First post of the season, bounceback teams are 1-1. I've tailed some of claw's picks, so am ahead, thanks to his work.
Week 4 is traditionally the bounceback angle's worst week, one of three losing weeks over the years on aggregate. Don't know why that is, but favorites do OK and dogs decidedly do not. And this year, it's the first week with multiple plays.
System plays are:
New England +10.5. I just can't do it. SF really need a W, and the Patriots are just not the kind of team to hang with a clearly superior outfit, their injuries and troubles be damned. My reasoning will be, Week 4 underdogs. They can't make me take this.
Miami -1. I took this one, who knows what the QB situation will actually be, but fortunately they're at home and the Titans are just awful. Will cheer for every misguided Levis lateral.
Jacksonville (+6) and Houston (-6) are both bounceback plays. This ordinarily makes this a "no play." At the same time, away dogs in J-ville's spot are 7-4 over the years, while Houston's home favorites are a 52% play. The mitigating factor is that Houston's play last week just doesn't match the score line. If I take either side, it'll be Jax and it will reflect a serious weakness of character.
Other plays this week:
Baltimore -2.5. "Twin Peaks" angle, and a fade of Buffalo.
Green Bay -2.5. A claw special. I'm a Packer fan and was looking for a reason. Or rather, another reason beyond my belief that Sam Darnold ain't coming into Lambeau and staying 2024 vintage.
0
To remove first post, remove entire topic.
First post of the season, bounceback teams are 1-1. I've tailed some of claw's picks, so am ahead, thanks to his work.
Week 4 is traditionally the bounceback angle's worst week, one of three losing weeks over the years on aggregate. Don't know why that is, but favorites do OK and dogs decidedly do not. And this year, it's the first week with multiple plays.
System plays are:
New England +10.5. I just can't do it. SF really need a W, and the Patriots are just not the kind of team to hang with a clearly superior outfit, their injuries and troubles be damned. My reasoning will be, Week 4 underdogs. They can't make me take this.
Miami -1. I took this one, who knows what the QB situation will actually be, but fortunately they're at home and the Titans are just awful. Will cheer for every misguided Levis lateral.
Jacksonville (+6) and Houston (-6) are both bounceback plays. This ordinarily makes this a "no play." At the same time, away dogs in J-ville's spot are 7-4 over the years, while Houston's home favorites are a 52% play. The mitigating factor is that Houston's play last week just doesn't match the score line. If I take either side, it'll be Jax and it will reflect a serious weakness of character.
Other plays this week:
Baltimore -2.5. "Twin Peaks" angle, and a fade of Buffalo.
Green Bay -2.5. A claw special. I'm a Packer fan and was looking for a reason. Or rather, another reason beyond my belief that Sam Darnold ain't coming into Lambeau and staying 2024 vintage.
Bill Belichick must be shooting up narcotics these days. He has found the fountain of youth in young pek pek with that sweet young thang by his side. I guess he didn't want to end up like his former boss Kraft in those highly disguised sex palaces.
BB said that 'Everyone has liked Darnold, except for the Jets'. Well he sucked when he was with the Jets and some of his performances with the other teams were disastrous also. It was just a flip remark by an old guy who carries a grudge for his own reasons.
I am a believer in Flores and that fine Vikings' D but never a believer in Darnold as that bozo cost me money over the years. No doubt he will revert one of these days and why not tomorrow? BOL
If she wins in November, may God help us all. The fate of the nation hangs in the balance.
0
@garbagetime
Bill Belichick must be shooting up narcotics these days. He has found the fountain of youth in young pek pek with that sweet young thang by his side. I guess he didn't want to end up like his former boss Kraft in those highly disguised sex palaces.
BB said that 'Everyone has liked Darnold, except for the Jets'. Well he sucked when he was with the Jets and some of his performances with the other teams were disastrous also. It was just a flip remark by an old guy who carries a grudge for his own reasons.
I am a believer in Flores and that fine Vikings' D but never a believer in Darnold as that bozo cost me money over the years. No doubt he will revert one of these days and why not tomorrow? BOL
Arizona -3.5. Influenced by vanzack. I also don't believe the Commandos became a team by beating Cincy on the road. Cincinnati clearly are not as good as people thought.
NY Jets -7, -130. Bought a point. I think the scoreline flattered Denver last week (one good drive for a TD, and the few others they sustained ended in FGs), and the Jets have a defense, too, are at home and have some weapons on offense to put some daylight between them and the Broncos. Two scores seemed a bit terrifying, though.
Holy shit, that's a lot of chalk for me.
0
Added, half a unit each:
Arizona -3.5. Influenced by vanzack. I also don't believe the Commandos became a team by beating Cincy on the road. Cincinnati clearly are not as good as people thought.
NY Jets -7, -130. Bought a point. I think the scoreline flattered Denver last week (one good drive for a TD, and the few others they sustained ended in FGs), and the Jets have a defense, too, are at home and have some weapons on offense to put some daylight between them and the Broncos. Two scores seemed a bit terrifying, though.
If you choose to make use of any information on this website including online sports betting services from any websites that may be featured on
this website, we strongly recommend that you carefully check your local laws before doing so.It is your sole responsibility to understand your local laws and observe them strictly.Covers does not provide
any advice or guidance as to the legality of online sports betting or other online gambling activities within your jurisdiction and you are responsible for complying with laws that are applicable to you in
your relevant locality.Covers disclaims all liability associated with your use of this website and use of any information contained on it.As a condition of using this website, you agree to hold the owner
of this website harmless from any claims arising from your use of any services on any third party website that may be featured by Covers.