Colin Cowherd had an interesting theory on Pats/Packers and it really is starting to make sense

This is not a pick. I probably won't even bet on the game. I am relaying information for conversation.

I listen to Colin Cowherd and when it comes to sports betting talk on the radio, he is the best in the business. He cares about the spread and knows what lines mean.

He has a GAMBLING show on ESPN for god's sake that they call a 'football' show.

Anyhow, he made a comment about the Pats Pack and it got me thinking about an example from the NBA:

He believes the Packers will win and cover for a singular reason.

It's not because the Pats are worse or can't win this game on the road and/or can't cover.

It's because he doesn't believe Belichick wants to 'show his hand' in this game.

The favorites to reach the Super Bowl right now? Packers/Pats. We all know this. 

If the Pats beat the Packers and extend their winning streak to 8 games, what's left?

They've beat the best in the league and they continue to win everything (and remember what winning everything did to them when they went to the SB on an 18 game win streak).

Therefore, Belichick will take it down a notch. He actually might be hoping to see the Packers best, lose, and keep his team hungry. We can never know this but masterminds like Bill and Pop can do things like this.

 

Perfect example last year from the NBA on this one.

The Spurs went on a 19 game win streak near the end of the season. No one could beat them.

Then they played the Thunder at the Thunder. The Thunder were basically the co-favorites to win the championship (with the Heat at the time) and the Spurs odds were dropping like an anvil.

The line for that game? Opened at -4.5 @ OKC. Many thought that line was high for the Spurs and took the points.

This line here? Opened at -3.5 (in many places) @ GB. Many thought the line was high and jumped on the Pats

Both are away games and both pretty surprising lines that make it VERY hard NOT to take the team on the winning streak.

Popovich, coach of the Spurs, is a genius. 

His team lost 106-94. Not a terrible blowout, and not an 20 game winning streak extending win.

The Thunder celebrated and laid it all out that day while the Spurs actually sounded like they were a bit relieved the streak was over and they could 'reset' and focus on the playoffs.

Who did the Spurs meat in the playoffs? The Thunder.

Who won the series? The Spurs.

Who won the championship? The Spurs.

Many believe Pop made a decision to take it down a notch in that OKC game and go into the playoffs hungry without beating a team they will likely see again. Instead, the Thunder broke the mighty Spurs winning streak and they met in the Western Conference Finals with all the confidence in the world. Injuries aside, they ended up losing the series.

The same could apply to this Pats game.

Take it down a notch, end the winning streak, and go into the playoffs hungry.

Don't THROW the game but don't go full bore either.

Let the Packers believe they are on top of the world, have them show their hand and if you meet them in the Super Bowl, they have 'shown their hand'.

Therefore, there is justification to lay a big number like -3.5 with the Packers with the Packers at home and the Pats attempting a reset to stay hungry (now an even bigger bargain at 3 and even 2.5 so it's even more of a bargain).

 

What is your opinion? 

Packers -3. Might be wise to buy the hook.

No way Brady would start changing every play if he thought his coach was sandbagging I believe GB wins but it will not be because they were given it on a silver plate

i currently like GB, but, let me ask u...

No hook anymore. Now at -2.5 in many places.

i understand the general thinking but this could also be labeled "nfl game of the year".  you don't know what the future holds injurywise etc.  these coaches are competitors and games on this level don't come around that often.  These are games coaches want.

No sandbagging by the players involved. It comes down the playcalling what Bill wants to show the other team.

Pop did the same with sets and substitutions and perhaps how he ran his practices.

All conjecture sure, but many who know Pop for all these years suspected as much.

Great post.        And Colin does a better than decent job at analyzing things and giving his opinion on lines. I will be on the Patriots today, but this makes good sense.

Wrong Forum - please move to General Disussion.  

I see what you mean.

But the Pats weren't really on a massive win streak at that time (4) and didn't have much of anything locked up in terms of home field.

Now they have a tie-breaker at Denver in the playoffs if it should come to that and a game in New England is far more important than 'showing your hand' to a team you meet in the SB on a neutral field (possibly the Packers).

Very true. Just a theory.

I'm an MVP. You're a veteran. I tell you where things should and shouldn't be posted.

scalabrine

great read...btw,   this does belong in this forum and not in the general discussion.    

Food for thought for sure. Thanks for sharing it Scalabrine. 

and mess around with not getting a home bye?  I'm not sure any coach in the league would be that dumb.  Plus the patriots would need to get lucky to get to the superbowl anyways the way things have gone for them in the postseason of late.

I heard the same thing .I respectfully disagree with Cowherd Pats want to lock up home field throughout and Pats and Coach will keep their foot on the pedal. Remember their undefeated season this team goes for the kill each and every week.

great info 

Funniest thing I have read all day- ever hear of game film? The Packers have seen everything the Pats have to offer- at this point in the season it is all about execution- Pats want home field advantage- if they had that locked up maybe they might take it easy- if they lose today it will be because of a great effort by the Packers- 

It was also stated on his show that the Pats thru weeks 9-14 since 2010 have only lost 3 games. Something like 30-3. Don't believe that stat is ats though. Not sure.

Dumbest theory I ever heard. New England wants to have home field in the playoffs. Enough said.

You lost me when you said that Cowherd is the best in the business. The guy is a prized person!

not a bad theory, but bball and football seasons are totally different ballgames. Nfl seasons dont have games to spare when home field & playoff seeding is on the line. Pop and Belicheck are both clearly the best at what they do, so you never really know what their master plan is.. but I cant imagine the Pats (players and coaches) coming out with a 100% effort today.