much, but some of that could be attributed to who they've played. Two games against the Rodgers-less packers. Two games against the Bears. Games against the Bucs and Browns. They also faced the Ravens, who struggled to do much on offense. That's almost half their games. Maybe teams consistently got into third and long situations.

I looked at how they performed against Top 10 offenses and they were just as good (only 14 first downs allowed in 60 tries).

Like most teams, even the Vikings had some games where they gave up a fair amount of points. 31 to the Panthers, 30 to the Redskins, 26 to the Steelers, 24 to the Saints (in a half), and 23 to Detroit.

Certainly the Vikings performance on third downs is impressive. I don't really have a reason or an explanation. Maybe the answer is to do more damage on 1st and 2nd downs.

In NE's last 5 playoff losses, they still were able to move the ball. They averaged 361 yards of offense  (against DEN, DEN, BAL, NYG, and NYJ). That's 86 yards more than MIN has allowed this year (275 yards a game). Their issue was more turning the ball over than anything else. 

It would make for an interesting contest like in other years (a top offense against a top defense).

 
Bossman said:
I would have LOVED to have seen a Drew Brees vs. Tom Brady SB in my lifetieme.

20 years from now we'll talk about Brady vs. That other guy, ... what was his name?

Dang you Diggs!
Click to expand...
I've wanted a Brady/Aaron forever (far more so than Brees) but each year it looked like that was gonna happen, Rodgers got hurt...

 
Continuing the mantra of could be something, could be nothing . . .

Brady seen at practice stretching only using his left hand and favoring his right hand. Said to be wearing something on his throwing hand (bandage? brace? glove/sleeve?). Speculation that he suffered an open finger laceration (bone going through the skin) which would explain why reports came out he got cut and needed x-rays. It does not sound like there are any broken bones, only that one of the bones got misaligned and broke the skin.

Not that anyone cares (and clearly I am not an athlete), but I suffered a similar injury in my youth playing basketball and they basically popped the bone in back in and I got a few stitches. In my case it was sore and swollen but I could have played pretty much the next day. Who knows how it will impact Brady throwing the football.

 
Anarchy99 said:
Continuing the mantra of could be something, could be nothing . . .

Brady seen at practice stretching only using his left hand and favoring his right hand. Said to be wearing something on his throwing hand (bandage? brace? glove/sleeve?). Speculation that he suffered an open finger laceration (bone going through the skin) which would explain why reports came out he got cut and needed x-rays. It does not sound like there are any broken bones, only that one of the bones got misaligned and broke the skin.

Not that anyone cares (and clearly I am not an athlete), but I suffered a similar injury in my youth playing basketball and they basically popped the bone in back in and I got a few stitches. In my case it was sore and swollen but I could have played pretty much the next day. Who knows how it will impact Brady throwing the football.
Click to expand...
It's nothing. Brady's been on the injury report his entire career.  Save for that season he got his knee detached,  he always plays.

 
Anarchy99 said:
Continuing the mantra of could be something, could be nothing . . .

Brady seen at practice stretching only using his left hand and favoring his right hand. Said to be wearing something on his throwing hand (bandage? brace? glove/sleeve?). Speculation that he suffered an open finger laceration (bone going through the skin) which would explain why reports came out he got cut and needed x-rays. It does not sound like there are any broken bones, only that one of the bones got misaligned and broke the skin.

Not that anyone cares (and clearly I am not an athlete), but I suffered a similar injury in my youth playing basketball and they basically popped the bone in back in and I got a few stitches. In my case it was sore and swollen but I could have played pretty much the next day. Who knows how it will impact Brady throwing the football.
Click to expand...
If I'm a JAX defensive player, I'm giving that right hand of Bradys a good hard squeeze as soon as I get the opportunity. 

This years SB could feature Foles or Keenum ... vs. Bortles or Hoya. What a treat.

.. and if NE wins the SB with Hoya as starting QB ... they will need to rename the Lombardi trophy.

 
Anarchy99 said:
Petey is better known as Laser Show or Muddy Chicken. The first one wouldn't fit Hoyer, but the second one might.
Click to expand...
I was familiar with laser show, but not muddy chicken :lol:   Everyone I know just calls him "Destroya"

Where'd ya hear about the dislocation breaking the skin on Brady's hand? 

I've loaded up a bit on cheap insurance on JAX ML (3.5 to 1 yesterday) and JAX +3.5 (2 to 1 today). :popcorn:  

 
[icon] said:
I was familiar with laser show, but not muddy chicken :lol:   Everyone I know just calls him "Destroya"

Where'd ya hear about the dislocation breaking the skin on Brady's hand? 

I've loaded up a bit on cheap insurance on JAX ML (3.5 to 1 yesterday) and JAX +3.5 (2 to 1 today). :popcorn:  
Click to expand...
NESN cited a tweet from the Chargers team doctor, who speculated that was the injury Brady suffered based on what had been reported. 

LINK

 
Brady listed as Did Not Participate in Practice today. That was expected. If he doesn't practice tomorrow then people should start getting concerned.

 
Anarchy99 said:
NESN cited a tweet from the Chargers team doctor, who speculated that was the injury Brady suffered based on what had been reported. 

LINK
Click to expand...
David Chao has slightly less credibility than Dr Nick from the Simpsons.

That said, count me as officially concerned:  The line has dropped 1.5 points so far. Something's wrong.

 
Anarchy99 said:
I haven't looked in to the Vikings all that much, but some of that could be attributed to who they've played. Two games against the Rodgers-less packers. Two games against the Bears. Games against the Bucs and Browns. They also faced the Ravens, who struggled to do much on offense. That's almost half their games. Maybe teams consistently got into third and long situations.

I looked at how they performed against Top 10 offenses and they were just as good (only 14 first downs allowed in 60 tries).

Like most teams, even the Vikings had some games where they gave up a fair amount of points. 31 to the Panthers, 30 to the Redskins, 26 to the Steelers, 24 to the Saints (in a half), and 23 to Detroit.

Certainly the Vikings performance on third downs is impressive. I don't really have a reason or an explanation. Maybe the answer is to do more damage on 1st and 2nd downs.

In NE's last 5 playoff losses, they still were able to move the ball. They averaged 361 yards of offense  (against DEN, DEN, BAL, NYG, and NYJ). That's 86 yards more than MIN has allowed this year (275 yards a game). Their issue was more turning the ball over than anything else. 

It would make for an interesting contest like in other years (a top offense against a top defense).
Click to expand...
You mind stopping over into the Eagles/Vikimgs thread and posting this LOL? I've brought up that the Vikings have played an awful,lot of cupcakes including their own division and the crappy AFC north where they lost to Pitt. I'm not saying they don't have a very good D but again, Philly is getting disrespected as if we are facing the friggen' Purple People Eaters.

 
[icon] said:
I've loaded up a bit on cheap insurance on JAX ML (3.5 to 1 yesterday) and JAX +3.5 (2 to 1 today). :popcorn:  
Click to expand...
Down to 2.75 to 1 for JAX ML, and JAX +3.5 is off the board (paid 2-to-1 30 mins ago)
Line dropped to NE -7.5.. down from a high of -9.5, and it had settled at -9. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

msudaisy26
Is football becoming too predictable?
Replies
15
Views
683
jobarules
J
Stat Correction
QB Jake Browning, Bengals
Replies
43
Views
1K
travdogg
T
renesauz
Jaguars "homefield advantage" in London (and the poor job of many analysts)
Replies
17
Views
739
eighsse2
eighsse2

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Top