*** Official Week 5 NFL Wagering Thread *** (1 Viewer)

[TheWick]

Date & Time Favorite Line Underdog Total

10/5 1:00 ET Indianapolis -3 At Houston 47

10/5 1:00 ET Tennessee -3 At Baltimore 33.5

10/5 1:00 ET San Diego -6.5 At Miami 45

10/5 1:00 ET At Carolina -9.5 Kansas City 38.5

10/5 1:00 ET At Philadelphia -6 Washington 42

10/5 1:00 ET Chicago -3.5 At Detroit 44.5

10/5 1:00 ET At Green Bay -7 Atlanta 43.5

10/5 1:00 ET At NY Giants -7 Seattle 43.5

10/5 4:05 ET At Denver -3 Tampa Bay 48

10/5 4:15 ET New England -3 At San Francisco 41

10/5 4:15 ET At Arizona -1 Buffalo 44.5

10/5 4:15 ET At Dallas -17 Cincinnati 44

10/5 8:15 ET At Jacksonville -4 Pittsburgh 36

Monday Night Football Line

10/6 8:35 ET At New Orleans -3 Minnesota 46.5

 

[The Man with the Plan]

Cardinals

Broncos

Saints

Get paid.

 

[The Jacket]

Denver -3

San Diego -6.5

Green Bay -7

 

[The_Man]

wow -- look at all those home dogs.

Indy -3 At Houston

Tennessee -3 at Baltimore

San Diego -6.5 At Miami

Chicago -3.5 At Detroit

New England -3 At San Francisco

 

[Assani Fisher]

Got $1000 on Det +3.5(-105) and $1000 on TB+3(EV) so far. May be the extent of my action this week.

 

[Dragon1952]

3-2 last week (due to the fact that Philly can't score on 1st and goal from the 1 ft line or make a FG over 40 freakin' yds)

Houston +3 vs Indianapolis (Schaub/Slaton getting warmed up. Indy no 'D'.)

Miami +6.5 vs San Diego (S.D. was lucky to beat Oakland. Nemesis New England on deck. Miami keeps it close)

Detroit +3.5 vs Chicago (Got a hunch Detroit wins SU)

K.C. +9.5 @ Carolina (Not counting St Louis, NFL dogs of 8 or more are 10-2 ATS this year, with 6 SU wins, 2 more went into OT and a 1 pt loss (Oak at Buf)

Pittsburgh +4 @ Jax (The Jags 0-3 ATS as a favorite this year. Their 2 wins have been by 2 and 3)

 

[Islander]

Got $1000 on Det +3.5(-105) and $1000 on TB+3(EV) so far. May be the extent of my action this week.

CHI is the square play of the week. DET is the sharp play. Very sharp. I will have the most units on this game for all year so far, and possibly for the rest of the year. I was able to get Det +4-110 earlier today, which is slightly better than +3.5-105. Now +4-110 or +3.5-105 are not available anymore - at least not where I am looking at.I do think the Lions will win SU but the +4 line had more value than the best ML I could find.

 

[Islander]

K.C. +9.5 @ Carolina (Not counting St Louis, NFL dogs of 8 or more are 10-2 ATS this year, with 6 SU wins, 2 more went into OT and a 1 pt loss (Oak at Buf)

I am not sure the fact that dogs 8+ have done well so far this year has anything to do with KC's expected performance next Sunday. I am generally not comfortable with the spread on big favs, but the Chiefs definitely won't win this one. I am taking CAR ML even though I don't think it will be close. KC just won their own Super Bowl last week and Carolina's defense is no Denver.

 

[Sonny Lubick Blowup Doll]

3-2 last week (due to the fact that Philly can't score on 1st and goal from the 1 ft line or make a FG over 40 freakin' yds)Houston +3 vs Indianapolis (Schaub/Slaton getting warmed up. Indy no 'D'.)Miami +6.5 vs San Diego (S.D. was lucky to beat Oakland. Nemesis New England on deck. Miami keeps it close)Detroit +3.5 vs Chicago (Got a hunch Detroit wins SU)K.C. +9.5 @ Carolina (Not counting St Louis, NFL dogs of 8 or more are 10-2 ATS this year, with 6 SU wins, 2 more went into OT and a 1 pt loss (Oak at Buf)Pittsburgh +4 @ Jax (The Jags 0-3 ATS as a favorite this year. Their 2 wins have been by 2 and 3)

Good luck and all, but your reasoning is whacky.

 

[Dragon1952]

K.C. +9.5 @ Carolina (Not counting St Louis, NFL dogs of 8 or more are 10-2 ATS this year, with 6 SU wins, 2 more went into OT and a 1 pt loss (Oak at Buf)

I am not sure the fact that dogs 8+ have done well so far this year has anything to do with KC's expected performance next Sunday.

I think it says a lot about parity, which is a current buzz-word it seems. I mean, if large favorites are not only not covering, but in fact losing outright? Geez, 6 out of 12 huge dogs won SU and another 3 came close and it doesn't tell you anything? Hmmm.

 

[Dragon1952]

3-2 last week (due to the fact that Philly can't score on 1st and goal from the 1 ft line or make a FG over 40 freakin' yds)Houston +3 vs Indianapolis (Schaub/Slaton getting warmed up. Indy no 'D'.)Miami +6.5 vs San Diego (S.D. was lucky to beat Oakland. Nemesis New England on deck. Miami keeps it close)Detroit +3.5 vs Chicago (Got a hunch Detroit wins SU)K.C. +9.5 @ Carolina (Not counting St Louis, NFL dogs of 8 or more are 10-2 ATS this year, with 6 SU wins, 2 more went into OT and a 1 pt loss (Oak at Buf)Pittsburgh +4 @ Jax (The Jags 0-3 ATS as a favorite this year. Their 2 wins have been by 2 and 3)

Good luck and all, but your reasoning is whacky.

Those are more like 'comments'. But not sure what you mean by whacky. They are all relevant.Indianapolis is lucky they are not 0-3. They have looked terrible yet continue to be the favorite. They are facing a QB that just threw for over 300 yds and 3 TD's and took a much better defense to OT on the road.The NFL dog statement was not 'reasoning', it's a fact.The Jags are obviously being over-rated....0-3 ATS as a favorite and haven't won a game by more than 3 and they are 4 pt favorites against one of the best defenses in the NFL this year?San Diego just barely got by Oakland, and now they travel 3000 miles to play a team that just dismantled New England and is coming off of a bye. They've got New England on deck, and if you don't think they've had that game circled you're crazy. New England has knocked them out of the playoffs 2 years in a row. In a way this is a sandwich game, coming off of a tough division game with a possible look-ahead towards a game they have had circled. Pretty whacky

 

[Assani Fisher]

only looking at games in which Jacksonville was the favorite is square thinking imo. They are 1-3 ATS this year. Its not as if they somehow perform worse when they are a favorite. If you want to look at it objectively, then you must take into account their win ATS when they were an underdog.

With that said, I like your Indy reasoning a lot. I think they may be overrated by the public a bit.

 

[TheWick]

I just bumped my lines up against whats out there and I am not going to play alot again this week. Here are the only differences I see

CAR -9.5 should be more like -13.5 or so...but I never lay that much

TB +3 they should be a 1 or 2 point favorite in this game but I have them "due down"

SF +3 they should also be the favorite in this game but I don't want to bet against NE coming off that bad loss and after a bye

NO -3 this line should be close to 6 or 7 and might be my only play

tough week fellas

I have BUF as very very due for a down game but would like to get a better line on that one. TEN of course is also due down but so is BAL so thats a no play for me.

The DET CHI game is interesting but I don't like to bet on DET.

interested to see what aiverson likes this week

 

[Islander]

K.C. +9.5 @ Carolina (Not counting St Louis, NFL dogs of 8 or more are 10-2 ATS this year, with 6 SU wins, 2 more went into OT and a 1 pt loss (Oak at Buf)

I am not sure the fact that dogs 8+ have done well so far this year has anything to do with KC's expected performance next Sunday.

I think it says a lot about parity, which is a current buzz-word it seems. I mean, if large favorites are not only not covering, but in fact losing outright? Geez, 6 out of 12 huge dogs won SU and another 3 came close and it doesn't tell you anything? Hmmm.

if you flip a coin and you get heads four times in a row, do you think the next flip has more than 50% chance of being heads and tail having less than 50% chance?

 

[Islander]

3-2 last week (due to the fact that Philly can't score on 1st and goal from the 1 ft line or make a FG over 40 freakin' yds)Houston +3 vs Indianapolis (Schaub/Slaton getting warmed up. Indy no 'D'.)Miami +6.5 vs San Diego (S.D. was lucky to beat Oakland. Nemesis New England on deck. Miami keeps it close)Detroit +3.5 vs Chicago (Got a hunch Detroit wins SU)K.C. +9.5 @ Carolina (Not counting St Louis, NFL dogs of 8 or more are 10-2 ATS this year, with 6 SU wins, 2 more went into OT and a 1 pt loss (Oak at Buf)Pittsburgh +4 @ Jax (The Jags 0-3 ATS as a favorite this year. Their 2 wins have been by 2 and 3)

Good luck and all, but your reasoning is whacky.

Those are more like 'comments'. But not sure what you mean by whacky. They are all relevant.Indianapolis is lucky they are not 0-3. They have looked terrible yet continue to be the favorite. They are facing a QB that just threw for over 300 yds and 3 TD's and took a much better defense to OT on the road.The NFL dog statement was not 'reasoning', it's a fact.The Jags are obviously being over-rated....0-3 ATS as a favorite and haven't won a game by more than 3 and they are 4 pt favorites against one of the best defenses in the NFL this year?San Diego just barely got by Oakland, and now they travel 3000 miles to play a team that just dismantled New England and is coming off of a bye. They've got New England on deck, and if you don't think they've had that game circled you're crazy. New England has knocked them out of the playoffs 2 years in a row. In a way this is a sandwich game, coming off of a tough division game with a possible look-ahead towards a game they have had circled. Pretty whacky

your reasoning on the chargers makes sense. yes there is a chance they overlook miami, thinking ahead to the NE game. i still won't bet on MIA (or even less on SD for that matter), but it's good thinking. good luck.

 

[MarshallPlan]

NO -3 this line should be close to 6 or 7 and might be my only play

If this game closes 6 or 7, I'll lay any amount of money on the Viks. This won't touch 4, except for maybe the squarest of books.

 

[Raider Nation]

Is Cincy/Dallas OTB primarily due to Palmer's uncertain status?

 

[MarshallPlan]

Is Cincy/Dallas OTB primarily due to Palmer's uncertain status?

Yes, it's 17' at Pinny. I think they believe he's not playing...

 

[Raider Nation]

Is Cincy/Dallas OTB primarily due to Palmer's uncertain status?

Yes, it's 17' at Pinny. I think they believe he's not playing...

Hmmm. Heard him interviewed today. Said it's getting better every day and he expects to be out there.

 

[MarshallPlan]

Is Cincy/Dallas OTB primarily due to Palmer's uncertain status?

Yes, it's 17' at Pinny. I think they believe he's not playing...

Hmmm. Heard him interviewed today. Said it's getting better every day and he expects to be out there.

Nonetheless, Bengals a good bet this week with or without Palmer. 17' fine by me with him or Fitzpatrick under center.

 

[Dragon1952]

K.C. +9.5 @ Carolina (Not counting St Louis, NFL dogs of 8 or more are 10-2 ATS this year, with 6 SU wins, 2 more went into OT and a 1 pt loss (Oak at Buf)

I am not sure the fact that dogs 8+ have done well so far this year has anything to do with KC's expected performance next Sunday.

I think it says a lot about parity, which is a current buzz-word it seems. I mean, if large favorites are not only not covering, but in fact losing outright? Geez, 6 out of 12 huge dogs won SU and another 3 came close and it doesn't tell you anything? Hmmm.

if you flip a coin and you get heads four times in a row, do you think the next flip has more than 50% chance of being heads and tail having less than 50% chance?

That is absolutely an erroneous analogy. We are talking about perceptions by humans of which teams are better, and how much they are better by. It has nothing to do with flipping a coin. And we are talking about 12 times not four, and not only about not covering but huge underdogs winning outright at a ratio of 50%. That tells you that the perceptions are quite possibly flawed and that maybe you would be wise to take advantage of it while you can. Tell me how Kansas City as a 10 pt underdog beat Denver out-right by 2 TD's...because of a coin flip? No...it was because Denver wasn't 10 pts better than Kansas City in that scenario to begin with. Same with Miami at New England, Cincinnati at NY Giants, Carolina at San Diego, Oakland at Buffalo and on and on.....(except St Louis)

 

[MarshallPlan]

K.C. +9.5 @ Carolina (Not counting St Louis, NFL dogs of 8 or more are 10-2 ATS this year, with 6 SU wins, 2 more went into OT and a 1 pt loss (Oak at Buf)

I am not sure the fact that dogs 8+ have done well so far this year has anything to do with KC's expected performance next Sunday.

I think it says a lot about parity, which is a current buzz-word it seems. I mean, if large favorites are not only not covering, but in fact losing outright? Geez, 6 out of 12 huge dogs won SU and another 3 came close and it doesn't tell you anything? Hmmm.

if you flip a coin and you get heads four times in a row, do you think the next flip has more than 50% chance of being heads and tail having less than 50% chance?

That is absolutely an erroneous analogy. We are talking about perceptions by humans of which teams are better, and how much they are better by. It has nothing to do with flipping a coin. And we are talking about 12 times not four, and not only about not covering but huge underdogs winning outright at a ratio of 50%. That tells you that the perceptions are quite possibly flawed and that maybe you would be wise to take advantage of it while you can. Tell me how Kansas City as a 10 pt underdog beat Denver out-right by 2 TD's...because of a coin flip? No...it was because Denver wasn't 10 pts better than Kansas City in that scenario to begin with. Same with Miami at New England, Cincinnati at NY Giants, Carolina at San Diego, Oakland at Buffalo and on and on.....(except St Louis)

It's a 12 game sample size. Who cares. Now if you look up how NFL dogs of 7' or more have fared since 1993 then we'll have a better idea of whether the subset is +EV. Without the numbers, I'd be willing to bet NFL dogs of 7' or more have won 52% of the time at best. Sample size is key here with all these ATS stats...

 

[Dragon1952]

K.C. +9.5 @ Carolina (Not counting St Louis, NFL dogs of 8 or more are 10-2 ATS this year, with 6 SU wins, 2 more went into OT and a 1 pt loss (Oak at Buf)

I am not sure the fact that dogs 8+ have done well so far this year has anything to do with KC's expected performance next Sunday.

I think it says a lot about parity, which is a current buzz-word it seems. I mean, if large favorites are not only not covering, but in fact losing outright? Geez, 6 out of 12 huge dogs won SU and another 3 came close and it doesn't tell you anything? Hmmm.

if you flip a coin and you get heads four times in a row, do you think the next flip has more than 50% chance of being heads and tail having less than 50% chance?

That is absolutely an erroneous analogy. We are talking about perceptions by humans of which teams are better, and how much they are better by. It has nothing to do with flipping a coin. And we are talking about 12 times not four, and not only about not covering but huge underdogs winning outright at a ratio of 50%. That tells you that the perceptions are quite possibly flawed and that maybe you would be wise to take advantage of it while you can. Tell me how Kansas City as a 10 pt underdog beat Denver out-right by 2 TD's...because of a coin flip? No...it was because Denver wasn't 10 pts better than Kansas City in that scenario to begin with. Same with Miami at New England, Cincinnati at NY Giants, Carolina at San Diego, Oakland at Buffalo and on and on.....(except St Louis)

It's a 12 game sample size. Who cares. Now if you look up how NFL dogs of 7' or more have fared since 1993 then we'll have a better idea of whether the subset is +EV. Without the numbers, I'd be willing to bet NFL dogs of 7' or more have won 52% of the time at best. Sample size is key here with all these ATS stats...

This parity thing is relatively new. It wouldn't be relevent to go that far back because there wasn't parity. Let's just see how it plays out.

 

[MarshallPlan]

K.C. +9.5 @ Carolina (Not counting St Louis, NFL dogs of 8 or more are 10-2 ATS this year, with 6 SU wins, 2 more went into OT and a 1 pt loss (Oak at Buf)

I am not sure the fact that dogs 8+ have done well so far this year has anything to do with KC's expected performance next Sunday.

I think it says a lot about parity, which is a current buzz-word it seems. I mean, if large favorites are not only not covering, but in fact losing outright? Geez, 6 out of 12 huge dogs won SU and another 3 came close and it doesn't tell you anything? Hmmm.

if you flip a coin and you get heads four times in a row, do you think the next flip has more than 50% chance of being heads and tail having less than 50% chance?

That is absolutely an erroneous analogy. We are talking about perceptions by humans of which teams are better, and how much they are better by. It has nothing to do with flipping a coin. And we are talking about 12 times not four, and not only about not covering but huge underdogs winning outright at a ratio of 50%. That tells you that the perceptions are quite possibly flawed and that maybe you would be wise to take advantage of it while you can. Tell me how Kansas City as a 10 pt underdog beat Denver out-right by 2 TD's...because of a coin flip? No...it was because Denver wasn't 10 pts better than Kansas City in that scenario to begin with. Same with Miami at New England, Cincinnati at NY Giants, Carolina at San Diego, Oakland at Buffalo and on and on.....(except St Louis)

It's a 12 game sample size. Who cares. Now if you look up how NFL dogs of 7' or more have fared since 1993 then we'll have a better idea of whether the subset is +EV. Without the numbers, I'd be willing to bet NFL dogs of 7' or more have won 52% of the time at best. Sample size is key here with all these ATS stats...

This parity thing is relatively new. It wouldn't be relevent to go that far back because there wasn't parity. Let's just see how it plays out.

Might be good to go back to 1994 actually, the year the 2 point conversion was adopted. With teams like Dallas, SF, NE, and Denver we can draw to a bigger sample size of 7' point dogs and I'd be willing to bet the dogs did quite well against the monster teams. Pats a great example from last year. A 50 team sample size is absolutely nothing.Lines have CERTAINLY tightened up since then, so finding 53% and up subsets are very tough nowadays in the NFL. I know many sharp bettors that don't believe the NFL at widely available lines is beatable. I'm on the fence, I believe it's beatable but not very easy. It's easy for me to see the proper "side" in the NFL games, but getting the best of it is important. That's why teasers, correlated parlays, quarters, and halves must be dipped into, IMO. I'm done here, it's a very good debate to have though. I did just play Jags -2' -155.

 

[Dragon1952]

"I did just play Jags -2' -155."

Well that's a hell of a lot more reasonable than 4....good luck!

BTW, I'll add Cincinnati +17.5

 

[MarshallPlan]

"I did just play Jags -2' -155."Well that's a hell of a lot more reasonable than 4....good luck!BTW, I'll add Cincinnati +17.5

And much more reasonable than the -215 ML.

 

[Assani Fisher]

I just bumped my lines up against whats out there and I am not going to play alot again this week. Here are the only differences I seeCAR -9.5 should be more like -13.5 or so...but I never lay that muchTB +3 they should be a 1 or 2 point favorite in this game but I have them "due down"SF +3 they should also be the favorite in this game but I don't want to bet against NE coming off that bad loss and after a byeNO -3 this line should be close to 6 or 7 and might be my only playtough week fellasI have BUF as very very due for a down game but would like to get a better line on that one. TEN of course is also due down but so is BAL so thats a no play for me.The DET CHI game is interesting but I don't like to bet on DET.interested to see what aiverson likes this week

I'm confused...you have 4 lines that are WAY DIFFERENT than what Vegas has, yet NO-3 might be your only play? Oh, and if your lines are that far off from Vegas' then your lines probably aren't very sharp.

 

[TheWick]

I just bumped my lines up against whats out there and I am not going to play alot again this week. Here are the only differences I seeCAR -9.5 should be more like -13.5 or so...but I never lay that muchTB +3 they should be a 1 or 2 point favorite in this game but I have them "due down"SF +3 they should also be the favorite in this game but I don't want to bet against NE coming off that bad loss and after a byeNO -3 this line should be close to 6 or 7 and might be my only playtough week fellasI have BUF as very very due for a down game but would like to get a better line on that one. TEN of course is also due down but so is BAL so thats a no play for me.The DET CHI game is interesting but I don't like to bet on DET.interested to see what aiverson likes this week

I'm confused...you have 4 lines that are WAY DIFFERENT than what Vegas has, yet NO-3 might be your only play? Oh, and if your lines are that far off from Vegas' then your lines probably aren't very sharp.

The line for every other game was +/-1 point from the vegas line so I'm not sure I'm that much different. Its just a simple power rankings formula. Usually only when the line is different and there is some other "edge" I see in the game is when I make a play. I'm still working the kinks out of this system so you could be very right. But according to it the teams that were that were prime for a change last week werebet againstARIATLBUFPHITENBet withCLEHOUKCSTLThis week it isbet againstBALBUFTBTENbet withCINDETHOUINDJAC

 

[tomarken]

K.C. +9.5 @ Carolina (Not counting St Louis, NFL dogs of 8 or more are 10-2 ATS this year, with 6 SU wins, 2 more went into OT and a 1 pt loss (Oak at Buf)

I am not sure the fact that dogs 8+ have done well so far this year has anything to do with KC's expected performance next Sunday.

I think it says a lot about parity, which is a current buzz-word it seems. I mean, if large favorites are not only not covering, but in fact losing outright? Geez, 6 out of 12 huge dogs won SU and another 3 came close and it doesn't tell you anything? Hmmm.

if you flip a coin and you get heads four times in a row, do you think the next flip has more than 50% chance of being heads and tail having less than 50% chance?

That is absolutely an erroneous analogy. We are talking about perceptions by humans of which teams are better, and how much they are better by. It has nothing to do with flipping a coin. And we are talking about 12 times not four, and not only about not covering but huge underdogs winning outright at a ratio of 50%. That tells you that the perceptions are quite possibly flawed and that maybe you would be wise to take advantage of it while you can. Tell me how Kansas City as a 10 pt underdog beat Denver out-right by 2 TD's...because of a coin flip? No...it was because Denver wasn't 10 pts better than Kansas City in that scenario to begin with. Same with Miami at New England, Cincinnati at NY Giants, Carolina at San Diego, Oakland at Buffalo and on and on.....(except St Louis)

It's a 12 game sample size. Who cares. Now if you look up how NFL dogs of 7' or more have fared since 1993 then we'll have a better idea of whether the subset is +EV. Without the numbers, I'd be willing to bet NFL dogs of 7' or more have won 52% of the time at best. Sample size is key here with all these ATS stats...

This parity thing is relatively new. It wouldn't be relevent to go that far back because there wasn't parity. Let's just see how it plays out.

I don't really think parity is a recent buzzword. And even if it is, does that mean there actually is more parity in the league now than there was 15 years ago? IIRC salary caps and free agency have been in effect since 1994 or so - why is there more parity now than there was then?As the other guy said, I don't think a sample of 12 games from this season should weigh too heavily on your decision to take KC and the points.

 

[Islander]

K.C. +9.5 @ Carolina (Not counting St Louis, NFL dogs of 8 or more are 10-2 ATS this year, with 6 SU wins, 2 more went into OT and a 1 pt loss (Oak at Buf)

I am not sure the fact that dogs 8+ have done well so far this year has anything to do with KC's expected performance next Sunday.

I think it says a lot about parity, which is a current buzz-word it seems. I mean, if large favorites are not only not covering, but in fact losing outright? Geez, 6 out of 12 huge dogs won SU and another 3 came close and it doesn't tell you anything? Hmmm.

if you flip a coin and you get heads four times in a row, do you think the next flip has more than 50% chance of being heads and tail having less than 50% chance?

That is absolutely an erroneous analogy. We are talking about perceptions by humans of which teams are better, and how much they are better by. It has nothing to do with flipping a coin. And we are talking about 12 times not four, and not only about not covering but huge underdogs winning outright at a ratio of 50%. That tells you that the perceptions are quite possibly flawed and that maybe you would be wise to take advantage of it while you can. Tell me how Kansas City as a 10 pt underdog beat Denver out-right by 2 TD's...because of a coin flip? No...it was because Denver wasn't 10 pts better than Kansas City in that scenario to begin with. Same with Miami at New England, Cincinnati at NY Giants, Carolina at San Diego, Oakland at Buffalo and on and on.....(except St Louis)

Even if your theory is correct, what tells you that the time to "take advantage" is not gone now and that it's too late? What tells you that this is not now reflected in the lines?6 SU winners out of 12 dogs is not the norm, but it is not a once in a lifetime event. Just like flipping a coin 6 times in a row on heads. Not the norm, but it happens once in a while. I don't believe this is a predictor of the future.

KC beat Denver because it's a heated rivalry and KC tries harder against DEN especially at home when they are 0-3 and Den is 3-0. KC winning at home vs DEN is not that surprising, regardless how bad they are. That's just the way it is at Arrowhead for this matchup. And given that DEN's defense is awful, KC was able to run. I agree the result was surprising, but this kind of stuff happens several times per year (dog 8+ winning). Nothing outrageously unusual.

I am not seeing more parity this year than last year or the year before.

I respectfully disagree with your thesis altogether.

 

[MarshallPlan]

Here's a good one I got from another poster on another board. I can't verify if it's correct, but...

NFL teams laying 17 or more...6-18 ATS

3 of the 6 covers came from the Rams in the late 90s early 2000 timeframe

Here we have a 24 game sample size. Looks like NFL favs of 17 or more have not done well. Is the sample size large enough? Hell no, not even close. As the above poster stated - flipping coins is actually a decent way to look at it.

But if I could predict going forward and make this sample size 1000 or more (in say 2097) then I'd bet NFL teams laying 17 or more would still be under 50% and closer to 46%.

Wnning at sports is about what is GOING to happen.

 

[Bankerguy]

Wash at +5.5 is good value. Westy will be out.

I like Indy and Denver as well.

 

[The_Man]

I don't like much of anything this week, particularly since the two teams I've been riding -- Tennessee and Baltimore -- are playing each other. I generally love Baltimore at home, and now they're getting 3, but I'll probably stay away from that.

Why are people interested in Detroit? One of the things I like to look at is point differential and Chicago has a pretty solid 94-80 edge for a 2-2 team, particularly when you look at the good teams they've played so far. They really are just a couple of plays away from 3-1 or even 4-0 (then again, they're just a Philly 1-yard play away from being 1-3 as well). Meanwhile, Detroit has been getting killed to a 59-113 tune, and that's with games vs. Atlanta and SF, who -- I think -- by year's end are going to be revealed as pretty bad teams.

I usually like the home dogs, but find Baltimore, Houston, and Miami all stronger picks this week than Detroit.

 

[MarshallPlan]

I don't like much of anything this week, particularly since the two teams I've been riding -- Tennessee and Baltimore -- are playing each other. I generally love Baltimore at home, and now they're getting 3, but I'll probably stay away from that.Why are people interested in Detroit? One of the things I like to look at is point differential and Chicago has a pretty solid 94-80 edge for a 2-2 team, particularly when you look at the good teams they've played so far. They really are just a couple of plays away from 3-1 or even 4-0 (then again, they're just a Philly 1-yard play away from being 1-3 as well). Meanwhile, Detroit has been getting killed to a 59-113 tune, and that's with games vs. Atlanta and SF, who -- I think -- by year's end are going to be revealed as pretty bad teams.I usually like the home dogs, but find Baltimore, Houston, and Miami all stronger picks this week than Detroit.

Lions had two weeks to prepare for this divisional game after getting killed the first three weeks. Bears off a tough, nationally televised night game against the Eagles, a game in which they deserved to lose. Home, divisional dogs are usually good bets, especially with two weeks to prepare. I expect a good effort out of the Lions this week.

 

[Dragon1952]

The Lions did sweep Chicago last year also. Not that it means they'll do it again, but they certainly aren't intimidated by them. Chicago is lucky they aren't 1-3 right now.

 

[kroyrunner89]

The Lions did sweep Chicago last year also. Not that it means they'll do it again, but they certainly aren't intimidated by them. Chicago is lucky they aren't 1-3 right now.

they also could easily be 4-0. but i do agree that the lions game is a dangerous one, they always give us fits

 

[TheWick]

Lines updated...I'm liking a teaser again

CIN +23

WAS + 12

 

[tribecalledjeff]

My plays this week so far: (4-1 last week, that was my first week posting)

Pitt +4'

Philly -5'

Balt +3

SF +3

Miami +7'

Houston +3'

NO -3

Atl +7

Balt/Tenn o33

I don't really like having this many plays, but I'm not going to lay off of a game that I feel there's an edge on just for the sake of not having plays.

 

[crnerblitz]

Week 1: 1-1

Week 2: 2-1-1

Week 3: 1-2

Week 4: 2-1

Total to date: 6-5-1

I'm back in the black and really like the board this week. There are probably 2-3 more games I could play but wont.

My hat is off to JKL who is just killing his man.

NYG -7 This team looked bad vs Cincy and will put out their best effort yet against the Seahawks.

Mia +6' Chad had a chance to work within the offense a little more. Defense will keep it close.

Ari -1 Arizona is glad to be home after a long roadtrip east. Zona should win the west and handle Buff.

 

[brianj74]

Indy -3.

Indy has won 7 of the last 8 in this series and by more than 3 points in each game. I'll gladly give 3 points with an Indy team coming off a bye to this Texan team.

Tennessee -3.

Should be a very low scoring game but Tennessee has looked very solid thus far and despite being 3-0, I'm not sold on Baltimore.

San Diego -6.5.

Me thinks this spread should be higher but at less than a touchdown, I'll take it.

Detroit +3.5.

I vaguely remember Detroit having a good record as a home dog, so no reason other than that.

Jacksonville -4.

Nothing has impressed me about this Pittsburgh team this year and with no running game now, I smell trouble against this Jacksonville team.

Cincy +17.

A total mismatch in every way and with Dallas losing last week at home to the 'Skins, this one could get ugly fast. That being said, 17 is a lot of points.

 

[CapnJB]

Money in the wind parlay...

Broncos(Denver) -3 (-120)

Chargers(SanDiego) -260

Colts(Indianapolis) -3 (-120)

Patriots(NewEngland) -3 (-120)

 

[TheWick]

Well I don't think anyone cares about this but using the "due up" and "due down" rules from Dan Gordon's book I just went through the first 4 weeks and here is what I got

Week 3

Downs = ARI, BUF

Both teams lost against the spread

Ups = CIN, DET, JAC, SD, SF

all teams won against the spread except DET which was playing SF also a due up

6-1 for the week

Week 4

Downs = ARI, ATL, PHI,TEN

TEN only team to win against the spread

Ups = CLE, HOU, KC, STL

STL only team that didn't win against the spread

6-2 for the week

So this has been 12-3 so far for the year...small sample size of course but it has my interest and I'll keep up with it

For this week the system says

DOWNS = BAL, BUF, TB, TENx2

UPS = CIN, DETx2, IND, JAC

 

[tribecalledjeff]

Well I don't think anyone cares about this but using the "due up" and "due down" rules from Dan Gordon's book I just went through the first 4 weeks and here is what I gotWeek 3 Downs = ARI, BUFBoth teams lost against the spreadUps = CIN, DET, JAC, SD, SFall teams won against the spread except DET which was playing SF also a due up6-1 for the weekWeek 4Downs = ARI, ATL, PHI,TENTEN only team to win against the spreadUps = CLE, HOU, KC, STLSTL only team that didn't win against the spread6-2 for the weekSo this has been 12-3 so far for the year...small sample size of course but it has my interest and I'll keep up with itFor this week the system saysDOWNS = BAL, BUF, TB, TENx2UPS = CIN, DETx2, IND, JAC

What are the rules for this system?

 

[TheWick]

Well I don't think anyone cares about this but using the "due up" and "due down" rules from Dan Gordon's book I just went through the first 4 weeks and here is what I gotWeek 3 Downs = ARI, BUFBoth teams lost against the spreadUps = CIN, DET, JAC, SD, SFall teams won against the spread except DET which was playing SF also a due up6-1 for the weekWeek 4Downs = ARI, ATL, PHI,TENTEN only team to win against the spreadUps = CLE, HOU, KC, STLSTL only team that didn't win against the spread6-2 for the weekSo this has been 12-3 so far for the year...small sample size of course but it has my interest and I'll keep up with itFor this week the system saysDOWNS = BAL, BUF, TB, TENx2UPS = CIN, DETx2, IND, JAC

What are the rules for this system?

Basically all teams are given a power ranking grade at the beginning of the season. If the game ends up within 4.5 points of the spread both teams maintain the same power rank numberIf the game ends up 5-9.5 points from the spread the loser ATS gets -1 and the winner gets +1 to there rank number10-14.5 points +/-215+ points +/- 3If a team gets too far from their original grade they are due to come back to it...so basically this weeks downsBAL started as a 15 and are now a 19 ( I had them at about a 5 win team when the season started...so this one could be messed up)BUF started as a 22.5 and are now a 28.5TB started as a 22.5 and are now a 26.5TEN started as a 22.5 and are now a 29.5Of course this is all based off of the original grade I gave each team...so it is certainly not without flaws. I paraphrased a bit but that is the basic idea of it. The book is Beat the Sportsbooks by Dan Gordon...pretty good read...and much much more to his plays than this one part of his system.Hope that made sense

 

[The Duff Man]

I really like Car -9.5 against KC. KC is getting too much credit for their win last week and they are not going to run the ball as well this week against Car.

 

[gkza]

I really like Car -9.5 against KC. KC is getting too much credit for their win last week and they are not going to run the ball as well this week against Car.

How much does the loss of both Carolina starting Tackles affect everyone's thought process in this game?

 

[Ghost Rider]

You gotta love NE, especially on the road. With Brady out, their lines in road games will be very low, so there is money to be made there. Does anyone really think they will play as poorly as they did against Miami again? No way. Belichick will have that defense ready to play. I see a 23-13 win.

 

[tribecalledjeff]

Well I don't think anyone cares about this but using the "due up" and "due down" rules from Dan Gordon's book I just went through the first 4 weeks and here is what I gotWeek 3 Downs = ARI, BUFBoth teams lost against the spreadUps = CIN, DET, JAC, SD, SFall teams won against the spread except DET which was playing SF also a due up6-1 for the weekWeek 4Downs = ARI, ATL, PHI,TENTEN only team to win against the spreadUps = CLE, HOU, KC, STLSTL only team that didn't win against the spread6-2 for the weekSo this has been 12-3 so far for the year...small sample size of course but it has my interest and I'll keep up with itFor this week the system saysDOWNS = BAL, BUF, TB, TENx2UPS = CIN, DETx2, IND, JAC

What are the rules for this system?

Basically all teams are given a power ranking grade at the beginning of the season. If the game ends up within 4.5 points of the spread both teams maintain the same power rank numberIf the game ends up 5-9.5 points from the spread the loser ATS gets -1 and the winner gets +1 to there rank number10-14.5 points +/-215+ points +/- 3If a team gets too far from their original grade they are due to come back to it...so basically this weeks downsBAL started as a 15 and are now a 19 ( I had them at about a 5 win team when the season started...so this one could be messed up)BUF started as a 22.5 and are now a 28.5TB started as a 22.5 and are now a 26.5TEN started as a 22.5 and are now a 29.5Of course this is all based off of the original grade I gave each team...so it is certainly not without flaws. I paraphrased a bit but that is the basic idea of it. The book is Beat the Sportsbooks by Dan Gordon...pretty good read...and much much more to his plays than this one part of his system.Hope that made sense

Thanks for explaining, and I'm glad you pointed out the flaws as I was mumbling them to myself as I was reading Every system has flaws, though, and it's always beneficial to look at and learn from them.

 

[tribecalledjeff]

You gotta love NE, especially on the road. With Brady out, their lines in road games will be very low, so there is money to be made there. Does anyone really think they will play as poorly as they did against Miami again? No way. Belichick will have that defense ready to play. I see a 23-13 win.

I've been wrong plenty of times before and could be here, but this is square thinking imo. By every predictive statistical model that I have looked at, which is several, NE is among the worst teams in the league offensively and defensively. They are still looked at by the betting public as though they are simply last year's team without Brady, which is simply not true - they are in fact much worse than that (or Brady's impact is much larger than anybody imagines). I actually think the wrong team is favored here and I'm on SF relatively large.

 

[kroyrunner89]

11-11. the way i've been picking the past couple weeks don't listen to a thing i say, i'm just putting these down for the fun of it. as usual, picks in order of confidence:

Tennessee -3

Carolina -9.5

Seattle +7

San Fran +3

Arizona -1

over/unders:

Balt/Tenn over 33.5

Jacksonville/Pitt over 36