NFL Week #7

[jimmysingh9]

I cannot watch that vikings game anymore. I did bet on the Vikings and I will jump off my roof if I watch anymore lol.


Just looking at some spread early for Week # 7

BTB i know you will add something to this but Kansas City +3.5 looks good to me against Kyle Boller led Raiders.

Raiders didnt look good with Boller in and they will probably have Gerrard or someone in this week, but can they learn the offense that quickly?

taking the points looks good there.


I may even look at -14 for the Saints while its still there. Indy was good in their last primetime spot but that was at home against a terrible O-Line. This time it's on the road and the Saints off a loss. Superdome is usually loud in primetime games.

Steelers -4 is probably a bad spot but will look into more. fishy line IMO.

If Andre Johnson is back, I would look at Texans laying points

The First two standout to me

[ChiefZilla]

I tailed that play that BTB mentioned last week about teams coming off losses of 21 or more points (underdogs hitting at 65% since 2008 or whatever it was) and rode the Bucs +7 and ML to some nice cash last weekend.

By my count there are four such teams this weekend.

Rams (Lost 24-3 at GB in Week 6): +13.5 at Dallas
Vikings (Lost 39-10 at CHI in Week 6): +8.5 vs. Green Bay
Titans (Lost 38-17 at PIT in Week 5): -3 vs. Houston
Cardinals (Lost 34-10 at MIN in Week 5): +3.5 vs. Pittsburgh

Out of those which do you guys like? I'm actually thinking about a play on Minnesota as that big of a home underdog, but am a bit weary of Ponder making his first start against such a good defense. Also, it seems like Aaron Rodgers and that offense just torch teams when they're indoors on turf. What do you guys think?

[louiemdj]

I am 8-7 on the year NFL, and even tho I was somewhat lucky last week to go 2-0, it seems like it's getting harder every week. I can't really see any plays I even like enough to bet at this point.

[kreatture]

I'm in love with this weekend's card for the 1st time since Week 2.

I've already loaded up on Tampa Bay ML & Cleveland -3.

Lots of good looking lines right now with Houston +3 (ML), Kansas City +3.5, San Diego -1, Denver +1 (ML), Atlanta +3.5 (ML), & Jacksonville +9.

I've Teased Tampa Bay +8 / Houston +9 / Kansas City +9.5 / Green Bay -3 / Jacksonville +15

If the Baltimore line moves to -9.5 I'm jumping on Jacksonville big, but right now the +9 is juiced at -125.

[The Posse]

Jumped on Baltimore -8, Green Bay -9 (even), Kansas City +4, Pittsburgh -3.5, Tennessee -3, and Chicago -1 early. Like Kansas City and Tennessee coming off byes against teams with injury issues. I teased Kansas City/under to +11/48.5 since I think it'll be a low scoring, close game. Loving Green Bay -9 which I got before Ponder was announced as starting QB. Normally hate taking so much chalk but I think all have good value considering several of those numbers will go up, get juiced, or both.

[The Posse]

(10-18-2011 04:50 PM)ChiefZilla Wrote:  I tailed that play that BTB mentioned last week about teams coming off losses of 21 or more points (underdogs hitting at 65% since 2008 or whatever it was) and rode the Bucs +7 and ML to some nice cash last weekend.

By my count there are four such teams this weekend.

Rams (Lost 24-3 at GB in Week 6): +13.5 at Dallas
Vikings (Lost 39-10 at CHI in Week 6): +8.5 vs. Green Bay
Titans (Lost 38-17 at PIT in Week 5): -3 vs. Houston
Cardinals (Lost 34-10 at MIN in Week 5): +3.5 vs. Pittsburgh

Out of those which do you guys like? I'm actually thinking about a play on Minnesota as that big of a home underdog, but am a bit weary of Ponder making his first start against such a good defense. Also, it seems like Aaron Rodgers and that offense just torch teams when they're indoors on turf. What do you guys think?

I was thinking the same on Minnesota. I wouldn't touch it unless it's a double digit spread, even at home. Their strengths (run ball/stop run) do not match up well at all versus Green Bay.

The Rams are in a similar situation- Bradford is doubtful to start as of now. But I don't know if I like Dallas to cover a big spread.

I took Pittsburgh at -3.5 early but I may jump on Arizona. Whisenhunt knows that offense and defense well. Mike Wallace also has a minor injury that bears watching. I want to see if this line goes up to 4 or more first.

I still like the Titans -3. The Andre Johnson talk of returning is wishful thinking IMO. Even if he returns, he'll be at about half speed. I like the Titans coming off the bye week.

[ChiefZilla]

(10-18-2011 10:51 PM)The Posse Wrote:  I was thinking the same on Minnesota. I wouldn't touch it unless it's a double digit spread, even at home. Their strengths (run ball/stop run) do not match up well at all versus Green Bay.

The Rams are in a similar situation- Bradford is doubtful to start as of now. But I don't know if I like Dallas to cover a big spread.

I took Pittsburgh at -3.5 early but I may jump on Arizona. Whisenhunt knows that offense and defense well. Mike Wallace also has a minor injury that bears watching. I want to see if this line goes up to 4 or more first.

I still like the Titans -3. The Andre Johnson talk of returning is wishful thinking IMO. Even if he returns, he'll be at about half speed. I like the Titans coming off the bye week.

That's a good point on Minnesota and their strengths. Then again, I don't know if anyone has a good enough pass d to match up with the Pack right now. It's just difficult to talk yourself into betting against GB right now with them not only winning, but also covering most weeks. I tried to talk myself into it last week, and I'm glad I didn't. You know eventually spreads will get high enough to where there's value going against them; just not sure if this is that week.

I also like Titans -3. Off a bye, Texans are banged up and coming off a tough road trip to Pittsburgh, and I also don't believe Andre Johnson will be back. At least a week too soon if he does. That's such a pivotal game in that division.

I think I'd actually lean Dallas (even though the value on that play is dwindling rapidly), but that's just because I want to see St. Louis, ya know, cover a spread before I consider betting on them.

---

Also, welcome to the BTB forum, Posse.

[kreatture]

Green Bay is due to some sort of letdown, even if minor. This game has potential of what GB/Carolina was like. Pack were -9 on the road and Panthers got the backdoor cover. Divisional game, on the road, looks like an easy one for Pack heading into their Bye. They were outplayed at home last week, I wouldn't be surprised if Vikings put up enough of a fight to get the cover. But betting against the Pack is foolish, so it's a no-play for myself. Altho I did tease GB down to -3.

I don't care if Tennessee is coming off a Bye. Teams off a Bye aren't as dominant as people think.. this is a monster game for Houston who if loses, will be 1.5 games back in the division, plus Titans will hold early tie-breaker. Tennessee has been a hot or cold team.. I don't care if Andre Johnson plays or not, I like Houston to win this game outright.

(10-18-2011 10:51 PM)The Posse Wrote:  I took Pittsburgh at -3.5 early but I may jump on Arizona. Whisenhunt knows that offense and defense well. Mike Wallace also has a minor injury that bears watching. I want to see if this line goes up to 4 or more first.

Pittsburgh opened -4.5 and it's fallen to -3.5. Sharps went Arizona early. Public will no doubt bring it back to 4 by Sunday morning, unless Sharps hit it some more..

Sam Bradford is expected to start Sunday in Dallas, as per Adam Schefter

[jimmysingh9]

The Bucs have done this London thing before, and they think they learned a thing or two.

Lesson No. 1: Arrive there early.

Last time around, the Bucs treated the game like any other road contest. They left Tampa Friday and got there Saturday morning London time for a Sunday game. They players said they hated it.

“I slept all day Saturday the last time I was there,” tackle Donald Penn told the Tampa Tribune. “I was tired. . . . It took a lot out of me the last time. It’s a big time adjustment. I’m real happy about how we’re doing it this year.”

Tampa took the opposite approach this time around. They left on Monday, and allowed their players to see the sights Tuesday.

The Bears are going the other route, deciding to practice this week in Chicago. They have taken criticism from former player Desmond Clark and the writers at ESPNChicago.com for treating this like any other week.

Perhaps it’s all mental and doesn’t make a difference. But the Bucs believe they have an advantage in London with their approach.

---

I have a question. It's regarding teasers and I want to know why this is considered a no-no or a bad bet or square play?

Green Bay -0.5
Dallas -6
Saints -7

payout is +110

i like all 3 of those team to win fairly easily but I am not confident laying over 2 Td's almost and over a Td on the road. But if I tease this bet. I get GB under a FG on the road and the two home team at or under a TD. If i want the saints under a Td. it will payout +100.

Now why is that considered a no-no for a teaser???? If I believe I like my chances of my bet alot more now and it pays me out something that i like, then why is considered a foolish bet? I just keep reading that the only teaser to play is a 2 team 5 or 6 point teasers that brings numbers over a key line. Suppose I like that bet that i made up over any one team, why is it dumb to play it? I understand the concept of its 3 different games and anything can happen, but i trust those 3 teams at that spread than suppose denver in one game.

just points for discussion

[oddsok]

Wow, spread continues to move towards Oakland. To -5 now, disappointed I took the 4 on offer for KC...

[SkyBlues42]

(10-19-2011 09:11 PM)oddsok Wrote:  Wow, spread continues to move towards Oakland. To -5 now, disappointed I took the 4 on offer for KC...

I'm not convinced, at all, that Carson Palmer makes them better than they were with Jason Campbell.

Still interesting to see the line move, wonder if it'll get to 6 before kickoff.

Would 7 just be absurd?

[The Posse]

(10-19-2011 11:32 AM)jimmysingh9 Wrote:  The Bucs have done this London thing before, and they think they learned a thing or two.

Lesson No. 1: Arrive there early.

Last time around, the Bucs treated the game like any other road contest. They left Tampa Friday and got there Saturday morning London time for a Sunday game. They players said they hated it.

“I slept all day Saturday the last time I was there,” tackle Donald Penn told the Tampa Tribune. “I was tired. . . . It took a lot out of me the last time. It’s a big time adjustment. I’m real happy about how we’re doing it this year.”

Tampa took the opposite approach this time around. They left on Monday, and allowed their players to see the sights Tuesday.

The Bears are going the other route, deciding to practice this week in Chicago. They have taken criticism from former player Desmond Clark and the writers at ESPNChicago.com for treating this like any other week.

Perhaps it’s all mental and doesn’t make a difference. But the Bucs believe they have an advantage in London with their approach.

---

I have a question. It's regarding teasers and I want to know why this is considered a no-no or a bad bet or square play?

Green Bay -0.5
Dallas -6
Saints -7

payout is +110

i like all 3 of those team to win fairly easily but I am not confident laying over 2 Td's almost and over a Td on the road. But if I tease this bet. I get GB under a FG on the road and the two home team at or under a TD. If i want the saints under a Td. it will payout +100.

Now why is that considered a no-no for a teaser???? If I believe I like my chances of my bet alot more now and it pays me out something that i like, then why is considered a foolish bet? I just keep reading that the only teaser to play is a 2 team 5 or 6 point teasers that brings numbers over a key line. Suppose I like that bet that i made up over any one team, why is it dumb to play it? I understand the concept of its 3 different games and anything can happen, but i trust those 3 teams at that spread than suppose denver in one game.

just points for discussion

I'm all for the occasional sweetheart teaser if the value is there. My personal preference is to avoid having any team higher than -3. As you said, anything can happen. Adding a 3rd team is adding more risk to your bet. Coincidentally, I am playing a sweetheart teaser myself but I bought 10 points for -110 and took Packers +1, Cowboys -3, Ravens +2. This is my biggest play of the weekend. This will likely be the only time all season where the numbers, matchups, and discrepancy in my power rankings all come together.

---

(10-19-2011 10:50 PM)SkyBlues42 Wrote:  

(10-19-2011 09:11 PM)oddsok Wrote:  Wow, spread continues to move towards Oakland. To -5 now, disappointed I took the 4 on offer for KC...

I'm not convinced, at all, that Carson Palmer makes them better than they were with Jason Campbell.

Still interesting to see the line move, wonder if it'll get to 6 before kickoff.

Would 7 just be absurd?

I also took KC +4 and am perplexed at this line move. A quarterback is going to come out of "retirement" ice cold with little reps/rhythm with his receivers and play well? Although I hesitate to fall in love with teams coming off a bye week, I love the Chiefs this week. Romeo Crennel should have their defense ready to go. The Chiefs offense has improved and I think will keep up, if not win this game outright. I hope the line gets to 6.

[oddsok]

(10-20-2011 12:17 AM)The Posse Wrote:  I also took KC +4 and am perplexed at this line move. A quarterback is going to come out of "retirement" ice cold with little reps/rhythm with his receivers and play well? Although I hesitate to fall in love with teams coming off a bye week, I love the Chiefs this week. Romeo Crennel should have their defense ready to go. The Chiefs offense has improved and I think will keep up, if not win this game outright. I hope the line gets to 6.

And it gets to 6.

[The Posse]

(10-21-2011 01:11 AM)oddsok Wrote:  

(10-20-2011 12:17 AM)The Posse Wrote:  I also took KC +4 and am perplexed at this line move. A quarterback is going to come out of "retirement" ice cold with little reps/rhythm with his receivers and play well? Although I hesitate to fall in love with teams coming off a bye week, I love the Chiefs this week. Romeo Crennel should have their defense ready to go. The Chiefs offense has improved and I think will keep up, if not win this game outright. I hope the line gets to 6.

And it gets to 6.

Got to 6 and already back down to 4 again with the news that Palmer isn't starting. Never had a chance to get it at 6.

[ChiefZilla]

(10-21-2011 03:01 PM)The Posse Wrote:  Got to 6 and already back down to 4 again with the news that Palmer isn't starting. Never had a chance to get it at 6.

Wow, I just never bought the hype that Palmer was going to make that big of a difference in his first start after eating pizza and sipping beers for the past 10 months. (ok maybe that's not true, but he doesn't strike me as the hardest of workers.) Hard to believe he made an immediate 2-point difference in the line, though. Seems strange.

[The Posse]

(10-21-2011 03:11 PM)ChiefZilla Wrote:  Wow, I just never bought the hype that Palmer was going to make that big of a difference in his first start after eating pizza and sipping beers for the past 10 months. (ok maybe that's not true, but he doesn't strike me as the hardest of workers.) Hard to believe he made an immediate 2-point difference in the line, though. Seems strange.

That and Janikowski is unlikely to play. That's a MUCH bigger deal to me.

[ChiefZilla]

(10-21-2011 03:37 PM)The Posse Wrote:  That and Janikowski is unlikely to play. That's a MUCH bigger deal to me.

Oh gosh. Got into a bar argument with two friends the other day about "whether Janikowski was worth a first-round pick." They were emphatic that he was. I said no.

My head still hurts.

[oddsok]

Well I guess we had the right read on KC @ OAK, and McFadden going down did hurt our cause.

Jax spread to +10 at plenty of books. Tempted to take this...

[The Posse]

(10-23-2011 07:29 PM)oddsok Wrote:  Well I guess we had the right read on KC @ OAK, and McFadden going down did hurt our cause.

Jax spread to +10 at plenty of books. Tempted to take this...

I don't think McFadden would have made a difference in that game unless Hue Jackson played him as a Wildcat QB the whole game. Which would not have been a bad idea, really.

Anyways, I think that number could get to 10.5 or 11. Hard to pass up a double digit home dog but I think the Jags are overvalued from last week's game against the Steelers. If you're looking to take the Jags you're probably better off waiting until tomorrow. I'd be surprised if this line moved the other way.

[ChiefZilla]

(10-24-2011 12:49 AM)The Posse Wrote:  I don't think McFadden would have made a difference in that game unless Hue Jackson played him as a Wildcat QB the whole game. Which would not have been a bad idea, really.

Raiders passing: 15-35, 4.8 yards per attempt, 6 INT
Raiders rushing: 27 attempts, 155 yards, 5.7 yards per rush

That was quite simply one of the worst game plans I've ever seen put together by Hue Jackson, but I'm grateful for it. He panicked when they got in the early 14-0 hole, when the truth is that even without McFadden the Raiders probably could have run their way back into that game. Instead, Jackson just let his quarterbacks completely ruin any hope they had.

But I'll take it!