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!
SUPER BOWL ODDS (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Neovivo
- Start date
Football Critic
Footballguy
.... Pitt -2 1/2 early, lol, my guess. 
Alex P Keaton
Footballguy
Seems about right. Personally I think Pitt is the more well-rounded team, but it should be a great game.
Neovivo
Footballguy
Where did you see those odds? Oh, never mind you are pulling them out of your
PennStater77
Footballguy
Peter King is laughing...
GB will torch us IMO.
GB will torch us IMO.
Evilgrin 72
Distributor of Pain
I'm seeing GB favored by 2 1/2
PennStater77
Footballguy
No way GB will be favored.. I think Steelers will be by 1 to start.
Evilgrin 72
Distributor of Pain
This is not guessing here. The lines are out. Green Bay by 2.5. Whether it stays there or not, who knows?
Football Critic
Footballguy
Yes, yes I was....a total guess...its gonna be a fairly close spread to start, who knows where it will go. What ever those high rollers in Vegas do will determine it.Where did you see those odds? Oh, never mind you are pulling them out of your
Fensalk
Footballguy
The Steelers just tied the Dallas Cowboys for most Super Bowl appearances with 8. They'll either be 7-1 or 6-2 after the game. The Cowboys sit at 5-3. The Packers are looking for their 4th Lombardi with their record at 3-1, and they could be starting a run of dominance themselves.
Last edited by a moderator:
otello
Footballguy
PITT is the greatest team of the Super Bowl era.
Fensalk
Footballguy
I think its between the Cowboys, Steelers and 49ers. But if the Pack win this super bowl, and win a couple more in the next decade with their young franchise QB, they will quickly lay claim to it themselves. The Packers have been a good to great team for 18 years now, and were dominant in the early Super Bowl years.
fantasizing
Footballguy
GB 31 Pittsburgh 10
(It's close until the 3rd quarter where Roesth starts throwing picks or fumbles, and it all falls apart for Pittsburgh).
I just can't see Pittsburgh scoring alot of points against GB's stout defense.
(It's close until the 3rd quarter where Roesth starts throwing picks or fumbles, and it all falls apart for Pittsburgh).
I just can't see Pittsburgh scoring alot of points against GB's stout defense.
CrossEyed
Footballguy
Should be a great game.
DoubleG
Footballguy
Sorry, but I don't think so. A few questions as to why:1) Who has a better defense, the Bears or Steelers?2) Who is a better QB, Big Ben or 1/2 of Cutler + 1/2 of 3rd string Caleb Hanie + a few series of Todd Collins thrown in?The answer to the two above should be fairly obvious - and yet the Bears defense held Aaron Rodger to 55 QB rating. And despite not getting any points or even any boost from special teams, the Bears were arguably one stupid reverse call and a series away from tying the game. Cutler played poorly in the first half - and there were open receivers and he had time. He just made some very innacurate throws. The Packers, based on the poor QB play from the Bears - and feeble play by the #1 special teams unit in the league, should have won this won going away.I think Pittsburgh rolls the Packers 34-17.CentralPA said:
The Westin
Footballguy
Cute excuses...But what does the Packers/Bears game have to do with the Packers/Steelers game?
DoubleG
Footballguy
Excuses for what? The game the Packers last played, might have something to do with how they will play when they face a team that has a better QB and a better defense. My point was fairly simple - the Bears are inferior to Steelers in many ways - and the Packers barely beat them. The Packers have a mediocre run defense - which Pittsburgh will likely try to exploit, and Big Ben likely wont play as poorly as Ryan did two weeks ago or the Cutler/Collins/Hanie did this past week. As such, the Packers probably won't jump out to a big early lead, which will allow the Steelers the opportunity to exploit Green Bay's run defense. Typically in the post season, running the ball is crucial. Pittsburgh is better at running the ball and much better at stopping the run than the Packers. Ben and Rodgers are a wash in terms of talent and experience. Well, maybe a slight edge to Ben in "big game" experience. Both defenses are excellent, with an edge to the Steelers due to their tough run defense.The Jets are inferior to the Packers and the Jets almost beat the Steelers....in Pittsburgh.
DoubleG
Footballguy
The Jets have a better running game than the Packers - which is kinda my point, so thanks for the support.The Jets are inferior to the Packers and the Jets almost beat the Steelers....in Pittsburgh.
Last edited by a moderator:
The Westin
Footballguy
Pittsburgh is a completely different team than Chicago. Pitt >>>>Chi -----> GB barely beat Chi ----> Therefore.....Pit >> GB? Is that what you're saying? Because that's ridiculous.Green Bay hasn't run the ball well all year...and has been successful. They have improved in the playoffs.You say Ryan/Cutler had bad games. Perhaps GB's defense has a little something to do with that?GB played Chicago in Chicago. The Super Bowl will be a neutral field.Pittsburgh fans have made me aware that their defense has trouble stopping teams that can spread them out. Green Bay has maybe the best WR core in the NFL and one of the best QB's.GB may not have a top rush defense, but they've done just fine in the postseason.My main point here is...just because Pit is better than Chicago...and just because Pit is superior to Chicago in many ways...doesn't mean Pit >>GB.The matchups in this game are completely different than the GB/Chi game. GB always has trouble with the Bears defense. It's a new game. I don't expect a game similar at all to what we saw yesterday.By your reasoning. Pit barely beat NYJ.GB is far superior to the Jets on offense and evenly matched on defense. Therefore GB>>>>PITLast weeks games don't mean a thing. GB/PIT is a completely different game.Excuses for what? The game the Packers last played, might have something to do with how they will play when they face a team that has a better QB and a better defense. My point was fairly simple - the Bears are inferior to Steelers in many ways - and the Packers barely beat them. The Packers have a mediocre run defense - which Pittsburgh will likely try to exploit, and Big Ben likely wont play as poorly as Ryan did two weeks ago or the Cutler/Collins/Hanie did this past week. As such, the Packers probably won't jump out to a big early lead, which will allow the Steelers the opportunity to exploit Green Bay's run defense. Typically in the post season, running the ball is crucial. Pittsburgh is better at running the ball and much better at stopping the run than the Packers. Ben and Rodgers are a wash in terms of talent and experience. Well, maybe a slight edge to Ben in "big game" experience. Both defenses are excellent, with an edge to the Steelers due to their tough run defense.
Last edited by a moderator:
Was that your point, i couldnt really tell?Not sure what the Jets run game has to do with the Packers run game. Your welcome for the support though.a better running game than the Packers - which is kinda my point, so thanks for the support.
TobiasFunke
Footballguy
First of all, the Packers didn't "barely" beat the Bears. They outgained them and out first-downed them by decent margins. They won by a full TD on the scoreboard, which means the Bears had to score another TD simply to have a 50/50 chance of winning. And the Pack sat on the ball on their final possession- it's entirely possible they could have scored again if it had been in their interest to do so. And this was in Chicago. NFL teams don't blow out other NFL teams that often. By NFL standards, this was a solid win.Second, the entire premise of your post is ridiculous. Why not look at the previous week's results and try to apply the transitive property there? The Packers absolutely manhandled a Falcons team in Atlanta while the Steelers got a come-from behind win at home vs. Baltimore. Incidentally, Atlanta beat that Baltimore team earlier in the season.Finally, what grounds do you have for your statement that "typically in the postseason, running the ball is crucial"? It's a football game. You get six points for passing TDs, just like you get six points for rushing TDs. Last year both teams threw for around 300 yards and rushed for well under 100 in the Super Bowl. The previous year, both teams rushed for under 60 yards and both went over 250 passing. Really, it's a marvel any of those four teams got there at all, what with running the ball being so crucial in the postseason and all.
Last edited by a moderator:
DoubleG
Footballguy
You might want to reread my post. Only the first two sentences dealt with this past week's game. The rest of the post explained why I think Pittsburgh will present some problems for the Packers.Pittsburgh is a completely different team than Chicago. Pitt >>>>Chi -----> GB barely beat Chi ----> Therefore.....Pit >> GB? Is that what you're saying? Because that's ridiculous.Excuses for what? The game the Packers last played, might have something to do with how they will play when they face a team that has a better QB and a better defense. My point was fairly simple - the Bears are inferior to Steelers in many ways - and the Packers barely beat them. The Packers have a mediocre run defense - which Pittsburgh will likely try to exploit, and Big Ben likely wont play as poorly as Ryan did two weeks ago or the Cutler/Collins/Hanie did this past week. As such, the Packers probably won't jump out to a big early lead, which will allow the Steelers the opportunity to exploit Green Bay's run defense. Typically in the post season, running the ball is crucial. Pittsburgh is better at running the ball and much better at stopping the run than the Packers. Ben and Rodgers are a wash in terms of talent and experience. Well, maybe a slight edge to Ben in "big game" experience. Both defenses are excellent, with an edge to the Steelers due to their tough run defense.
Green Bay hasn't run the ball well all year...and has been successful. They have improved in the playoffs.
You say Ryan/Cutler had bad games. Perhaps GB's defense has a little something to do with that?
GB played Chicago in Chicago. The Super Bowl will be a neutral field.
Pittsburgh fans have made me aware that their defense has trouble stopping teams that can spread them out. Green Bay has maybe the best WR core in the NFL and one of the best QB's.
GB may not have a top rush defense, but they've done just fine in the postseason.
My main point here is...just because Pit is better than Chicago...and just because Pit is superior to Chicago in many ways...doesn't mean Pit >>GB.
The matchups in this game are completely different than the GB/Chi game. GB always has trouble with the Bears defense. It's a new game. I don't expect a game similar at all to what we saw yesterday.
By your reasoning. Pit barely beat NYJ.
GB is far superior to the Jets on offense and evenly matched on defense. Therefore GB>>>>PIT
Last weeks games don't mean a thing. GB/PIT is a completely different game.
JFTR, GB is not "far superior" to the Jets on offense. Running the ball is also included in offense. The Jets were 4th in the NFL in rushing, the Packers 24th. Sure, the Packers have a better passing attack, but the Jets WR group is not horrible (and not nearly as bad as the Bears) - but as you said, that means nothing.
DocHolliday
Footballguy
Pittsburgh wins the SB easily with that D. How can you bet against that D? It has been stifling opponents all season, all decade.
GB is a nice story. Rodgers has a good future in front of him but without a running game, GB is Denver until Elway got a running game.
Pburgh 31
GB 17
GB is a nice story. Rodgers has a good future in front of him but without a running game, GB is Denver until Elway got a running game.
Pburgh 31
GB 17
Last edited by a moderator:
scooterg61
Footballguy
he put on 37 in 2009 against this team.. up and down the field both ways.. hell if a3rd stringer can throw like hanie did.. i see GB defense getting torched by that PITT WR speed!!fantasizing said:
Serafino
Footballguy
Yeah, but I heard that Green Bay was only using half of their playbook against the Bears so....
DoubleG
Footballguy
My bad - I thought the NFL still used number of points to determine the victor. The Bears had their 3rd string QB in, their special teams had played lousy and their defense allowed GB to march right down the field on the opening drive. Despite that they were a stupid end-around call away from having the ball 1st and 10 at the GB 30 with 1:30 and two timeouts with an offense that had already put up 14 points in that quarter.
Got it. We cant try to look at similarities in team styles or past stats and extrapolate from there. The point was not "x beat y, therefore y should beat z" - the point was that, in most people's line of thinking the Bears are inferior to the Steelers on defense and at the QB position. But hey, if ignoring the past and statistics somehow makes you feel better about the Packers chances, go for it.
Running the ball does several things that passing the ball does not:1) It wears down the opposing defense.2) It keeps the clock running. Even a very good QB who completes 65% of his passes stops the clock 35% of the time. 3) There is a greater risk for tunrovers when passing. As and old football cliche goes, when a QB drops back to pass one of 3 things is about to happen - and 2 of them bad for the offensive team.4) Running the ball succesfully sets up the play-action, making the passing game more effective and neutralizing a good pass rush.5) It keeps the opposing defense honest, making them less likely to sell-out on the pass rush.6) It allows your o-line to take on an "attack" mentality, which many o-lineman enjoy. As opposed to pass-blocking which is more of defensive mentality for the o-line.I realize the league has gone to a more pass oriented style, but the ability to run the ball effectively is still a huge factor. That's why so many teams like playing with a lead late - not simply because they have more points (which is still how victories are determined), but because it forces the other team to be one dimensional. While the short passing game can accomplish some of the above (being higher % completions and still controlling the clock) only running the ball from scrimmage accomplishes all of them as effectively.
Last edited by a moderator:
sho nuff
Footballguy
This defense is a bit better in 2010 than it was in 2009 against the pass.So is Pitt's vs. what GB did to them in that same game (Troy P was not there).You think GB is going to play that soft against Pitt as they did late against Hanie? Good luck with that.GB has not been torched on D all year long...why start now?
DoubleG
Footballguy
The Packers stopped playing to win in the final quarter of the NFC Championship game, up by only a TD?
sho nuff
Footballguy
Never claimed that.I think they certainly softened up into a prevent like shell (something they have done before when up at least a TD near the end of games chosing to drop into coverage much more than the rest of the game).I also wouldn't count on two pro-bowlers like Woodson and Collins to allow another play like they did during Chicago's 2nd TD without laying a hit at all.There is a huge difference between playing a soft version of the D and not playing to win...but I get what you are doing there...just a poor effort.The Packers stopped playing to win in the final quarter of the NFC Championship game, up by only a TD?
DoubleG
Footballguy
Just having a little fun.Actually I heard an interview of a few players about that type of situation and they said that the defense does tend to play a little bit more "tentative" when a knew QB comes in, because they are trying to get an idea of what he can and cannot do, as they haven't watched any film of him, nor gameplanned for him specifically. Some of the examples they gave were actually pretty interesting:- Different QBs go through their reads differently (even moving their heads differently).- Cadence pre-snap, as well as pre-snap reads and calls- Which way (and how) they avoid the rush and when they tuck and run or throw on the move.All of those variables (plus others) change, so the defense tends to try to "read/react" more than simply "attack" if that makes any sense. At least that's the way some former defensive players stated it.Never claimed that.I think they certainly softened up into a prevent like shell (something they have done before when up at least a TD near the end of games chosing to drop into coverage much more than the rest of the game).I also wouldn't count on two pro-bowlers like Woodson and Collins to allow another play like they did during Chicago's 2nd TD without laying a hit at all.There is a huge difference between playing a soft version of the D and not playing to win...but I get what you are doing there...just a poor effort.The Packers stopped playing to win in the final quarter of the NFC Championship game, up by only a TD?
sho nuff
Footballguy
I think the game situation did too...and they were not playing soft the whole time...don't get me wrong.
Im not sure what they were doing on the 2nd TD drive there (nor what Collins was doing on that TD).
Might have let their guard down after the Raji INT.
On the game ending drive...just looked as though they were fine dropping 8 into coverage, allowing the short passes to forte and letting them move a bit down the field while taking a lot of time off the clock.
That 3rd down play was just a terrible call against this defense...and 4th down they brought a little bit of pressure, though it was delayed. Shields just made a great play.
But they have done the whole drop 8 into coverage a lot this year in a team's final drive. Opting to let their coverage do the work and hope Raji or Jenkins or Matthews or whoever is in there late can get to the QB.
Im not sure what they were doing on the 2nd TD drive there (nor what Collins was doing on that TD).
Might have let their guard down after the Raji INT.
On the game ending drive...just looked as though they were fine dropping 8 into coverage, allowing the short passes to forte and letting them move a bit down the field while taking a lot of time off the clock.
That 3rd down play was just a terrible call against this defense...and 4th down they brought a little bit of pressure, though it was delayed. Shields just made a great play.
But they have done the whole drop 8 into coverage a lot this year in a team's final drive. Opting to let their coverage do the work and hope Raji or Jenkins or Matthews or whoever is in there late can get to the QB.
bicycle_seat_sniffer
Smells like chicken
The worst part about this game is NO CHEERLEADERS
other than that, this should be an awesome superbowl
Pitt 28 GB 24
other than that, this should be an awesome superbowl
Pitt 28 GB 24
Copeman
Footballguy
Defense wins championships.
Mustang Man
Footballguy
OK these two teams are close and GB is the hotter team. I think most people will just go ahead and say GB wins off of what they have did this post season. Hence Vegas putting them as the favorites. Anyone that has any smarts will put the money on Pittsburgh no matter what. They will win this game. It is a Vegas trap. Pittsburgh is battle tested and has been there before. When the game is on the line in the fourth quarter Big Ben will make the plays. It really is that simple. Green Bay is every bit as good as Pittsburgh but so are about 5 teams that made the playoffs. They beat 2 of them already. The difference is they make the plays at the end. Green Bay beat Atlanta (No big game experience) Chicago(no big game experience) Neither team had ever played a big game as a team. The Steelers played the Ravens who have had many playoff wins the last 3 years and played in big time games. Also the Jets have played in and won big time playoff games last season and beat the Pats in NE this year. Both these teams that Pittsburgh beat are battle tested and much better teams then what Green Bay have beat. Yeah I know GB beat Philly as well, that team is over ratted and was exposed by the Giants and other teams late in the year.
Pittsburgh is the better big game team and maybe the best we have seen in a while and that makes them the easy play this game and by the time the line ends Pitt will be the favorite cause most people will realize this. Green Bay has about a 25% chance to win the game. This is coming from a guy that has zero dogs in the fight. Just trying to save some people some money.
Pittsburgh is the better big game team and maybe the best we have seen in a while and that makes them the easy play this game and by the time the line ends Pitt will be the favorite cause most people will realize this. Green Bay has about a 25% chance to win the game. This is coming from a guy that has zero dogs in the fight. Just trying to save some people some money.
TobiasFunke
Footballguy
I'm not even gonna bother addressing the rest of this cliched logic, but i will point out to you that if Vegas wanted to "trap" people into betting on the Packers, they probably wouldn't have made them 2.5 point favorites despite the fact that the teams are close to even in most respects (DVOA, scoring margin, recent performance, etc.)
David Yudkin
Footballguy
You guys are aware that the difference in points allowed this year between PIT and GB is 0.03 points per game. PIT has given up 15.2777 PPG while GB has allowed 15.3157 PPG.Offensively, PIT has scored 23.88 PPG to 25.16 for the Packers.
Mustang Man
Footballguy
That is fine bet on Green Bay at your own demise. Vegas is just playing everyone by leading them to believe GB is the better team. They see the polls and that GB is believed to be the hotter team. They realize people will be betting GB early no matter the spread. So why not get these fools right now and the house is also getting points. Man some people are so dense. When this line closes it will be Pitt as the favorite by 3+ points, the people that believe GB will win should wait so they can at least get some points on their side. The sucker bets GB - points in this game.
bryhamm
Footballguy
wow, didn't realize it was that close
Buzzbait
Footballguy
Remember that Pit didn't have Roethlisberger for the 1st 4 games. They rolled TB for 38 in week 3 but other than that only scored 15, 19 & 14.As a Bengals fan that can't stand Pit I'll take the Steelers and the points.
TobiasFunke
Footballguy
I didn't want to make this personal, but since you did, you're asking for it:You think a Super Bowl line is going to move 5.5 points?!!?!?! Creating an enormous arbitrage opportunity in which Vegas could stand to lose massive sums of money if the result falls between the opening line (GB-2.5) and what you hilariously project will be the line at kickoff (Pitt -3)? And you think I'm "dense"?Mustang Man said:
You also think that Vegas thought that: (1) the public would bet on Green Bay no matter what the spread; and (2) the Steelers were the far superior team, yet the chose to make the line 2.5? If, as you say, the public is going to bet on the Packers no matter what, why would Vegas not want the extra half-point? As the renowned wagering expert you claim to be, I'm sure you understand the substantial difference between 2.5 points and 3 points in football, right?
Finally, you think that the result of this game is basically predetermined. Of all the exaggerations, meaningless cliches, and plain old errors in your posts, this might be the worst. The simple, indisputable fact is that you have NO IDEA what is going to happen in this game. Neither do I. Neither do the guys who set the lines, the blowhards at ESPN, Mike Tomlin and Mike McCarthy, the referee, the mafia, the world's greatest gambler, or Clay Matthews' hairdresser. As I noted before and you completely ignored and failed to provide and substantive arguments to the contrary, almost every stat around suggests this is a very close matchup. To say that someone betting on one team or another in this game is a "fool" and "dense" is arrogant garbage.
I'll tell you what: since you seem to know so much about football, gambling and lines, let's make a side wager to keep things interesting. You say that by kickoff the line will move to Pitt -3. I disagree. So let's bet on the line at kickoff. If it's Pitt -2.5 or more, you win. If it's Pitt -2 or less or GB is still favored, I win. What do you say? Want to put your money where your arrogant, condescending mouth is?
Last edited by a moderator:
Sheriff66
Footballguy
Somebody sounds butt hurt about what someone else said on the interwebs.
Leroy Hoard
Footballguy
The thing I respect about "Vegas" is they put their money where their mouth is. If they put out a bad line they pay for it. Last I checked not too many sportsbooks going out of business.
