What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

Why do people fall for the "Wild Card" teams will (1 Viewer)

Jason Wood

Zoo York
It cracks me up how many people are predicting two, three or four upsets this weekend in the Divisionals. In the world of sports, there are few things as daunting as winning on the road, against a rested team that has had two weeks to prepare against you.

Happens every year. Last year it was the same thing. The Falcons dismantled Green Bay in Green Bay (first time in history) and everyone was on the Vick bandwagon as they came to Philly. Philly 20-Atlanta 6. And everyone talked about how San Fran had the "mo" after pulling out the improbable win vs. NYG. Tampa Bay 31-San Fran 6). The Jets spanked the Colts 41-0 and they were the vogue pick by the pundits. Raiders 30-Jets 10.

Not only do the home teams win more than 80% of the time, they also cover ATS, which means they're not winning ugly.

But honestly, best of luck to everyone who's calling for a bunch of upsets. :rolleyes:

Cheers

 

Iceman03

Footballguy
Is there really upsets with all the parity today. I think this year especially everyone has an equal shot.

 

billsfan

Footballguy
It cracks me up how many people are predicting two, three or four upsets this weekend in the Divisionals. In the world of sports, there are few things as daunting as winning on the road, against a rested team that has had two weeks to prepare against you.

Happens every year. Last year it was the same thing. The Falcons dismantled Green Bay in Green Bay (first time in history) and everyone was on the Vick bandwagon as they came to Philly. Philly 20-Atlanta 6. And everyone talked about how San Fran had the "mo" after pulling out the improbable win vs. NYG. Tampa Bay 31-San Fran 6). The Jets spanked the Colts 41-0 and they were the vogue pick by the pundits. Raiders 30-Jets 10.

Not only do the home teams win more than 80% of the time, they also cover ATS, which means they're not winning ugly.

But honestly, best of luck to everyone who's calling for a bunch of upsets. :rolleyes:

Cheers
It happens every year. People have short memories. I am backing 2 wild card teams this round though. :bag: I like the Colts and Packers.

 

Alias

Footballguy
I see New England as the only sure fire win this weekend, and I probably just jinxed them by saying that.

St. Lou lost homefield advantage to the Lions, Panthers can play on turf, i.e. their win @IND

Philly has the 3rd worst run defense in the league, Ahman Green is tops in the NFC for RB's, Philly could easily lose this game
While Indy's defense will have a hard time stopping KC's offense I think they can throttle it to an extent to allow Indy's offense to keep pace if not exceed KC'sI'm not saying these three teams will upset the respective teams coming off a BYE playing them on the road, but I think there is certainly a chance 2 out of 3 upset.

 

Leroy Hoard

Footballguy
While I think 1 of the 4 dogs will somehow win, I'm not sure which one. So I'll end up just betting the chalks and hope to go 3-1. :thumbup:

 

H.K.

Footballguy
Thank you! Hopefully this will restore sanity around here. There is probably a very small percentage of people calling for upsets on this board that are actually taking it to the window. Everyone wants to lay claim to predicting the upsets before they happen to make themselves look smart. Why not? there's no downside. There's no real shame in being wrong because the underdog is supposed to lose anyway, but if they win then it was pure genius at work.

 

dkb

Footballguy
It cracks me up how many people are predicting two, three or four upsets this weekend in the Divisionals. In the world of sports, there are few things as daunting as winning on the road, against a rested team that has had two weeks to prepare against you.

Happens every year. Last year it was the same thing. The Falcons dismantled Green Bay in Green Bay (first time in history) and everyone was on the Vick bandwagon as they came to Philly. Philly 20-Atlanta 6. And everyone talked about how San Fran had the "mo" after pulling out the improbable win vs. NYG. Tampa Bay 31-San Fran 6). The Jets spanked the Colts 41-0 and they were the vogue pick by the pundits. Raiders 30-Jets 10.

Not only do the home teams win more than 80% of the time, they also cover ATS, which means they're not winning ugly.

But honestly, best of luck to everyone who's calling for a bunch of upsets. :rolleyes:

Cheers
How can you compare the past which this sport was sooo different in this day and age? This reminds me of the rushing title and JLewis trying to beat Dickerson's rushing season record, ahhh hello remember OJ? OK he did it in 14 games, not 16 games! The point is that you can say that Dickerson or JLewis has more rushing yards for the season but the TRUTH is that OJ is the best back in terms of playing in 2 fewer games. So, that said, saying historically wild card teams did not win is true but what does that have to do with the 2003-2004 season?GB NEVER losses at home in the playoffs, Atlanta beat them last year, right?

TEN CAN'T beat Baltimore, especially in the postseason, they did.

TB CAN'T beat Phily in cold, in January but did last year

Ramds CAN't Lost to NE because they are a much better team and are playing on turf, but did.

The list is endless....

 
Last edited by a moderator:

djcolts

Footballguy
Simple, people have short-term memories, and can only remember what happens the week before. Then the hype-machines (except Carolina's seems to be MIA) seems to rev up based on the teams' "destiny" or "toughness" or "unstoppable offense" based on the most recent events.Remember when Vick returned and played well on his season debut, some people on this board were saying that he's the "real" MVP? Then his team got their butts kicked the next week...and no one said that anymore. Hype is very powerful...

 

smlevin

Footballguy
Agree - but the "money where the mouth is" argument doesn't ring true. This is one year where two or three underdogs could cover the spread: GB+5.5, Tenn +6, Carolina +7, and Indy +3 (if you believe they are the dog that wins) all look like decent (not great) bets. Two close games and an upset and the dogs pull it out ATS.It is much more unlikely that the road teams actually WIN the games, of course, but Packer Fans, Titans fans, Panthers fans, and Colts fans have to have some hope, though the odds are stacked significantly against them (especially you Packer fans - I'm sorry you are so vocal and feel so destined - there's a 95%+ chance the season is ending for you this Sunday).

 
If you are in a playoff pool (or similar contest), there are two reasonable strategies for picking games for this weekend:1) Take all the favorites. Home teams have won 80% of the games over the last 10 years.2) Take one underdog ... and somehow be right! Over the last ten years in the second round, home teams have gone:4-0: 3 times.3-1: 6 times.2-2: 1 time.So 3-1 is the most frequent result. Of course, you only have a 1 in 4 chance of being right! In the Falguy's contest, I took the 3-1 route and picked GB over PHI.Best to all.

 

Leroy Hoard

Footballguy
Just for kicks, I set up a bet online to see what odds you could get if all four underdogs won. They would ALL have to win outright to collect.

A $100.00 bet would win you $7739.00 :eek:

 

Willy

Footballguy
It cracks me up how many people are predicting two, three or four upsets this weekend in the Divisionals. In the world of sports, there are few things as daunting as winning on the road, against a rested team that has had two weeks to prepare against you.

Happens every year. Last year it was the same thing. The Falcons dismantled Green Bay in Green Bay (first time in history) and everyone was on the Vick bandwagon as they came to Philly. Philly 20-Atlanta 6. And everyone talked about how San Fran had the "mo" after pulling out the improbable win vs. NYG. Tampa Bay 31-San Fran 6). The Jets spanked the Colts 41-0 and they were the vogue pick by the pundits. Raiders 30-Jets 10.

Not only do the home teams win more than 80% of the time, they also cover ATS, which means they're not winning ugly.

But honestly, best of luck to everyone who's calling for a bunch of upsets. :rolleyes:

Cheers
It's surprising how many people like the Colts and/or Packers to win this weekend. But I remember in 2001 the Bears were the bye week team and a lot of people, myself included, thought the Eagles would go to Chicago and win that game. They were right.
 

smlevin

Footballguy
It cracks me up  how many people are predicting two, three or four upsets this weekend in the Divisionals. In the world of sports, there are few things as daunting as winning on the road, against a rested team that has had two weeks to prepare against you.

Happens every year. Last year it was the same thing. The Falcons dismantled Green Bay in Green Bay (first time in history) and everyone was on the Vick bandwagon as they came to Philly. Philly 20-Atlanta 6. And everyone talked about how San Fran had the "mo" after pulling out the improbable win vs. NYG. Tampa Bay 31-San Fran 6). The Jets spanked the Colts 41-0 and they were the vogue pick by the pundits. Raiders 30-Jets 10.

Not only do the home teams win more than 80% of the time, they also cover ATS, which means they're not winning ugly.

But honestly, best of luck to everyone who's calling for a bunch of upsets. :rolleyes:

Cheers
How can you compare the past which this sport was sooo different in this day and age? This reminds me of the rushing title and JLewis trying to beat Dickerson's rushing season record, ahhh hello remember OJ? OK he did it in 14 games, not 16 games! The point is that you can say that Dickerson or JLewis has more rushing yards for the season but the TRUTH is that OJ is the best back in terms of playing in 2 fewer games. So, that said, saying historically wild card teams did not win is true but what does that have to do with the 2003-2004 season?GB NEVER losses at home in the playoffs, Atlanta beat them last year, right?

TEN CAN'T beat Baltimore, especially in the postseason, they did.

TB CAN'T beat Phily in cold, in January but did last year

Ramds CAN't Lost to NE because they are a much better team and are playing on turf, but did.

The list is endless....
Stupid stupid stupid. He is talking about THIS ROUND of the playoffs - at least on the NFC side, there have been exactly 2 losses for the NFC teams on a first round bye in the last 20+ years. That means that OVER 90% of the time, the NFC home team in the second round wins.You did not cite to a single example from the 2nd round on the NFC side b/c you can't. There are only two, and the last one was over 10 years ago.

 

djcolts

Footballguy
Just for kicks, I set up a bet online to see what odds you could get if all four underdogs won. They would ALL have to win outright to collect.

A $100.00 bet would win you $7739.00 :eek:
Sounds like a bet Nick Bakay would make to make up for a season's worth of losing picks. ;)
 

Alias

Footballguy
Just for kicks, I set up a bet online to see what odds you could get if all four underdogs won. They would ALL have to win outright to collect.

A $100.00 bet would win you $7739.00 :eek:
Hey LH - out of curiousity what is the payoff for all the dogs (except the titans) hit on that 3-way ML parlay?
 

Jason Wood

Zoo York
It cracks me up  how many people are predicting two, three or four upsets this weekend in the Divisionals. In the world of sports, there are few things as daunting as winning on the road, against a rested team that has had two weeks to prepare against you.

Happens every year. Last year it was the same thing. The Falcons dismantled Green Bay in Green Bay (first time in history) and everyone was on the Vick bandwagon as they came to Philly. Philly 20-Atlanta 6. And everyone talked about how San Fran had the "mo" after pulling out the improbable win vs. NYG. Tampa Bay 31-San Fran 6). The Jets spanked the Colts 41-0 and they were the vogue pick by the pundits. Raiders 30-Jets 10.

Not only do the home teams win more than 80% of the time, they also cover ATS, which means they're not winning ugly.

But honestly, best of luck to everyone who's calling for a bunch of upsets. :rolleyes:

Cheers
How can you compare the past which this sport was sooo different in this day and age? This reminds me of the rushing title and JLewis trying to beat Dickerson's rushing season record, ahhh hello remember OJ? OK he did it in 14 games, not 16 games! The point is that you can say that Dickerson or JLewis has more rushing yards for the season but the TRUTH is that OJ is the best back in terms of playing in 2 fewer games. So, that said, saying historically wild card teams did not win is true but what does that have to do with the 2003-2004 season?GB NEVER losses at home in the playoffs, Atlanta beat them last year, right?

TEN CAN'T beat Baltimore, especially in the postseason, they did.

TB CAN'T beat Phily in cold, in January but did last year

Ramds CAN't Lost to NE because they are a much better team and are playing on turf, but did.

The list is endless....
ATS trends of 21-4-1 are STRONG...that's not just the favorites winning, that's them winning with room to spare. Cheers

 

Leroy Hoard

Footballguy
Just for kicks, I set up a bet online to see what odds you could get if all four underdogs won. They would ALL have to win outright to collect.

A $100.00 bet would win you $7739.00 :eek:
Hey LH - out of curiousity what is the payoff for all the dogs (except the titans) hit on that 3-way ML parlay?
$100 = $2357 at canbet.
 

Jason Wood

Zoo York
It cracks me up  how many people are predicting two, three or four upsets this weekend in the Divisionals. In the world of sports, there are few things as daunting as winning on the road, against a rested team that has had two weeks to prepare against you.

Happens every year. Last year it was the same thing. The Falcons dismantled Green Bay in Green Bay (first time in history) and everyone was on the Vick bandwagon as they came to Philly. Philly 20-Atlanta 6. And everyone talked about how San Fran had the "mo" after pulling out the improbable win vs. NYG. Tampa Bay 31-San Fran 6). The Jets spanked the Colts 41-0 and they were the vogue pick by the pundits. Raiders 30-Jets 10.

Not only do the home teams win more than 80% of the time, they also cover ATS, which means they're not winning ugly.

But honestly, best of luck to everyone who's calling for a bunch of upsets. :rolleyes:

Cheers
How can you compare the past which this sport was sooo different in this day and age? This reminds me of the rushing title and JLewis trying to beat Dickerson's rushing season record, ahhh hello remember OJ? OK he did it in 14 games, not 16 games! The point is that you can say that Dickerson or JLewis has more rushing yards for the season but the TRUTH is that OJ is the best back in terms of playing in 2 fewer games. So, that said, saying historically wild card teams did not win is true but what does that have to do with the 2003-2004 season?GB NEVER losses at home in the playoffs, Atlanta beat them last year, right?

TEN CAN'T beat Baltimore, especially in the postseason, they did.

TB CAN'T beat Phily in cold, in January but did last year

Ramds CAN't Lost to NE because they are a much better team and are playing on turf, but did.

The list is endless....
You're confusing the Championship games with the Divisionals. Championship games are much less friendly to the home teams, which makes sense for a lot of reasons. 1) Neither team has an extra week to prepare. 2) It's usually the two best teams in the league facing off against one another, so the playing field is relatively even.Cheers

 

smlevin

Footballguy
My bad - thank you Willy for correctin - yes, Bears 2001, and another were the only NFC teams defeated at home in the second round in the last many many years.

 
I remain firm in my opinion that KC will stick it to the flavor of the month, Indy.Any visions of Peyton leisurely calling out signals in a comfortable dome are grossly exaggerated.90% of the Colts have never seen what they will see in the Ketchup Bowl this weekend.And KC STILL has a GREAT offense. Priest, and that awesome O-line, will grind the crap out of that D...keeping the ball more.Vermeil has achieved this before...Dungy hasn't. 2 weeks of prep. vs. 1 week.LOVE KC ONLY LAYING 3. :excited:

 
Last edited by a moderator:

smlevin

Footballguy
Vermeil has achieved this before...Dungy hasn't. 2 weeks of prep. vs. 1 week.LOVE KC ONLY LAYING 3. :excited:
I think this is an important point folks keep overlooking when they look at KC's defensive problems.Vermeil is a Super Bowl winner, TB didn't take the next step until they ditched Dungy for Gruden. I am not putting TOO much stock in all of that, but it means something.Also, you have the home team essentially at a pick'em when you factor in that KC gets the 3 points for home field. They have the #1 O in the league. They have a coach who knows how to make his team into the ultimate winner, who was given two weeks of prep, and rest for his team, the Colts got their first playoff win ever under Manning so an emotional letdown is possible. And, finally, the historical numbers are on the side of the home team, especially one that is undefeated at home this year, scoring 34 points a game in that stadium, and (IIRC) the history that every 8-0 team has proceeded to the Super Bowl.
 

Alias

Footballguy
Vermeil has achieved this before...Dungy hasn't. 2 weeks of prep. vs. 1 week.LOVE KC ONLY LAYING 3. :excited:
I think this is an important point folks keep overlooking when they look at KC's defensive problems.Vermeil is a Super Bowl winner, TB didn't take the next step until they ditched Dungy for Gruden. I am not putting TOO much stock in all of that, but it means something.Also, you have the home team essentially at a pick'em when you factor in that KC gets the 3 points for home field. They have the #1 O in the league. They have a coach who knows how to make his team into the ultimate winner, who was given two weeks of prep, and rest for his team, the Colts got their first playoff win ever under Manning so an emotional letdown is possible. And, finally, the historical numbers are on the side of the home team, especially one that is undefeated at home this year, scoring 34 points a game in that stadium, and (IIRC) the history that every 8-0 team has proceeded to the Super Bowl.
Broncos essentially had two weeks of rest as well, didn't do them much good against Indy.
 

Capella

CAPELLODINHO
I remain firm in my opinion that KC will stick it to the flavor of the month, Indy.Any visions of Peyton leisurely calling out signals in a comfortable dome are grossly exaggerated.90% of the Colts have never seen what they will see in the Ketchup Bowl this weekend.And KC STILL has a GREAT offense. Priest, and that awesome O-line, will grind the crap out of that D...keeping the ball more.Vermeil has achieved this before...Dungy hasn't. 2 weeks of prep. vs. 1 week.LOVE KC ONLY LAYING 3. :excited:
Man, if I had $$ to gamble with (f'n tuition :rant: ), I'd be on that like ugly on a Osbourne.I'm wishing Indy well in this postseason (big fan of Dungy for reviving the Bucs)...but I think the Chiefs are going to pound them. Two weeks off, that offense is rested, Manning won't be able to shout loud enough to hear himself...no way Indy gets out of there without getting creamed.
 

Workhorse

Footballguy
Vermeil has achieved this before...Dungy hasn't.  2 weeks of prep. vs. 1 week.LOVE KC ONLY LAYING 3. :excited:
I think this is an important point folks keep overlooking when they look at KC's defensive problems.Vermeil is a Super Bowl winner, TB didn't take the next step until they ditched Dungy for Gruden. I am not putting TOO much stock in all of that, but it means something.Also, you have the home team essentially at a pick'em when you factor in that KC gets the 3 points for home field. They have the #1 O in the league. They have a coach who knows how to make his team into the ultimate winner, who was given two weeks of prep, and rest for his team, the Colts got their first playoff win ever under Manning so an emotional letdown is possible. And, finally, the historical numbers are on the side of the home team, especially one that is undefeated at home this year, scoring 34 points a game in that stadium, and (IIRC) the history that every 8-0 team has proceeded to the Super Bowl.
Broncos essentially had two weeks of rest as well, didn't do them much good against Indy.
Two words:ROAD GAME.
 

smlevin

Footballguy
Vermeil has achieved this before...Dungy hasn't.  2 weeks of prep. vs. 1 week.LOVE KC ONLY LAYING 3. :excited:
I think this is an important point folks keep overlooking when they look at KC's defensive problems.Vermeil is a Super Bowl winner, TB didn't take the next step until they ditched Dungy for Gruden. I am not putting TOO much stock in all of that, but it means something.Also, you have the home team essentially at a pick'em when you factor in that KC gets the 3 points for home field. They have the #1 O in the league. They have a coach who knows how to make his team into the ultimate winner, who was given two weeks of prep, and rest for his team, the Colts got their first playoff win ever under Manning so an emotional letdown is possible. And, finally, the historical numbers are on the side of the home team, especially one that is undefeated at home this year, scoring 34 points a game in that stadium, and (IIRC) the history that every 8-0 team has proceeded to the Super Bowl.
Broncos essentially had two weeks of rest as well, didn't do them much good against Indy.
:lol: Funny. Two weeks of rest, not two weeks of prep. The Broncos lost all their emotional intensity after they beat the Colts in Indy - resting players was th eworse thing they could have done. It was reminiscent of the Jags game in '95 or '96 when the Broncos got knocked out at home in their first playoff game after resting their starters the previous couple of weeks.This KC team won't have that problem.
 
Vermeil has achieved this before...Dungy hasn't.  2 weeks of prep. vs. 1 week.LOVE KC ONLY LAYING 3. :excited:
I think this is an important point folks keep overlooking when they look at KC's defensive problems.Vermeil is a Super Bowl winner, TB didn't take the next step until they ditched Dungy for Gruden. I am not putting TOO much stock in all of that, but it means something.Also, you have the home team essentially at a pick'em when you factor in that KC gets the 3 points for home field. They have the #1 O in the league. They have a coach who knows how to make his team into the ultimate winner, who was given two weeks of prep, and rest for his team, the Colts got their first playoff win ever under Manning so an emotional letdown is possible. And, finally, the historical numbers are on the side of the home team, especially one that is undefeated at home this year, scoring 34 points a game in that stadium, and (IIRC) the history that every 8-0 team has proceeded to the Super Bowl.
Broncos essentially had two weeks of rest as well, didn't do them much good against Indy.
:rolleyes: Horrible rebuttal...sorry.The fact alone that the Broncos were on the ROAD, in a dome, for a playoff game, makes your point moot. KC is AT HOME...in arguably the toughest place to win in the NFL.Second of all, only SOME Broncos had rest. And the difference between being home (KC) for 2 weeks to prepare for a matchup, and going on the road to GB in between, is a large one. No question.Add to that, the Broncos were finishing their 3rd road week in a row. KC has been in KC since before X-mas.To compare the two is a complete reach...at best.
 

dkb

Footballguy
KC is AT HOME...in arguably the toughest place to win in the NFL.
Well you aren't making valid points either, when was the last time KC has won their Home playoff game? :confused:
 

Alias

Footballguy
I remain firm in my opinion that KC will stick it to the flavor of the month, Indy.Any visions of Peyton leisurely calling out signals in a comfortable dome are grossly exaggerated.90% of the Colts have never seen what they will see in the Ketchup Bowl this weekend.And KC STILL has a GREAT offense. Priest, and that awesome O-line, will grind the crap out of that D...keeping the ball more.Vermeil has achieved this before...Dungy hasn't. 2 weeks of prep. vs. 1 week.LOVE KC ONLY LAYING 3. :excited:
Man, if I had $$ to gamble with (f'n tuition :rant: ), I'd be on that like ugly on a Osbourne.I'm wishing Indy well in this postseason (big fan of Dungy for reviving the Bucs)...but I think the Chiefs are going to pound them. Two weeks off, that offense is rested, Manning won't be able to shout loud enough to hear himself...no way Indy gets out of there without getting creamed.
Two words for you:HAND SIGNALS
 
I remain firm in my opinion that KC will stick it to the flavor of the month, Indy.Any visions of Peyton leisurely calling out signals in a comfortable dome are grossly exaggerated.90% of the Colts have never seen what they will see in the Ketchup Bowl this weekend.And KC STILL has a GREAT offense.  Priest, and that awesome O-line, will grind the crap out of that D...keeping the ball more.Vermeil has achieved this before...Dungy hasn't.  2 weeks of prep. vs. 1 week.LOVE KC ONLY LAYING 3. :excited:
Man, if I had $$ to gamble with (f'n tuition :rant: ), I'd be on that like ugly on a Osbourne.I'm wishing Indy well in this postseason (big fan of Dungy for reviving the Bucs)...but I think the Chiefs are going to pound them. Two weeks off, that offense is rested, Manning won't be able to shout loud enough to hear himself...no way Indy gets out of there without getting creamed.
Two words for you:HAND SIGNALS
That was pretty funny, actually.Two words for you...Priest Holmes.
 

Alias

Footballguy
btw, here is the drive chart for Indy's game against Denver:TDTDTDTDFGTDFGFumbleRan the clock change of possession on 4thWho has a better defense KC or Denver? I would think DenverSo other then being really loud at Arrowhead Stadium (if that's what it is still called), how does KC stop Indy?

 

smlevin

Footballguy
Take the lock or not, I am sticking by what has worked for me in general, take Carolina and the pts.If history always repeats itself then why not best everything on the favorites then smart guy? Then again, why not ALL OF US just bet against the dogs and collect. I'll tell you why, cause history doesn't repeat itself.How many people picked against Indy? I didn't.Who picked against against GB? I didStupid will be you picking only because historically what has come true, go ahead Einstein.
Typical mouth running without the brain processing - I know who this is, too, and I know your old alias. It is obvious from the stuff being typed.Let's clarify: you are talking ATS, not wins. Not what *I* was talking about. JayWoo was discussing people picking wild card teams to WIN this weekend, not simply cover the spread. He also mentioned ATS numbers to show that the home team most often wins convincingly. The discussion moved other places, but you ignored my posts on the subject - and you ignored the point I made regarding a total of 2 NFC home teams after a first round bye have LOST in the last couple of decades or so. I said nothing about covering, Einstein.Now, you want to talk bets? Here's what *I* posted in THIS THREAD on that subject:
Agree - but the "money where the mouth is" argument doesn't ring true. This is one year where two or three underdogs could cover the spread: GB+5.5, Tenn +6, Carolina +7, and Indy +3 (if you believe they are the dog that wins) all look like decent (not great) bets. Two close games and an upset and the dogs pull it out ATS.It is much more unlikely that the road teams actually WIN the games, of course, but Packer Fans, Titans fans, Panthers fans, and Colts fans have to have some hope, though the odds are stacked significantly against them (especially you Packer fans - I'm sorry you are so vocal and feel so destined - there's a 95%+ chance the season is ending for you this Sunday).
I believe that comports exactly with what you posted. So, unfortunately, we are in agreement.
 

smlevin

Footballguy
So other then being really loud at Arrowhead Stadium (if that's what it is still called), how does KC stop Indy?
That's not the major question for me - it is on the other side of the ball.How does Indy stop KC?
 

dkb

Footballguy
at this point, I am taking Carolina as the lock of the weekend. Rams are a farce and should NEVER had had the record they had this year. At worst, Carolina will cover but I see this as a win over the Rams.I could really make a case for any of the other teams why they will win but that is not how I typically judge on what team to pick. Depending on which way the spread goes, will deterimine who I will pick which is so far:GBTENIndy vs KC I am holding off at this point and all final picks will be decided 15 minutes before kickoff.Note: I took BALT/SEA/INDY/CAR last week and layed the most on CAR and SEA

 
KC is AT HOME...in arguably the toughest place to win in the NFL.
Well you aren't making valid points either, when was the last time KC has won their Home playoff game? :confused:
:lol: :rolleyes: Selective statistics. Infantile response.The FACT is...it is A LOT tougher to play on the road...AND in a playoff game.Proof of this can be seen in betting lines, where it is abundantly obvious there IS an advantage to ANY home team...not to mention history. And I don't mean history of another coach/team with the same uniform.Don't kid yourself, Archie.
 
btw, here is the drive chart for Indy's game against Denver:TDTDTDTDFGTDFGFumbleRan the clock change of possession on 4thWho has a better defense KC or Denver? I would think DenverSo other then being really loud at Arrowhead Stadium (if that's what it is still called), how does KC stop Indy?
You can't be serious, dude.Throw your line elsewhere.I'm done.
 

Alias

Footballguy
All I am hearing here is a bunch of #####ing and moaning about homefield advantage, you know what I'll give you the 3 point spread, but other then history repeating itself, look at the matchups and explain to me why KC wins this in a blowout? It doesn't add up.

 

Alias

Footballguy
You are right Indy is a HORRIBLE Road Team.

Sep 7 @Cleveland Won 9-6

Sep 28 @New Orleans Won 55-21

Oct 6 @Tampa Bay Won 38-35

Nov 2 @Miami Won 23-17

Nov 9 @Jacksonville Lost 23-28

Nov 23 @Buffalo Won 17-14

Dec 7 @Tennessee Won 29-27

Dec 28 @Houston Won 20-17

 

smlevin

Footballguy
Note: I took BALT/SEA/INDY/CAR last week and layed the most on CAR and SEA
Congrats on the winnings - I was successful as well with most of my Pars, teasers and straight bets and was able to double mey money. I had bought a point in the GB game to make it -6.5, which was looking great at 27-20, but then we all know what happened after that.I like Carolinas a lot this week to cover, but not to win the game.Pack could get within 4 points of Philly.'dogs cover, but not win.In the AFC, I see it as way more wide open - the Indy game's a toss-up for me, though I really believe KC will win it. A couple of Vandie FGs instead of XPs, and KC could roll. The only thing I'm in "love" with in that game is the over, as long as it stays under 60.And, I LOVE Tennesse at +6 - I think that will be a 3-4 point game, esp,. since NE has not blown out a ton of folks this year, and Tenn is simply tough to blow out. I'll probably be looking at a lot of teasing this weekend to butress my feelings about the games, and I expect I'll do well in the straight wagers. The correct combo of parlays will decide if I win this weekend or break even.Good luck to you - and I apologize if you think I was calling YOU stupid, as opposed to the point you were making.
 

Doug Drinen

Moderator
The FACT is©©©it is A LOT tougher to play on the road©©©AND in a playoff game©

Proof of this can be seen in betting lines, where it is abundantly obvious there IS an advantage to ANY home team©©©not to mention history©
I'm not criticizing you, Sonny, just popping in to make a quick point:It is very difficult to determine exactly how much home field advantage means in the playoffs because the data is polluted by the fact that the home team is ¥almost¤ always the better team in the playoffs©

It most certainly is true that home teams dominate in the playoffs© But it's not clear that being at home has anything to do with it© I don't have the exact numbers in front of me right now, but over the last 20ish years, when two teams with the same record meet in the playoffs, the road team has actually won more often ¥just barely¤© Woodrow will remember that because I was forced to point it out to him before a certain Championship game about a year ago :D

Now, you may or may not believe that this is relevant to this week's games© As has been correctly pointed out in this thread, the byes make the 2nd round of the playoffs different from the 1st and the 3rd© Also, it does seem clear that the home teams are the better teams in at least three of this week's games©

Just don't be too quick to put too much stock in the home field advantage factor© If you really think, for example, that the Colts are as good as the Chiefs*, don't let the HFA scare you off©

* - this post takes no position on whether the Colts are, in fact, as good as the Chiefs

 

Motown Maniac

Footballguy
History says there will be 1 more upset in the PO's. Only 2 times have there only been 1 upset. 1973 & 1974. All other years have featured more than 1 upset! A good article by B. Duane Cross on this very subject.

NFL - Home Is Where The Loss Is

B. Duane Cross, CNN/Sports Illustrated - [LINK]

Since 1970, at least one home team has lost in the playoffs. Of course, if you're a fan of the Rams, Patriots, Chiefs or Eagles, you have to be feeling better that the Ravens lost. Here's the kicker: Only twice in that time -- 1973 and '74 -- has there been only one upset in the playoffs. Historically speaking, there is another upset lurking in the weeds.

Mo

 
The FACT is©©©it is A LOT tougher to play on the road©©©AND in a playoff game©

Proof of this can be seen in betting lines, where it is abundantly obvious there IS an advantage to ANY home team©©©not to mention history©
I'm not criticizing you, Sonny, just popping in to make a quick point:It is very difficult to determine exactly how much home field advantage means in the playoffs because the data is polluted by the fact that the home team is ¥almost¤ always the better team in the playoffs©

It most certainly is true that home teams dominate in the playoffs© But it's not clear that being at home has anything to do with it© I don't have the exact numbers in front of me right now, but over the last 20ish years, when two teams with the same record meet in the playoffs, the road team has actually won more often ¥just barely¤© Woodrow will remember that because I was forced to point it out to him before a certain Championship game about a year ago :D

Now, you may or may not believe that this is relevant to this week's games© As has been correctly pointed out in this thread, the byes make the 2nd round of the playoffs different from the 1st and the 3rd© Also, it does seem clear that the home teams are the better teams in at least three of this week's games©

Just don't be too quick to put too much stock in the home field advantage factor© If you really think, for example, that the Colts are as good as the Chiefs*, don't let the HFA scare you off©

* - this post takes no position on whether the Colts are, in fact, as good as the Chiefs
Point taken. :thumbup: Now that, is a solid argument. :yes:

However, I do indeed consider the Chiefs better than Indy. Arguably, Indy played its best game last week, in friendly confines. It will be tough to duplicate it, no matter what.

And due to the recency factor (Indy's hot), I believe the line is a lot lower than it should/would have been. That is, since I consider the Chiefs to be the better team, I would also concur a higher pointspread should be given to that same team...especially at a home field like Arrowhead.

So, bottom line, I think there is value in taking the Chiefs in this game.

Don't confuse this with the Chiefs going far. Their D will be their downfall. But, in this affair, it won't matter as much because Indy's D is also suspect.

The Chiefs don't match up well against good D's, of which -- sans Baltimore (should have lost) -- they really haven't played. It's a matter of time before they play a good D...and get beat. That will happen next week.

Lastly, I would not be surprised to see upsets in any of the games this weekend. The one I consider to be least likely is the Chiefs/Colts. Well, with the fewest amount of points to give of the four, that makes an obvious pick for me, in the Chiefs.

SLBD - 3 :excited:

 

Jason Wood

Zoo York
The FACT is©©©it is A LOT tougher to play on the road©©©AND in a playoff game©

Proof of this can be seen in betting lines, where it is abundantly obvious there IS an advantage to ANY home team©©©not to mention history©
I'm not criticizing you, Sonny, just popping in to make a quick point:It is very difficult to determine exactly how much home field advantage means in the playoffs because the data is polluted by the fact that the home team is ¥almost¤ always the better team in the playoffs©

It most certainly is true that home teams dominate in the playoffs© But it's not clear that being at home has anything to do with it© I don't have the exact numbers in front of me right now, but over the last 20ish years, when two teams with the same record meet in the playoffs, the road team has actually won more often ¥just barely¤© Woodrow will remember that because I was forced to point it out to him before a certain Championship game about a year ago :D

Now, you may or may not believe that this is relevant to this week's games© As has been correctly pointed out in this thread, the byes make the 2nd round of the playoffs different from the 1st and the 3rd© Also, it does seem clear that the home teams are the better teams in at least three of this week's games©

Just don't be too quick to put too much stock in the home field advantage factor© If you really think, for example, that the Colts are as good as the Chiefs*, don't let the HFA scare you off©

* - this post takes no position on whether the Colts are, in fact, as good as the Chiefs
As always Dr. D finds a way to say it better than I could. But he touched on the key point here, and one that I think is lost on most people who are, once again failing to give the bye teams their due. It's not about home field advantage in and of itself. It's about the fact that these teams have homefield advantage, are better teams in general AND have a bye week giving them more time to rest and prepare. It the COMBINATION of those three factors which make it so very very difficult for the road teams to win in the Divisionals regardless of how you slice and dice the numbers.Cheers

 

smlevin

Footballguy
I think this phenomenon may explain why so many folks think a) Indy will win; b) GB will win; c) Carolina will keep it close.The perception is that red-hot Indy, which has a respectable defense, is playing better than KC, and their lackluster D.The perception also is that the Rams stumbled before reaching the playoffs and lost to some bad teams - including Chicago and Detroit - when they could have wrapped up home field throughout the playoffs. Now a defensive minded team comes to the dome (ala Baltimore) and the "field" thinks Carolina can keep it close.Finally, the "team of destiny" Packers, who only lost their last meeting with this Philly team b/c of 6 AGreen fumbles, and Brett Favre's broken thumb - oh, and Philly is beat up. So, the perception is that the Pack has closed the gap talent-wise to Philly.I think these thoughts are all bunk, but that is my opinion. I think the only true "close" matchup as far as talent is the Tennessee/New England game. The other games are, to me, lopsided heavily in favor of the home team as far as "how good" the teams are.

 
Last edited by a moderator:

KID

Footballguy
IMHO one of the reasons that the "public" falls for the wild card is the hype. My guess is the USA today on Friday will be hyping all the dogs. That set aside there are many questions in my mind about the current lines. Why is KC only a 3 point favorite over Indy. KC has always been a "public" team and if they are as good as a lot of people think than shouldn't they be favored by more than 3. One big win by Indy and they get some cred going into KC. For some reason, IMHO this line stinks to high heavens. Now let's take a gander at the NE line of -6. Heck they have been beating everyone close. Vegas has lost a lot of money on NE this year (I believe they are 14-2 ATS) NE has won a lot of close games. Why isn't this line 4 points. Think McNair will throw 3 ints in this game.IMHO one of the dogs in the AFC wins and one covers. I am taking Indy to get ahead early and win by a TD and the NE/TN game be the best of the week with NE squeaking out a 3 or 4 point win.IMHO the NFC games aren't going to be close. St. Louis will put on the track show against Carolina and this one gets ugly quickly. Everyone will be talking the Rams of old after this game. Can't see Delhomme playing catch up. He has had a good year but too much pressure will turn into ints. St Louis will take Davis out of the game early. The line is 7.5 and begging you to take Carolina.As for Philly, personally I would like to see GB win but don't think that will happen. Favre has been playing great ball but IMHO will be forced to play from behind. Reid impressed the #$&% out of me when he showed a wide open offense against Miami on Monday night. I think that was a tease of things to come. IMHO Westbrook being out will not effect the Philly offense. GB will have three turnovers in this game which will be a big part of the difference. Philly by 11.

 

biglare66

Footballguy
This looks like a VERY good year to bet on a few underdogs. 1) KC is a perennial post-season bust, going against a hot Peyton Manning. This game is a toss. Good game to place a bet on the road team.2) St.Louis is not as good as their record, but I think I'd give them the edge over Carolina being at home and having more talent in the skill positions.3) New England will hand the Titans their head. I wouldn't bet against the NE defense this year.4) Phili needs to make some big plays on defense to win. I like the Packers.I'll take IND, NE, STL, and GB.

 
The FACT is©©©it is A LOT tougher to play on the road©©©AND in a playoff game©

Proof of this can be seen in betting lines, where it is abundantly obvious there IS an advantage to ANY home team©©©not to mention history©
I'm not criticizing you, Sonny, just popping in to make a quick point:It is very difficult to determine exactly how much home field advantage means in the playoffs because the data is polluted by the fact that the home team is ¥almost¤ always the better team in the playoffs©

It most certainly is true that home teams dominate in the playoffs© But it's not clear that being at home has anything to do with it© I don't have the exact numbers in front of me right now, but over the last 20ish years, when two teams with the same record meet in the playoffs, the road team has actually won more often ¥just barely¤© Woodrow will remember that because I was forced to point it out to him before a certain Championship game about a year ago :D

Now, you may or may not believe that this is relevant to this week's games© As has been correctly pointed out in this thread, the byes make the 2nd round of the playoffs different from the 1st and the 3rd© Also, it does seem clear that the home teams are the better teams in at least three of this week's games©

Just don't be too quick to put too much stock in the home field advantage factor© If you really think, for example, that the Colts are as good as the Chiefs*, don't let the HFA scare you off©

* - this post takes no position on whether the Colts are, in fact, as good as the Chiefs
As always Dr. D finds a way to say it better than I could. But he touched on the key point here, and one that I think is lost on most people who are, once again failing to give the bye teams their due. It's not about home field advantage in and of itself. It's about the fact that these teams have homefield advantage, are better teams in general AND have a bye week giving them more time to rest and prepare. It the COMBINATION of those three factors which make it so very very difficult for the road teams to win in the Divisionals regardless of how you slice and dice the numbers.Cheers
Which, in turn, IS EXACTLY what I've been saying all along. :wall: The line on KC, only being at - 3, is quite possibly too low.

Remember, lines aren't set at what oddsmakers think the teams will do. Lines are set at what they think the PUBLIC will do; in order to get half the money on each side...and making a riskless, whopping 10%. :eek:

If what you just said is true Woodrow -- and I concur -- then giving less points is obviously an advantage.

KC could lose...sure...but, the relatively low spread offers value. :thumbup:

SLBD

 
Last edited by a moderator:

Users who are viewing this thread

Top