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!
Try again tomorrow. That happens to me sometimes. I think it's because they use different company names to charge you and your card doesn't trust certain ones.Damn was about to place a few prop bets on the Super Bowl on Sportsbook and it rejected my cc.
Get him in here.
Hmnm. Good lookin out. I was just trying to protect myself. Seems like a high number of games land right on 44. If it was 52 I wouldn't bother.I don't have a strong opinion on the bet....but PLEASE don't buy a 1/2pt, you're burning moneyRaider Nation said:I am going to fade my original lean and play the over on Sunday for $2K. I'll buy a half point to get it down to 44.A score of 27-17 (minimum) seems reasonable to expect. The roof is closed so the bad weather isn't a factor.
Finally took the time to look up the original bet (damn I hate Sportsbook's wagering history capabilities). It was listed as AP NFL Offensive Rookie of the Year, so looks like I'm good for my +250 bet. Whoever here spotted this back in October:It was offensive I think...I had $15 on Best
Pick me up on the way.
Packers are up to -3 (+105) at the Greek. REALLY tempted to take that $2K and send in a GB -3/over 44.5 parlay. It would pay $5827.27.Hmnm. Good lookin out. I was just trying to protect myself. Seems like a high number of games land right on 44. If it was 52 I wouldn't bother.I don't have a strong opinion on the bet....but PLEASE don't buy a 1/2pt, you're burning moneyRaider Nation said:I am going to fade my original lean and play the over on Sunday for $2K. I'll buy a half point to get it down to 44.A score of 27-17 (minimum) seems reasonable to expect. The roof is closed so the bad weather isn't a factor.
This is my last gamble until March Madness. It sure would be exciting.
Watch out for the Raji carry.......
seriously? UGGGHHHH The FREEZER...lol
I would tell you to go for it, since I already have a large parlay on GB -2.5/over 44.5 and feel very confident about it. However, my large parlay would be a lot less than $2k, so you're on your own here, but I am definitely pulling for you.Raider Nation said:Packers are up to -3 (+105) at the Greek. REALLY tempted to take that $2K and send in a GB -3/over 44.5 parlay. It would pay $5827.27.Raider Nation said:Hmnm. Good lookin out. I was just trying to protect myself. Seems like a high number of games land right on 44. If it was 52 I wouldn't bother.I don't have a strong opinion on the bet....but PLEASE don't buy a 1/2pt, you're burning moneyRaider Nation said:I am going to fade my original lean and play the over on Sunday for $2K. I'll buy a half point to get it down to 44.A score of 27-17 (minimum) seems reasonable to expect. The roof is closed so the bad weather isn't a factor.
This is my last gamble until March Madness. It sure would be exciting.
Great info here, thanks for the post.... I'll likely tail you and put 25 on the orange gatorade too... but I can't help thinking where do people get this information from??? Tried looking all over the internet and couldn't find this information???
![[icon]](/data/avatars/m/5/5167.jpg?1660313464){kind=avatar}
Sportsbook is reporting 80% of the money is on the over. At 45, with the #1 scoring defense in the NFL playing against the #2 - doesn't make sense to me.I would tell you to go for it, since I already have a large parlay on GB -2.5/over 44.5 and feel very confident about it. However, my large parlay would be a lot less than $2k, so you're on your own here, but I am definitely pulling for you.Raider Nation said:Packers are up to -3 (+105) at the Greek. REALLY tempted to take that $2K and send in a GB -3/over 44.5 parlay. It would pay $5827.27.Raider Nation said:Hmnm. Good lookin out. I was just trying to protect myself. Seems like a high number of games land right on 44. If it was 52 I wouldn't bother.I don't have a strong opinion on the bet....but PLEASE don't buy a 1/2pt, you're burning moneyRaider Nation said:I am going to fade my original lean and play the over on Sunday for $2K. I'll buy a half point to get it down to 44.A score of 27-17 (minimum) seems reasonable to expect. The roof is closed so the bad weather isn't a factor.This is my last gamble until March Madness. It sure would be exciting.
It might be because the teams were both top 4 when they met last year and 73 points were scored, Rodgers is red hot, fast track at Jerryworld and the teams seem to be able to manufacture points even when things don't go perfectly. Add in the chance for a defensive score, and 45 is very reasonable.Bottom line though is the public loves to see the over and wishing it to be so goes a long way. 24-21 sounds about right for this game.
I'll give my reasoning: I think both teams KNOW they won't be able to run the ball. If you accept this as truth, there will be fewer times with a running clock. That's the first, big thing. If the passing is successful, well... that's great for the over. If it's quick and unsuccessful, that should result in good field position for the other team. The Steelers secondary has shown to be vulnerable against teams that spread them out and throw. If the Pack goes 5-wide with Jennings, Driver, Nelson, Jones and Quarless, Pittsburgh will have to blitz to have any hope of stopping that attack. But Rodgers gets rid of the ball so quickly that it's difficult to get to him. He can take full advantage of running lanes a blitzing defense creates, as well. And I also considered your last point -- a defensive score. With all the passing, there is a good chance of a cheap, quick pick-6.
He should have said
ittsburgh probably thinks they'll be able to run, but that won't happen.
Right, just like they couldn't run on the Ravens or the Jets. Why would they expect to be able to run against the 18th ranked rushing defense? Can't wait for the game.He should have said
Every team goes into a game wishing/thinking/hoping they can run the ball. That notion will be squashed quickly in this game on both sides.He should have said
You lost a Pro Bowl center, bro.Right, just like they couldn't run on the Ravens or the Jets. Can't wait for the game.He should have said
Ok I'm not going to argue in this thread with Pittsburgh homers who tend to be among the worst homers in all of sports (please see hockey tread or any thread about Rotehrlsraperler).Right, just like they couldn't run on the Ravens or the Jets. Can't wait for the game.He should have said
That's as useless a stat as you'll find for this game. Units can improve over the course of the year.In the playoffs alone, G.B. held McCoy to 46 yards and Turner to 39 yards. Forte had a decent day with 70 yards. All of that on the road.
I understand that. Of course I wish the Steelers had Pouncey. But I don't necessarily think it will completely kill their running game. Legursky can play and they ran just fine against the Jets with Pouncey out of the game.
Sanchez is no Rogers. If the Packers score as much as I believe they will, the Steelers will have to abandon their running game... All 2.1 ypc of it. If it's a passing game, like RN and I believe it will be, Pittsburgh will get crushed if they try sticking to the run.
Come on man, homer? You are better than that. Every team has homers, that dooes not mean that because I think the Steelers can run the ball that I am a homer.My money is already down, Steelers +3 and a Steelers +10/Over 37 teaser. Even with that, I surely think Green Bay might win the game though.Ok I'm not going to argue in this thread with Pittsburgh homers who tend to be among the worst homers in all of sports (please see hockey tread or any thread about Rotehrlsraperler).If you think they'll run, great put your money down accordingly. What RN was saying is that he doesn't think that is gonna happen, he is also free to place bets accordingly.
True, although I think McCoy was partly due to dumb playcalling and Turner was due to Atlanta trailing big. Green Bay's defense is nasty, as GR put it. No arguments there.Would you agree that the Steelers' secondary has played well in the playoffs, or at least improved from the regular season.
By the numbers, sure. Would you agree that Rodgers and the Green Bay receivers are slightly better than what they faced with the Ravens and Jets?
I wouldn't recommend doing this, it's definitely a smart play but sportsbooks past history with anything even resembling correlated parlays is really nasty
Absolutely. I don't worry about Jennings vs. Taylor. I worry about Gay/McFadden/Madison vs. Driver/Jones/Nelson. I think that Clark and Polamalu will have to continue to play well in pass coverage, but most importantly, the Steelers can't let Rodgers get comfortable in the pocket.OK, I will shut up now so we don't miss bmj's second installment of picks.
Illinois-Chicago
Any reasoning behind this? I have no idea about them but just want to make sure I know what I'm getting into. TIA GR.
