Washington @ New York -4.0/4.5 (1 Viewer)

[Tom in Albany]

Sharks> Help me understand why Washington is only getting 4.0/4.5 pts?

 

[jeeb]

Because the Skins are going to win this game and Vegas wins truckloads of money after the public jumps on the Giants after Washington's past 2 preseason games.

 

[valhallan]

To get you to bet on it.

 

[jon_mx]

I would say most think Washington is an improved team and the Giants are not, and many think they were a bit of a fluke last year. I am sure the Giants don't mind being underestimated. Will be a good game.

 

[tombonneau]

I don't get it either. Recent SB winners are something like 10-0-1 ATS in season openers. Love the G-men in this spot.

 

[Tom in Albany]

Taylor is still a game-time decision...

 

[Sylira21]

Division games tend to be close, and upsets are frequent.

That being said, it does seem an attractive price, given the Redskins' recent struggles.

 

[Tom in Albany]

To get you to bet on it.

It's working.

 

[Manster]

all the spreads are pretty close, sans a few. this is the most difficult week to predict. i'm finding myself fallin in line with most of the faves.

that said, i like the g-men to cover, but this is not a dominant team, imo. not the same defense, which is what won them a SB last season. and this is the NFC East. should be a hard fought division game.

 

[Chase Stuart]

If you looked at just the regular season last year, Washington projects out as better than the Giants. While Washington only outscored its opponents by two more points than the Giants did, Washington had a tougher schedule -- outside of their common games, Washington played Arizona when the Giants played San Fran, and Washington played the Bucs when the Giants played the Falcons.

Adjusted for SOS, the '07 Redskins looked like a better team than the '07 Giants. That was before the SB, of course. But since Washington has added Jason Taylor (although he is a GTD) while the Giants have lost two key DE, it's understandable to think Washington's improved while the Giants have gotten worse. The game's in NY, of course, which means (once you factor in what the Giants did in the playoffs) that 4 is a very reasonable line.

 

[Tom in Albany]

With Taylor banged up (possibly out) and Osi Umenyiora on IR. It's seems like a good game to also take the over.

 

[Tom in Albany]

If you looked at just the regular season last year, Washington projects out as better than the Giants. While Washington only outscored its opponents by two more points than the Giants did, Washington had a tougher schedule -- outside of their common games, Washington played Arizona when the Giants played San Fran, and Washington played the Bucs when the Giants played the Falcons.Adjusted for SOS, the '07 Redskins looked like a better team than the '07 Giants. That was before the SB, of course. But since Washington has added Jason Taylor (although he is a GTD) while the Giants have lost two key DE, it's understandable to think Washington's improved while the Giants have gotten worse. The game's in NY, of course, which means (once you factor in what the Giants did in the playoffs) that 4 is a very reasonable line.

Excellent points. This puts it into a better perspective.

 

[AB in DC]

Nobody knows how the Giants defense will perform without Strahan and Umeniyora.

Nobody knows how the Redskins new West Coast offense will perform, period.

I wouldn't touch this game with a ten-foot pole.

 

[Tom in Albany]

I wouldn't touch this game with a ten-foot pole.

I may sit back and just watch this one. I've been going back and forth all day...

 

[PatsFanCT]

Division games tend to be close, and upsets are frequent.

That being said, it does seem an attractive price, given the Redskins' recent struggles.

And by struggles, you mean making the playoffs last year in arguably the toughest division?

 

[Pyscho Wife]

Because the Giants really weren't that good last year and have taken a few hits on defense (and offense if you want to include Shockey).

The line has gotten bigger over the past couple of days.

 

[plymkr]

Division games tend to be close, and upsets are frequent.

That being said, it does seem an attractive price, given the Redskins' recent struggles.

And by struggles, you mean making the playoffs last year in arguably the toughest division?

I think he means how they have been absolutely dominated in their last 2 preseason games.

 

[dgreen]

Division games tend to be close, and upsets are frequent.

That being said, it does seem an attractive price, given the Redskins' recent struggles.

And by struggles, you mean making the playoffs last year in arguably the toughest division?

I assume he's referring to the last two preseason games.

 

[JKL]

I'll just add that the home field advantage in games like this, between two outdoor close proximity rivals, is fairly small. These would be games between the northeastern teams in the AFC and NFC East, Chicago v. Green Bay, all the AFC North matchups, and SD v. Oakland. In fact, the Giants and Skins both won the game on the road last year.

My reaction is the opposite of yours. You're getting over a field goal in a game between teams that were pretty even last year, in a situation where there has historically been a small home field advantage. Both teams have significant questions, as outlined above, the Skins with a new coach and offense, the Giants without two key defensive linemen from last year.

 

[PatsFanCT]

Division games tend to be close, and upsets are frequent.

That being said, it does seem an attractive price, given the Redskins' recent struggles.

And by struggles, you mean making the playoffs last year in arguably the toughest division?

I assume he's referring to the last two preseason games.

Ohhhh, pre-season. At least it's based on something substantial.

 

[Tremendous Upside]

Because the Giants really weren't that good last year

 

[PatsFanCT]

Division games tend to be close, and upsets are frequent.

That being said, it does seem an attractive price, given the Redskins' recent struggles.

And by struggles, you mean making the playoffs last year in arguably the toughest division?

I think he means how they have been absolutely dominated in their last 2 preseason games.

If we're basing it on preseason, shouldn't the Colts and Patriots be getting a touchdown plus in their games?

 

[valhallan]

If we're basing it on preseason, shouldn't the Colts and Patriots be getting a touchdown plus in their games?

No, the Colts and Patriots didn't field their starters. The Redskins did and looked horrendous.

 

[got_nugs]

Preseason DOES mean something. Just ask Steve Spurrier.

 

[Letum]

New coaches, new offense, coming off two dismal preseason performances and opening on the road on national TV against a Super Bowl champion that believes they've been disrespected all off-season...

I like the G-Men -4.5

Not saying I'd bet the mortgage payment, but it looks like a decent play...

 

[big0mar]

Giants lost something like their final 5 home games last year. That does add a little to it.

But I would still take the Gmen in this spot. The Redskins are running an offense that they don't have the personnel for. If anyone has watched Campbell lately, his confidence does not appear to be there. Add in the fact that Greg Williams is gone, and I don't think this Redskins team is nearly as good as they were last year.

 

[Glatty]

I wouldn't touch this game with a ten-foot pole.

I wouldn't touch any NFC East divisional game w/ a 10-foot pole!

 

[Pyscho Wife]

Because the Giants really weren't that good last year

10-6 during the regular season.....Good record, but not GREAT.Yes, they won the Super Bowl and played well in the playoffs, but weren't elite.....as indicated by this line.

 

[aiverson]

As many have said, divisional game, primetime, lots of money on it, overachieving Giants w/ negative off-season momentum, especially in the media w/ Osi and Strahan. Skins looked bad in preseason, but not many watch out-of town preseason games, Skins had positive off-season momentum w/ new head coach and Jason Taylor.

Money has been coming in on NYG thus moving the line up. Looks about right to me....

By the way (for those who didn't read the other thread) I dug up the following during my weekly research:

* The NFL has played Thursday Night games to kickoff Week 1 since 2002. That's 6 games. The Home team has gone 4-1-1 ATS in those games and the favored team has never lost that game.

* Since the 2003 season (Fassel/Spurrier's last years, then on came Coughlin/Gibbs for 4 years):

In their first H2H meeting of the year, the Redskins are 0-5 SU and 0-5 ATS, losing by an avg of 13.6 points.

In their second H2H meeting, the Redskins are 4-1 SU and 4-1 ATS, winning by an avg of 11.6 points

 

[Sylira21]

Division games tend to be close, and upsets are frequent.

That being said, it does seem an attractive price, given the Redskins' recent struggles.

And by struggles, you mean making the playoffs last year in arguably the toughest division?

I assume he's referring to the last two preseason games.

Ohhhh, pre-season. At least it's based on something substantial.

*shrugs* say what you wish. I watched those games, and the Redskins top units were dominated. They weren't just going through the motions, they weren't just doing vanilla things. And they were physically pushed around and beaten by both Carolina and Jacksonville.But what I think doesn't matter. Remember, this discussion is about why the line is what it is. As long as enough people buy into that line of thinking, it can move the numbers.

 

[Native]

Because the Giants really weren't that good last year

 

[Pyscho Wife]

Because the Giants really weren't that good last year

It's laughable that a team like that could win the SB, right?

 

[JuniorNB]

Because the Giants really weren't that good last year

It's laughable that a team like that could win the SB, right?

Scoreboard

 

[aiverson]

Another thing to add:

If you think this line is too low to suck you in, what did you think when you saw the Week 1 lines of these defending SB champs:

01 Ravens

-9.5 vs. Chi W 17-6, ATS=W

02 Pats

+2.5 vs. Pit W 30-14, ATS=W

03 Bucs

+3 vs. Phi W 17-0, ATS=W

04 Pats

-3 vs. Ind W 27-24, ATS=W

05 Pats

-7.5 vs. Oak W 30-20, ATS=W

06 Steelers

-1 vs. Mia W 28-17, ATS=W

07 Colts

-6 vs NO W 41-10, ATS=W

Do any of those lines look fishy to you? Looking for action on the other side? Thing is, all the SB champs covered these games.

 

[Dexter Manley]

Because the Giants really weren't that good last year

It's laughable that a team like that could win the SB, right?

Scoreboard

In all fairness the gmen were only the third best team in their division last year, but they put everything together when it counted, which is nice.As for the game tonight, I think NYG should be favored by 6 points. That's Dexter Manley's line. I expect the Skins offense to struggle early this season and get better in the latter part of the year. I'll probably be fading them early, then betting them for value in Nov/Dec.

 

[Tom in Albany]

It moved

The line also changed from 4.0/4.5 to 4.5/5.0

 

[Jason Wood]

The Giants weren't a statistically dominant team last year, and lost their top two pass rushers this offseason. Factor in that with the fact it's a division rivalry game, and you have to expect a tight spread IMHO.

 

[Sylira21]

Division games tend to be close, and upsets are frequent.

That being said, it does seem an attractive price, given the Redskins' recent struggles.

And by struggles, you mean making the playoffs last year in arguably the toughest division?

I think he means how they have been absolutely dominated in their last 2 preseason games.

If we're basing it on preseason, shouldn't the Colts and Patriots be getting a touchdown plus in their games?

Are we still thinking preseason is meaningless? For a team like the Redskins, with a new coach, new coordinators, new offense...it is something to pay attention to.

 

[PatsFanCT]

Division games tend to be close, and upsets are frequent.

That being said, it does seem an attractive price, given the Redskins' recent struggles.

And by struggles, you mean making the playoffs last year in arguably the toughest division?

I think he means how they have been absolutely dominated in their last 2 preseason games.

If we're basing it on preseason, shouldn't the Colts and Patriots be getting a touchdown plus in their games?

Are we still thinking preseason is meaningless? For a team like the Redskins, with a new coach, new coordinators, new offense...it is something to pay attention to.

Yeah, I'm still thinking it is.

 

[T Bell]

Division games tend to be close, and upsets are frequent.

That being said, it does seem an attractive price, given the Redskins' recent struggles.

And by struggles, you mean making the playoffs last year in arguably the toughest division?

I think he means how they have been absolutely dominated in their last 2 preseason games.

If we're basing it on preseason, shouldn't the Colts and Patriots be getting a touchdown plus in their games?

Are we still thinking preseason is meaningless? For a team like the Redskins, with a new coach, new coordinators, new offense...it is something to pay attention to.

Yeah, I'm still thinking it is.

Kind of a sophomoric bump, no? For the purposes of the line in that opening game, the preseason meant everything.

For the purposes of showing what the team could potentially become under a new coach and with a new offensive system, the preseason meant much less.

And BTW, the guy you're arguing with in this thread is a 'Skins fan, so it's not like he was out to bash the team.

 

[Ballstein]

Sharks> Help me understand why Washington is only getting 4.0/4.5 pts?

To make money on you. Vegas is pulling you in!!! beware-----it's a trap!!!