What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Assani's NFL Wagers (1 Viewer)

Assani Fisher

Footballguy
In the past I've taken a very casual and light-hearted approach to sports betting, but now that I live in Vegas I'd like to start betting the games more seriously. I started off betting $125 per game, and most of my bets will probably fall in the $100-$300 range. At first I wasn't going to bother to start a thread, but I've gotten off to a great start and am feeling confident, so I'll give it a go.

Instead of just posting my picks each week, I'm going to post my thought processes throughout the week. I gladly welcome all comments and criticisms, as I go through the process of coming up with my final picks right before the games start(usually make a trip to MGM either Saturday night or Sunday morning). Addittionally, I'll try to take a look back at my picks from the previous weeks and see what I did right/wrong and try to learn from them.

First my picks and results from the first two weeks:

Week 1: 3-0

Seattle -5.5

Buffalo +3

Tenn +6

I didn't post these picks here, so no link or analysis available.

Week 2: 3-0

link to picks

Atl +10

KC +12.5

Pit -10

Looking back to week 2

Here was my analysis on my picks:

ATL +10: Jacksonville is overrated. They've lost 4 in a row. They got manhandled last week. This will be low scoring, 10 should be enough.

KC +12.5: KC really didn't lose that much from last year...people are underrating them. I think they'll win 7 games or so. Chicago's offense is dreadful. Another low scoring game, and 12.5 is too much.

Pit -10: I think Pit is a top 5 team. Went 15-1 3 years ago, SB champs 2 year ago, last year QB got hurt and coach retired and everything fell apart. They represent good value early in the season imo.

I think I nailed the Pit and Atl calls, and I couldn't be more happy regarding those plays. I think I got very lucky though with KC. That game clearly could've gone either way, and looking back I think I should've laid off it.

I only had $375 in cash on me Sunday morning, otherwise I was also set to bet on tenn+7. I talked myself into dropping that game becuase I decided the Colts were tough to bet against- they easily could play close for 3 quarters and then score 21 late points to easily cover. However, I was shocked when watching the game to see the stat that Tenn and Indy had the most games last year decided by 7 points or less. Tenn I expected, but I was shocked to learn that about Indy. I'd be interested to hear thoughts on that stat and whether or not there might be value in fading Indy as a result.

I also would've taken Wash+7 if I didn't have a rule about not betting on my favorite team. But on the other hand I would've bet on NYG -1 if I knew Eli was going to play, so I guess it evens out a bit.

Overall very happy with this past week...I go 3-0 and both of my favorite teams win...can't ask for much more than that.

Week 3

Early lines: LINK

The very first line that jumped out to me was Denver -3 at home against Jacksonville. If you couldn't already tell by my picking against them the first two weeks, I think Jacksonville is tremendously overrated.

FACT: Jacksonville lost their last 3 games last year

FACT: Jacksonville has failed to cover the spread in either game this year

FACT: The last time these two teams played, Denver won 20-7 in Jacksonville

FACT: Through two games this year Jacksonville has given up the most rushing yards in the league, while through two games this year Denver has rushed for the third most yards in the league.

IMHO Jacksonville is simply not a very good team. I don't know what their schedule looks like off-hand, so I'm not going to make an exact prediction on their record, but I wouldn't be surprised at all to see them as a 6-10 team. They just barely squeaked by a horrile ATL team at home last week. Why exactly are they only 3 point underdogs on the road(which means the teams would be even on a neutral field)?

As for Denver, I think many people are guilty of just looking at the scoreboard regarding them. People think "they barely beat two bad teams, so they can't be that good." What people don't realize is that Denver has moved the ball very well and stopped the other team very well, but they've struggled inside the red zone(on both sides of the football). I believe that is just variance and bad luck so far. Allow me to quote two posts on footballguys from moleculo and SSOG, which I believe sum up my viewpoints well:

Denver has managed 400+ yards in both games. Denver leads the league in yards gained, and is 3rd in yards allowed. Denver is top 5 in rushing and passing yards per game, and first is passing yards allowed. On the other hand, Denver has only scored 3 TD's so far - 20th in the league, and is 27th in rushing D.

This offense is clicking at a high level so far, but simply failed to punch it in the end zone. Counting OT, Denver had five trips inside the 10, with three FG's yesterday. That will change - at least it better.

Of course, the raiders and the Bills aren't exactly cream of the crop teams. The Den O has been clicking the way one would expect them to. A mediocre O would put up some yards against these teams. What is concerning is the lack of TD's and the run D. both of these can haunt a team come playoff time, but there is plenty of time to fix.

Denver has struggled opening the season on the road the past few years - dropping games vs Mia and StL, specifically. While they should have killed the Bills, I was pleased with the win. The raiders always play the Broncos tough - divisional rivalry and all that.

Bottom line is that this team is finding a way to win. winning ugly is still winning. Wins like these will mean alot come playoff push time.
Out of curiousity, are you watching the games, or are you basing that solely off of margin of victory and opponent faced? This isn't one of those "you obviously aren't watching the games!" accusations, I was just honestly curious. As a Broncos fan, I have to say, if you look at anything other than the actual score, you'd swear Denver won those two games by 40 combined points. I mean, outgaining Buffalo by 300 yards? Allowing 125 net passing yards in 130 minutes?

Denver is #1 in the NFL in yards per game (#5 in passing yards, #4 in rushing yards). Denver is #3 in the NFL in yards allowed per game (with Philly yet to play, so they'll likely be #2 in yards allowed per game after tonight), allowing 62.5 yards per game passing despite an 12% more football than the average NFL team (thanks to the OT). Denver has a positive turnover differential and a positive sack differential (including ranking 7th in the league in sacks and 3rd in the league in INTs). If this is the most unimpressive 2-0 start you've ever seen, I would suggest that maybe you haven't seen many 2-0 starts.

If Philly allows more than 222 yards tonight, then Denver and New England will be #1 and #2 in terms of yards per game and yards allowed per game. If Denver hadn't played overtime, it would have actually been #1 in both categories (and yes, that's even discounting the yards that Denver itself gained in overtime).
As with all game, I will rethink things throughout the week, but as of now I can't see any reason why Denver -3 isn't a great pick.

Another game I'm leaning towards early is Pit -9 at home vs San Fran. I fully jumped on the Pit bandwagon after week 1, as evidenced by my power rankings and week 2 pick of them.

One of my major overall theories about NFL wagering is that people overreact too much to last year. Pit is every bit as good now as they were when they went 15-1 or when they won the SB imho. So far they've blown out two bad opponents, and I don't see any reason for that to stop this week. And this past week's game against Buffalo wasn't even as close as the score indicated, as Pit settled for quite a few FGs deep in Buffalo territory.

I really don't think SF is anything more than an average team. I think their 0-2 start is a mirage and they get clobbered this week.

I must admit that I'm tempted at Buffalo getting 16.5. That just seems like a ton of points, and having come off a big win vs SD and with a road game against Cincy in week 4 this seems like a classic let down game imo. They're division rivals too, which makes me think it could be a hard fought, close game. I'm still very undecided though here.

I like the Jets -3 at home against Miami. The Jets were a playoff team last year, while the Dolphins were 6-10. The Jets have lost against New England and on the road against Baltimore(one of the hardest places to win on the road according to the stats)....should we really bump them down that much for those two losses? The home team being favored by 3 generally means two evenly matched teams....What has Miami done to make us put them on the Jets level? Also I was impressed with how Clemens came on late in the Balt game, and I think that will give him some confidence for this week. I'm not in love with the play, but I"m definitely leaning towards NY here.

I like Houston +5. Houston looks good...really good. Its not just that they've won 2 games, but its how they won them. Falling down 2 TDs on the road against Carolina and then coming back impressed me a lot. I really like what they've got in Houston on both sides of the football. I'm going to have to monitor Andre Johnson's injury though for sure. Also that stat about the Colts and games decided by 7 points or less is really sticking out to me. If AJ is healthy, I think Houston takes this game striaght up and makes a statement to the league.

Tennesee has played two very good games, only losing by two points to Indy this past week. New Orleans has looked like legitimately the worst team in the league so far. Yes I could see N.O. coming out and just destroying them on MNF similar to their MNF game against Atlanta last year, but I think its very possible that they just aren't a very good team this year. Also Vince Young on MNF = $$$. I like Tenn +4.5.

Nothing else really stood out to me as anything worth betting on. And of course these are just my initial impressions, and I will probably makes some changes before placing my actual bets. I may lay off on some of them simply because it feels like this is a lot of action and I may want to limit it to the ones I feel most strongly about. As always, thoughts and comments are welcome.

 
With Denver being unable to cover 3 points @ Buffalo or at home vs Oakland, poor %'s on 3rd down and in the redzone, and very poor performances by the special teams (Elam's 6 of 9 is concerning with a 3 point spread) I don't think this is an easy game for Denver. I haven't watch much of Denver this year, but I assume they play a lot of man defense with Bly and Bailey, if so, Garrard's mobility could cause them some problems and he'll likely keep 2 or 3 drives alive with scrambles. I think 3 or 4 points is a fair spread for this game, but I'd get on it early @ 3 because I think it'll move.

 
I thought this was a fantasy football site, not a sports book website. You said you would welcome all criticism. Besides, weren't you the same guy saying take the Jets in week 1 along with the points?

 
I thought this was a fantasy football site, not a sports book website. You said you would welcome all criticism. Besides, weren't you the same guy saying take the Jets in week 1 along with the points?
What's more, is he knows full well that there is a perfectly good thread dedicated to this in the FFA. However, he feels his picks merit front page news; and in the Shark Pool to boot. He likes attention.
 
I thought this was a fantasy football site, not a sports book website. You said you would welcome all criticism. Besides, weren't you the same guy saying take the Jets in week 1 along with the points?
The Shark Pool (NFL Talk) Important Note about the Shark Pool:

Threads that are asking for advice on how you should draft or manage your team belong in the Assistant Coach's Forum.

The Shark Pool is reserved for sharing NFL talk and fantasy football strategy discussion.

Forum Led by: Admin, Moderator

Pretty sure this falls under "NFL talk." And no I never advocated the Jets in week 1, although last year I did pick them as my surprise team.

 
I thought this was a fantasy football site, not a sports book website. You said you would welcome all criticism. Besides, weren't you the same guy saying take the Jets in week 1 along with the points?
What's more, is he knows full well that there is a perfectly good thread dedicated to this in the FFA. However, he feels his picks merit front page news; and in the Shark Pool to boot. He likes attention.
Please put me on ignore then.
 
With Denver being unable to cover 3 points @ Buffalo or at home vs Oakland, poor %'s on 3rd down and in the redzone, and very poor performances by the special teams (Elam's 6 of 9 is concerning with a 3 point spread) I don't think this is an easy game for Denver. I haven't watch much of Denver this year, but I assume they play a lot of man defense with Bly and Bailey, if so, Garrard's mobility could cause them some problems and he'll likely keep 2 or 3 drives alive with scrambles. I think 3 or 4 points is a fair spread for this game, but I'd get on it early @ 3 because I think it'll move.
interesting point regarding Garrard scrambling. I think that their inability to cover the first two weeks was because of their low percentages on 3rd down and in the red zone, and I think those numbers are largely based upon short term luck. I fail to see how Jacksonville is going to stop Denver from running the ball all day long, and I really don't see Jacksonville putting up more than 14-17 points either.
 
Assani Fisher said:
I like Houston +5. Houston looks good...really good. Its not just that they've won 2 games, but its how they won them. Falling down 2 TDs on the road against Carolina and then coming back impressed me a lot. I really like what they've got in Houston on both sides of the football. I'm going to have to monitor Andre Johnson's injury though for sure. Also that stat about the Colts and games decided by 7 points or less is really sticking out to me. If AJ is healthy, I think Houston takes this game striaght up and makes a statement to the league.
Pretty good analysis. This is the one thing I disagree with. While Houston has been a pleasant surprise through 2 weeks, I don't see them stopping to Colts. I personally jumped on Indy -5.5 early because a gimpy or even inactive Andre Johnson causes the Texans offense to take a major step backwards, and we might see that 5.5 creep to 7.5 if/when news is released that AJ is out or not playing at 100%.
 
Assani Fisher said:
I like Houston +5. Houston looks good...really good. Its not just that they've won 2 games, but its how they won them. Falling down 2 TDs on the road against Carolina and then coming back impressed me a lot. I really like what they've got in Houston on both sides of the football. I'm going to have to monitor Andre Johnson's injury though for sure. Also that stat about the Colts and games decided by 7 points or less is really sticking out to me. If AJ is healthy, I think Houston takes this game striaght up and makes a statement to the league.
Pretty good analysis. This is the one thing I disagree with. While Houston has been a pleasant surprise through 2 weeks, I don't see them stopping to Colts. I personally jumped on Indy -5.5 early because a gimpy or even inactive Andre Johnson causes the Texans offense to take a major step backwards, and we might see that 5.5 creep to 7.5 if/when news is released that AJ is out or not playing at 100%.
I missed the chance to get in at -5.5, but even at -6 I like the bet without AJ playing (or gimpy). I see the line at -7 once AJ is confirmed out.
 
Assani Fisher said:
I like Houston +5. Houston looks good...really good. Its not just that they've won 2 games, but its how they won them. Falling down 2 TDs on the road against Carolina and then coming back impressed me a lot. I really like what they've got in Houston on both sides of the football. I'm going to have to monitor Andre Johnson's injury though for sure. Also that stat about the Colts and games decided by 7 points or less is really sticking out to me. If AJ is healthy, I think Houston takes this game striaght up and makes a statement to the league.
Pretty good analysis. This is the one thing I disagree with. While Houston has been a pleasant surprise through 2 weeks, I don't see them stopping to Colts. I personally jumped on Indy -5.5 early because a gimpy or even inactive Andre Johnson causes the Texans offense to take a major step backwards, and we might see that 5.5 creep to 7.5 if/when news is released that AJ is out or not playing at 100%.
Who was the last team to beat the Indianapolis Colts?Are the Colts better or worse than they were last season?Are the Texans better or worse than they were last season?Don't be surprised when the Texans win this game.
 
I'm all over Pitt as long as they stay under 10. At +9, I think it's terrific.

I really like Jacksonville, but they've been depressing the last two weeks. I thought they were my sleeper pick to win it all this year. I wouldn't bet against them, but no way I could bet on them at this point.

Jets are very likely to beat Miami. I don't see anything worse than a push with NY -3.0.

I'd stay away from betting against the Pats at all costs.

 
Assani Fisher said:
I like Houston +5. Houston looks good...really good. Its not just that they've won 2 games, but its how they won them. Falling down 2 TDs on the road against Carolina and then coming back impressed me a lot. I really like what they've got in Houston on both sides of the football. I'm going to have to monitor Andre Johnson's injury though for sure. Also that stat about the Colts and games decided by 7 points or less is really sticking out to me. If AJ is healthy, I think Houston takes this game striaght up and makes a statement to the league.
Pretty good analysis. This is the one thing I disagree with. While Houston has been a pleasant surprise through 2 weeks, I don't see them stopping to Colts. I personally jumped on Indy -5.5 early because a gimpy or even inactive Andre Johnson causes the Texans offense to take a major step backwards, and we might see that 5.5 creep to 7.5 if/when news is released that AJ is out or not playing at 100%.
Who was the last team to beat the Indianapolis Colts?Are the Colts better or worse than they were last season?Are the Texans better or worse than they were last season?Don't be surprised when the Texans win this game.
The Texans are very improved from last season...but do you honestly see them being able to keep up with Indy's offense with AJ presumed out, or at least <100%?
 
I like most of those, but am wary of HOU without Andre Johnson. Definitely on board with DEN and TEN.

I also like Cinci +4.5 at Seattle, DET +6.5 at PHI, and DAL +whatever at Chicago. I think 2 of these 3 will likely win outright.

 
Everyone is down on Jacksonville, not Denver. But, the Jags are much better than they appear. IMO, they win this game outright, and that is why the line is only 3 and very appealing to all the Denver backers.

 
Let me preface by saying that I am a Niner homer.

Normally I would agree with you that Pittsburgh is a lock to blowout the Niner's in Pittsburgh. But after watching the first two games, I would urge you to reconsider. The 49er's are playing an entirely new ballgame this year due to their defensive FA acquisitions and Patrick Willis. We've proven that we can beat an equally matched team on the road(STL). How did we do it? Ball control. Our D keeps everything in front. Did you see Fitzgerald and Boldin get shutdown? Holt was almost non-existant against us. Only Bruce was lighting us up, all with the underneath stuff.

We play 2 deep on virtually every play. I really don't think Ben is going to have his way with SF, and furthermore I think we are very well suited to shutdown Willie Parker's style of play. Our LBs are fast, you're not gonna get the corner on them. It all adds up to a low scoring game IMO. And when you consider that Frank Gore can score from anywhere on the field, giving up double digit points just does not make sense to me. 17 PIt 14 SF is very possible.

#1 We have not been beaten deep one single time this year despite playing great WRs in Boldin/Fitz, Bruce/Holt.

#2 Patrick Willis is a freaking monster and allows us some major flexibility in our play calling.

#3 Pittsburgh O has looked good, but I think Ben's weaknesses play to our strengths, we can pressure him and force him to dink and dunk.

#4 Our secondary can create turnovers.

#5 Willie Parker will have a hard time running outside

#6 Frank Gore is the equalizer.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Everyone is down on Jacksonville, not Denver. But, the Jags are much better than they appear. IMO, they win this game outright, and that is why the line is only 3 and very appealing to all the Denver backers.
You're going to have to explain why Jacksonville is "better than they appear."They lost their last 3 games this year, lost at home to the Titans, and barely won at home against perhaps the worst team in the league.They aqre 14th in passing yards and 22nd in rushing yards. They are 32nd defending the run. The only thing they rank well in is pass yardage defense(2nd in the league) but when you consider that they've gone up against Vince Young and Joey Harrington that becomes a lot less impressive.I really don't see anything they do well, and I think they're a bad bad team. But I am more than willing to listen to your views...but I think that its on you to prove why you think that they're better than they've shown...just saying it doesn't convince me of anything.
 
Let me preface by saying that I am a Niner homer.Normally I would agree with you that Pittsburgh is a lock to blowout the Niner's in Pittsburgh. But after watching the first two games, I would urge you to reconsider. The 49er's are playing an entirely new ballgame this year due to their defensive FA acquisitions and Patrick Willis. We've proven that we can beat an equally matched team on the road(STL). How did we do it? Ball control. Our D keeps everything in front. Did you see Fitzgerald and Boldin get shutdown? Holt was almost non-existant against us. Only Bruce was lighting us up, all with the underneath stuff.We play 2 deep on virtually every play. I really don't think Ben is going to have his way with SF, and furthermore I think we are very well suited to shutdown Willie Parker's style of play. Our LBs are fast, you're not gonna get the corner on them. It all adds up to a low scoring game IMO. And when you consider that Frank Gore can score from anywhere on the field, giving up double digit points just does not make sense to me. 17 PIt 14 SF is very possible.#1 We have not been beaten deep one single time this year despite playing great WRs in Boldin/Fitz, Bruce/Holt.#2 Patrick Willis is a freaking monster and allows us some major flexibility in our play calling.#3 Pittsburgh O has looked good, but I think Ben's weaknesses play to our strengths, we can pressure him and force him to dink and dunk.#4 Our secondary can create turnovers.#5 Willie Parker will have a hard time running outside#6 Frank Gore is the equalizer.
Posts like this are the reason I started this thread. I'm not saying you've changed my mind, but you've certainly caused me to reconsider. I'm a bit tired now, but hopefully you'll check back in later and I can ask you some more questions about the 49ers.
 
Let me preface by saying that I am a Niner homer.Normally I would agree with you that Pittsburgh is a lock to blowout the Niner's in Pittsburgh. But after watching the first two games, I would urge you to reconsider. The 49er's are playing an entirely new ballgame this year due to their defensive FA acquisitions and Patrick Willis. We've proven that we can beat an equally matched team on the road(STL). How did we do it? Ball control. Our D keeps everything in front. Did you see Fitzgerald and Boldin get shutdown? Holt was almost non-existant against us. Only Bruce was lighting us up, all with the underneath stuff.We play 2 deep on virtually every play. I really don't think Ben is going to have his way with SF, and furthermore I think we are very well suited to shutdown Willie Parker's style of play. Our LBs are fast, you're not gonna get the corner on them. It all adds up to a low scoring game IMO. And when you consider that Frank Gore can score from anywhere on the field, giving up double digit points just does not make sense to me. 17 PIt 14 SF is very possible.#1 We have not been beaten deep one single time this year despite playing great WRs in Boldin/Fitz, Bruce/Holt.#2 Patrick Willis is a freaking monster and allows us some major flexibility in our play calling.#3 Pittsburgh O has looked good, but I think Ben's weaknesses play to our strengths, we can pressure him and force him to dink and dunk.#4 Our secondary can create turnovers.#5 Willie Parker will have a hard time running outside#6 Frank Gore is the equalizer.
I'm going to have to agree with most of this. I think Pittsburgh will win this week, but I think -9 is way too much to give a solid SF team.
 
The Texans are very improved from last season...but do you honestly see them being able to keep up with Indy's offense with AJ presumed out, or at least <100%?
The Titans took Indy to the wire last week and I think Houston is better on both sides of the ball than Tennessee is.
 
The Texans are very improved from last season...but do you honestly see them being able to keep up with Indy's offense with AJ presumed out, or at least <100%?
The Titans took Indy to the wire last week and I think Houston is better on both sides of the ball than Tennessee is.
But again, isn't it safe to say that the offense becomes limited without a fully healthy Andre Johnson? I just can't see the Texans going shot for shot with Indy when they'll be throwing to Kevin Walter and Jacoby James. I could most certainly be wrong, and AJ could end up 100% and make this a very interesting game, but going under the assumption that he is out or limited, I'm having a hard time seeing this team able to keep up with the Colts' offense.
 
Ok, I think you have convinced me to lay off the Pit/SF game.

right now I'm leaning towards also dropping the Buf pick and just going with NYJ, Den, and Hous.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
The Texans are very improved from last season...but do you honestly see them being able to keep up with Indy's offense with AJ presumed out, or at least <100%?
The Titans took Indy to the wire last week and I think Houston is better on both sides of the ball than Tennessee is.
But again, isn't it safe to say that the offense becomes limited without a fully healthy Andre Johnson? I just can't see the Texans going shot for shot with Indy when they'll be throwing to Kevin Walter and Jacoby James. I could most certainly be wrong, and AJ could end up 100% and make this a very interesting game, but going under the assumption that he is out or limited, I'm having a hard time seeing this team able to keep up with the Colts' offense.
With AJ out the Texans are in trouble Sunday. I don't consider anything a sure-thing in the NFL, but it would take a near-miracle for the Texans to pull off the win (or stay close for that matter).
 
Week 3

Another game I'm leaning towards early is Pit -9 at home vs San Fran. I fully jumped on the Pit bandwagon after week 1, as evidenced by my power rankings and week 2 pick of them.

I really don't think SF is anything more than an average team. I think their 0-2 start is a mirage and they get clobbered this week.
If you're going to be putting down serious money, you might want to check ALL your figures - since the Niners are 2-0... :hophead:
 
Let me preface by saying that I am a Niner homer.Normally I would agree with you that Pittsburgh is a lock to blowout the Niner's in Pittsburgh. But after watching the first two games, I would urge you to reconsider. The 49er's are playing an entirely new ballgame this year due to their defensive FA acquisitions and Patrick Willis. We've proven that we can beat an equally matched team on the road(STL). How did we do it? Ball control. Our D keeps everything in front. Did you see Fitzgerald and Boldin get shutdown? Holt was almost non-existant against us. Only Bruce was lighting us up, all with the underneath stuff.We play 2 deep on virtually every play. I really don't think Ben is going to have his way with SF, and furthermore I think we are very well suited to shutdown Willie Parker's style of play. Our LBs are fast, you're not gonna get the corner on them. It all adds up to a low scoring game IMO. And when you consider that Frank Gore can score from anywhere on the field, giving up double digit points just does not make sense to me. 17 PIt 14 SF is very possible.#1 We have not been beaten deep one single time this year despite playing great WRs in Boldin/Fitz, Bruce/Holt.#2 Patrick Willis is a freaking monster and allows us some major flexibility in our play calling.#3 Pittsburgh O has looked good, but I think Ben's weaknesses play to our strengths, we can pressure him and force him to dink and dunk.#4 Our secondary can create turnovers.#5 Willie Parker will have a hard time running outside#6 Frank Gore is the equalizer.
You failed to mentio the following:#1 How bad Alex Smith has been looking#2 Rams almost 400 total yards against ya'll, they just had stupid turnovers in great field postion.#3 Steelers D matches up well vs Gore.
 
Ok, I think you have convinced me to lay off the Pit/SF game.

right now I'm leaning towards also dropping the Buf pick and just going with NYJ, Den, and Hous.
Bad move.Sagarin has the Steelers as the 2nd best team in the league going forward, and the 49ers as the 29th best team. The difference between the two is a whopping 15.46 points, plus 3.22 for HFA. That's 18.68 points, more than double the spread.

Why does Sagarin rate the Steelers so highly and the 49ers so lowly? The Steelers have won their two games by an average of 25 points each, so that's simple enough. The 49ers? They've played the 32nd best schedule so far (read: the easiest), and won both games by an average of two points. The Rams are the 32nd best team in the NFL (read: the worst). STL lost to the 49ers (who aren't very good, but that's circular) and the Panthers. What do we know about the Panthers? They won IN St. Louis by two TDs, then lost at home to the Texans by 13 points. The Rams might not be the worst team in the league, but I think they've played like the worst team in the league so far. The Cardinals? They lost in the last second (and should have beaten) @ the 49ers, and then were lucky (and probably should have lost) against Seattle, winning at home by a field goal. And Seattle is no great shakes, either.

The 49ers beat two terrible teams by 4 points. The Steelers beat two bad teams by 50 points. And Pittsburgh's home.

Now I'm fine with not basing a lot on this season, but I don't think the 49ers were any good last year, either. In 2006 the 49ers played 7 playoff teams. They lost to 5 of them by an average...and average...of 28 points. They swept the Seahawks, but Seattle was a miserable playoff team and much inferior to your average playoff team.

If you think the Steelers are an AFC playoff team, you should feel confident taking the points, here. I'd probably be comfortable laying 13.5. SF is fool's gold.

 
Week 3

Another game I'm leaning towards early is Pit -9 at home vs San Fran. I fully jumped on the Pit bandwagon after week 1, as evidenced by my power rankings and week 2 pick of them.

I really don't think SF is anything more than an average team. I think their 0-2 start is a mirage and they get clobbered this week.
If you're going to be putting down serious money, you might want to check ALL your figures - since the Niners are 2-0... :thumbup:
Isn't it strange that a 2-0 team is 9 points underdog.When you really think about it, it isn't. The Niners were lucky to beat two very average teams. Arizona handed them the game with the turtle offense + prevent defense in the final 8 minutes of the game. St. Louis dominated most of the game as well.

Gore will get 70 yards tops, leaving the game in the hands of Alex Smith, who is not having a good start.

I don't think Pitt -9 is a top 5 bet, but SF +9 is definitely more risky.

 
someone at 2p2 chimed in with this:

another niners homer here wanting to chime in...

Willie Parker and the Steelers strength is actually inside running(despite his obvious speed to the outside). with the niners running the 3-4 without an experienced big fella in the middle to clog it up we are entirely vulnerable to that kind of run game. Against the Rams Bruce got open for passes of 37, 23, 22, and 27 yards in addition to the underneath stuff you mentioned. As far as us not getting beat deep all year, what is your criteria for deep? 2 ints in two games for our secondary is ok, but nothing to brag about i don't think. We do have some good speed in the LB corp and Clements is an excellent tackler on his side of the field, which is why I see Pitt pounding it up inside against us. We blitz a lot this year, and there have been numerous times where we were not in 2 deep coverage.... Did you see how many times we sent Nate last week? If we can't pass the ball against the Rams, why do you think we can against a traditionally strong defensive team like Pitt? I don't mean to just disagree with you, but rather enjoy hearing other perspectives.

Now I'm really going back and forth.

 
Ok, I think you have convinced me to lay off the Pit/SF game.

right now I'm leaning towards also dropping the Buf pick and just going with NYJ, Den, and Hous.
Bad move.Sagarin has the Steelers as the 2nd best team in the league going forward, and the 49ers as the 29th best team. The difference between the two is a whopping 15.46 points, plus 3.22 for HFA. That's 18.68 points, more than double the spread.

Why does Sagarin rate the Steelers so highly and the 49ers so lowly? The Steelers have won their two games by an average of 25 points each, so that's simple enough. The 49ers? They've played the 32nd best schedule so far (read: the easiest), and won both games by an average of two points. The Rams are the 32nd best team in the NFL (read: the worst). STL lost to the 49ers (who aren't very good, but that's circular) and the Panthers. What do we know about the Panthers? They won IN St. Louis by two TDs, then lost at home to the Texans by 13 points. The Rams might not be the worst team in the league, but I think they've played like the worst team in the league so far. The Cardinals? They lost in the last second (and should have beaten) @ the 49ers, and then were lucky (and probably should have lost) against Seattle, winning at home by a field goal. And Seattle is no great shakes, either.

The 49ers beat two terrible teams by 4 points. The Steelers beat two bad teams by 50 points. And Pittsburgh's home.

Now I'm fine with not basing a lot on this season, but I don't think the 49ers were any good last year, either. In 2006 the 49ers played 7 playoff teams. They lost to 5 of them by an average...and average...of 28 points. They swept the Seahawks, but Seattle was a miserable playoff team and much inferior to your average playoff team.

If you think the Steelers are an AFC playoff team, you should feel confident taking the points, here. I'd probably be comfortable laying 13.5. SF is fool's gold.
Thanks for your analysis. I think I'm going to follow my initial line of thought and take Pitt.
 
I have all of the following pending and these games will be my only NFL action of the weekend:

NYJ -3

DEN -3

STL - TB OVER 38

CLE - OAK OVER 40.5

CAR - ATL UNDER 36.5

TEN - NO UNDER 45

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I'm also interested in GB/SD under 43....just seems like 2 very good defenses and 2 middle of the pack offenses(yes I know SD was awesome last year, but so far this year they've looked pretty poor although maybe thats due to their opponent's good Ds)

 
Ok, I think you have convinced me to lay off the Pit/SF game.

right now I'm leaning towards also dropping the Buf pick and just going with NYJ, Den, and Hous.
Bad move.Sagarin has the Steelers as the 2nd best team in the league going forward, and the 49ers as the 29th best team. The difference between the two is a whopping 15.46 points, plus 3.22 for HFA. That's 18.68 points, more than double the spread.

Why does Sagarin rate the Steelers so highly and the 49ers so lowly? The Steelers have won their two games by an average of 25 points each, so that's simple enough. The 49ers? They've played the 32nd best schedule so far (read: the easiest), and won both games by an average of two points. The Rams are the 32nd best team in the NFL (read: the worst). STL lost to the 49ers (who aren't very good, but that's circular) and the Panthers. What do we know about the Panthers? They won IN St. Louis by two TDs, then lost at home to the Texans by 13 points. The Rams might not be the worst team in the league, but I think they've played like the worst team in the league so far. The Cardinals? They lost in the last second (and should have beaten) @ the 49ers, and then were lucky (and probably should have lost) against Seattle, winning at home by a field goal. And Seattle is no great shakes, either.

The 49ers beat two terrible teams by 4 points. The Steelers beat two bad teams by 50 points. And Pittsburgh's home.

Now I'm fine with not basing a lot on this season, but I don't think the 49ers were any good last year, either. In 2006 the 49ers played 7 playoff teams. They lost to 5 of them by an average...and average...of 28 points. They swept the Seahawks, but Seattle was a miserable playoff team and much inferior to your average playoff team.

If you think the Steelers are an AFC playoff team, you should feel confident taking the points, here. I'd probably be comfortable laying 13.5. SF is fool's gold.
If it were only this easy. I would give the Steelers a 50% chance of covering.
 
someone at 2p2 chimed in with this:another niners homer here wanting to chime in...Willie Parker and the Steelers strength is actually inside running(despite his obvious speed to the outside). with the niners running the 3-4 without an experienced big fella in the middle to clog it up we are entirely vulnerable to that kind of run game.
I'm gonna have to disagree here. Most of Willie's yardage comes from plays off tackle and not up the middle. Even the plays that start in the middle he often bounces out. And I do know that we are weak at NT, but then there is Patrick Willis. I don't know if you've been watching the D side closely, but #52 is in on EVERY play. The guy is a monster, Ray Lewis like. Edge ran up the middle all day on us, but we stopped him enough to win that game. I think Willie Parker can have a good game here (100+ yards), but it is gonna take him a whole lot of carries (and clock) to do it.
Against the Rams Bruce got open for passes of 37, 23, 22, and 27 yards in addition to the underneath stuff you mentioned. As far as us not getting beat deep all year, what is your criteria for deep?
Bruce got most of his yardage on deep outs and a few crossing patterns. Those ARE underneath plays. He cuts in front of our CB/S to make those plays and doesn't get behind them. That's what getting beat deep means, having a guy get past your last defender and you're chasing him. Gos, Stop and Gos, Posts, Corners are getting beat deep. Outs and slants are not scoring TDs. If this guy is truly a Niner's homer like he professes he must have seen how many times we've been "beat deep" the past few years. Remember the days when you started the WR#2 on a weak passing team against the Niner's because he was probably going to have a big game? Those days are over. Why the hell do you think we went out and got Clements this offseason for $80 MIL. Nolan knows what he is doing here.
We blitz a lot this year, and there have been numerous times where we were not in 2 deep coverage.... Did you see how many times we sent Nate last week? If we can't pass the ball against the Rams, why do you think we can against a traditionally strong defensive team like Pitt? I don't mean to just disagree with you, but rather enjoy hearing other perspectives.
We blitz a lot I agree, but we are never bringing the house, that was the point behind my two deep comment. We are not getting beat deep because we are always dropping guys back in coverage. With Lawson out that can be a big time hit for us, because that guy had a lot of speed and cover ability. I have to believe that we will get Brandon Moore on the field more even if he is listed as a backup ILB and not OLB, but that will still hurt coverage. And regarding the passing offense, I really think we are not as bad as we seem in the box score. We're just not passing the ball very much, and when we do there is a lot of short passing going on. I think we could have passed against the Ram's, but we didn't want to risk losing the battle of field position and risk Smith throwing INTS in a close game. Nolan has said that he is going to rethink the offense, so maybe he plans to open up a bit. But so far I think we are looking good, certainly not worst in the league bad. It was not a fluke or mistake that we beat Arizona BTW. Alex Smith drove the team down the length of the field in the 2 minute drill and carried the team on his back to victory. You don't win games by luck with 2:58 left in the 4th quarter, down by 4 at your own 14.
 
PS That Sagarin dude has Seattle as the #11 team. Yet they lost to Arizona. And who did they beat? Tampa? C'mon now. That doesn't even mention that we beat Seattle last season TWICE with a team far inferior to this year's team. You start pluggin in data into some formula two weeks into the season and you are just asking for trouble IMO.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Anyone have an analysis of Pittsburgh?

I haven't seen them play this season, and I expected them to struggle at first with Tomlin (a cover 2 guy) and Lebeau (3-4, blitz heavy D. Coordinator) clashing on the style of the defense. They've been very effective, but how are they playing defense, and what effect will it have on SF's offense.

 
ended up taking:

Jets -3

Denver -3

pit -9.5
Good luck, but I wouldn't even put fake money on the Jets right now. They have no sacks or turnovers in their first two games, and their "pass rush" is a joke. Even 140 year-old Trent Green can exploit a defense when he has all day to sit in the pocket. Jets fans better hope Mangini really is a defensive guru, or it'll be a long season.
 
ended up taking:

Jets -3

Denver -3

pit -9.5
Good luck, but I wouldn't even put fake money on the Jets right now. They have no sacks or turnovers in their first two games, and their "pass rush" is a joke. Even 140 year-old Trent Green can exploit a defense when he has all day to sit in the pocket. Jets fans better hope Mangini really is a defensive guru, or it'll be a long season.
What are your thoughts on the Jets defense this year vs. last year?
 
PS That Sagarin dude has Seattle as the #11 team. Yet they lost to Arizona. And who did they beat? Tampa? C'mon now. That doesn't even mention that we beat Seattle last season TWICE with a team far inferior to this year's team. You start pluggin in data into some formula two weeks into the season and you are just asking for trouble IMO.
For starters, it doesn't matter if SF beat Seattle twice last year. You look at what happens over 16 games, and while Seattle was wildly overrated in 2006, they were still better than SF.Sagarin's ratings only take into account what's happened this year, so there's certainly a "grain of salt" idea after only two games. I don't think the Saints are the 2nd worst team in the league.All that said, I'm not really sure why Seattle is ranked 11th. The best I can figure is they had a 14 point win over Tampa Bay, who beat the Saints in NO by 17. So those are two pretty large data points in Seattle's favor. The loss in Arizona should have hurt more, though, especially since they lost to SF in their other game. I don't think Sagarin has an error in his computer program, it just seems like one of those weird results so far.
 
ended up taking:

Jets -3

Denver -3

pit -9.5
Good luck, but I wouldn't even put fake money on the Jets right now. They have no sacks or turnovers in their first two games, and their "pass rush" is a joke. Even 140 year-old Trent Green can exploit a defense when he has all day to sit in the pocket. Jets fans better hope Mangini really is a defensive guru, or it'll be a long season.
What are your thoughts on the Jets defense this year vs. last year?
Didn't pay much attention to them last year. Are my comments about their horrid pass rush off base in your opinion?

 
RAIDERNATION said:
Chase Stuart said:
RAIDERNATION said:
Assani Fisher said:
ended up taking:

Jets -3

Denver -3

pit -9.5
Good luck, but I wouldn't even put fake money on the Jets right now. They have no sacks or turnovers in their first two games, and their "pass rush" is a joke. Even 140 year-old Trent Green can exploit a defense when he has all day to sit in the pocket. Jets fans better hope Mangini really is a defensive guru, or it'll be a long season.
What are your thoughts on the Jets defense this year vs. last year?
Didn't pay much attention to them last year. Are my comments about their horrid pass rush off base in your opinion?
No, but the pass rush isn't any worse than the pass rush last year. And this is a defense that led the league in points allowed in the second half of last year.I think the Jets are off to a slow start, especially on D, but I'm not terribly concerned. I don't expect Miami to do much on offense.

 
The Texans are very improved from last season...but do you honestly see them being able to keep up with Indy's offense with AJ presumed out, or at least <100%?
The Titans took Indy to the wire last week and I think Houston is better on both sides of the ball than Tennessee is.
That is because Vince Young, pure and simple. He's put that team on his back.
Yeah, there's no way Matt Schaub can hope to match VY's 225 yards of offense and one TD.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top