NE should destroy them on paper, but man are there some bad trends against NE in this spot off 7 straight covers.
It's interesting you say that as you know I've always respected your opinion, and this is why books always get their 2-way action.
I think "on paper" Atlanta wins this game going away. But I'm scared to bet against New England if the Super Bowl is called anywhere close to how yesterday's game vs the Steelers was. I think the Pats finally got their first penalty of the game just before the end of the 3rd quarter, after they had amassed a 24 point lead...and I can assure you that wasn't the first play of the game where an infraction was committed. I wouldn't go as far as to say that Pittsburgh should have won that game, but the score wasn't overly indicative of anything that happened other than New England getting every break/call imaginable.
The Pats still have yet to impress me, and maybe they finally do on February 5th, but it would be a stark contrast to anything they've done thus far this season. I haven't decided what I'm doing with the game yet FWIW.
0
Quote Originally Posted by andarmac99:
NE should destroy them on paper, but man are there some bad trends against NE in this spot off 7 straight covers.
It's interesting you say that as you know I've always respected your opinion, and this is why books always get their 2-way action.
I think "on paper" Atlanta wins this game going away. But I'm scared to bet against New England if the Super Bowl is called anywhere close to how yesterday's game vs the Steelers was. I think the Pats finally got their first penalty of the game just before the end of the 3rd quarter, after they had amassed a 24 point lead...and I can assure you that wasn't the first play of the game where an infraction was committed. I wouldn't go as far as to say that Pittsburgh should have won that game, but the score wasn't overly indicative of anything that happened other than New England getting every break/call imaginable.
The Pats still have yet to impress me, and maybe they finally do on February 5th, but it would be a stark contrast to anything they've done thus far this season. I haven't decided what I'm doing with the game yet FWIW.
Careful here with these Patriots fellas I truly believe that Rodger Goodell and the NFL organization made a plea bargain with Tom Brady at the beginning of the year cutting him slack with deflate gate in exchange for a non-cover lay down type game in the Super Bowl if he does indeed appear which he is. Atlanta may just win this game straight up and if not then that safety in the second or third quarter may make the difference in the spread and the game. Sound crazy Eh? I don't think so as I absolutely Believe that all professional sports are manipulated and this game will be structured for the NFL's desired outcome which I believe having Atlanta in all of your gimmicks will be the most profitable play come Super Bowl Sunday. But hey what do I know? I just like to play so Good luck whatever direction you take fellas it's just my two cents
0
Careful here with these Patriots fellas I truly believe that Rodger Goodell and the NFL organization made a plea bargain with Tom Brady at the beginning of the year cutting him slack with deflate gate in exchange for a non-cover lay down type game in the Super Bowl if he does indeed appear which he is. Atlanta may just win this game straight up and if not then that safety in the second or third quarter may make the difference in the spread and the game. Sound crazy Eh? I don't think so as I absolutely Believe that all professional sports are manipulated and this game will be structured for the NFL's desired outcome which I believe having Atlanta in all of your gimmicks will be the most profitable play come Super Bowl Sunday. But hey what do I know? I just like to play so Good luck whatever direction you take fellas it's just my two cents
BB you're cold as ice man.. Pats is another loser. Stay away or go big on ATL money line. Speed kills, ATL has a young, strong and swarming opportune defense. Quinn knows this Pats team, he knows them well, he was SEA DC during that brutal SB loss and will get his revenge with his Falcon team. Shanahan is beasting as the OC. ATL will ring up the scoreboard like a pinball machine..
I laugh every time I read idiots all over posting about how Goodel is destined to hand thout trophy to the Pats. ATL manhandled one of the best passblocking lines yesterday and put some licks on Rodgers. Brady will get tagged. I'm seeing a double sick shocking ATL win here. I know I'm in the minority. All good.
By the way I had Pitt +6 yesterday and was blown away by the play of Pitts secondary (6 blown coverages) and Tomlin's preparation and lack of adjustments. Ben sailed many throws, Bell getting hurt before game broke their whole game plan. ATL is 100% healthy, physical and speed all over the field.
Yup. Cold as ice!
NBA Season (recommended picks)
6-1
NFL Season (recommended picks)
4-2
10-3 total for 77%
Last 6 NBA winners were all wire-to-wire covers and/or blowouts:
Lakers +1.5 at Sixers 100-89
Bulls -2.5 at home against Pistons 113-82
Spurs -5.5 at home against Raptors 110-82
Warriors -8 at home against Cavs 126-91
Warriors -4.5/-5 on the road against the Rockets 125-108
Thunder +5/+6 at Jazz 97-95
0
Quote Originally Posted by ActionMagnet:
BB you're cold as ice man.. Pats is another loser. Stay away or go big on ATL money line. Speed kills, ATL has a young, strong and swarming opportune defense. Quinn knows this Pats team, he knows them well, he was SEA DC during that brutal SB loss and will get his revenge with his Falcon team. Shanahan is beasting as the OC. ATL will ring up the scoreboard like a pinball machine..
I laugh every time I read idiots all over posting about how Goodel is destined to hand thout trophy to the Pats. ATL manhandled one of the best passblocking lines yesterday and put some licks on Rodgers. Brady will get tagged. I'm seeing a double sick shocking ATL win here. I know I'm in the minority. All good.
By the way I had Pitt +6 yesterday and was blown away by the play of Pitts secondary (6 blown coverages) and Tomlin's preparation and lack of adjustments. Ben sailed many throws, Bell getting hurt before game broke their whole game plan. ATL is 100% healthy, physical and speed all over the field.
Yup. Cold as ice!
NBA Season (recommended picks)
6-1
NFL Season (recommended picks)
4-2
10-3 total for 77%
Last 6 NBA winners were all wire-to-wire covers and/or blowouts:
Lakers +1.5 at Sixers 100-89
Bulls -2.5 at home against Pistons 113-82
Spurs -5.5 at home against Raptors 110-82
Warriors -8 at home against Cavs 126-91
Warriors -4.5/-5 on the road against the Rockets 125-108
Disagree, that seems to be consensus but their D is actually better than people give them credit for. Quinn has rebuilt/captured a similar environment to the D he architected in Seattle.
Should be a great game, either team can easily win it. Doesn't feel as obvious as Denver did LY though.
NE defense is not as good as Denver, but when Matty Ice walks into that game as the MVP, that will only fire up the opposing defense. And when the game is on the line, would you rather have a guy playing in his 7th SB or his first one?
0
Quote Originally Posted by Michfan15:
Disagree, that seems to be consensus but their D is actually better than people give them credit for. Quinn has rebuilt/captured a similar environment to the D he architected in Seattle.
Should be a great game, either team can easily win it. Doesn't feel as obvious as Denver did LY though.
NE defense is not as good as Denver, but when Matty Ice walks into that game as the MVP, that will only fire up the opposing defense. And when the game is on the line, would you rather have a guy playing in his 7th SB or his first one?
1) Their defense is much better than what Atlanta has seen thus far
(Seattle was a shell of itself, especially in the secondary) and GB had
no secondary or pass rush:)
i have two issues with this comment. one, at least statistically (although it's hard to decide what statistic accurately ranks nfl defenses), atlanta faced the following top defenses: 5th (twice), 2nd and 9th. They scored 36, 24, 32 and 42.
now, look at it the other way. NE has not faced an offense anywhere near what atlanta's has done this season. NE has faced one healthy top 10 offense. that was arizona in week one. so, NE has not faced one healthy top 10 offense since early september. of course i say healthy because they did play pitt twice but they played them with landry in the first game and without their best player in the second game.
so if you say atlanta hasn't faced a defense like this, i think that's incorrect. they have and they've scored a ton of points. and this atlanta offense is hi9storically good.
but if you say NE hasn't faced an offense like NE, i'd say that's true and they really haven't faced anything close to an offense like this.
it reminds me of the seattle/denver super bowl when denver hadn't faced a defense anywhere close to what seattle had. the super bowl is not a good time to face a unit much better than anything you've faced all season. and it showed when seattle dominated denver's offense that people thought was so good.
NE's defense is fine in the afc east and matched up with the nfc west which was pretty terrible this season. i'm not sure it's fine against this offense.
the only think that makes me pause when comparing this to the seattle/denver situation a few years ago is NE has belichik and two weeks. no one else has anything like that. they won't stop atlanta much, but he might be able slow atlanta down enough. NE should get their points and that could be enough. but if NE does slow atlanta down, it''ll be the first time they've done anything like that all season and again, the super bowl is never a good time for your first huge test.
0
1) Their defense is much better than what Atlanta has seen thus far
(Seattle was a shell of itself, especially in the secondary) and GB had
no secondary or pass rush:)
i have two issues with this comment. one, at least statistically (although it's hard to decide what statistic accurately ranks nfl defenses), atlanta faced the following top defenses: 5th (twice), 2nd and 9th. They scored 36, 24, 32 and 42.
now, look at it the other way. NE has not faced an offense anywhere near what atlanta's has done this season. NE has faced one healthy top 10 offense. that was arizona in week one. so, NE has not faced one healthy top 10 offense since early september. of course i say healthy because they did play pitt twice but they played them with landry in the first game and without their best player in the second game.
so if you say atlanta hasn't faced a defense like this, i think that's incorrect. they have and they've scored a ton of points. and this atlanta offense is hi9storically good.
but if you say NE hasn't faced an offense like NE, i'd say that's true and they really haven't faced anything close to an offense like this.
it reminds me of the seattle/denver super bowl when denver hadn't faced a defense anywhere close to what seattle had. the super bowl is not a good time to face a unit much better than anything you've faced all season. and it showed when seattle dominated denver's offense that people thought was so good.
NE's defense is fine in the afc east and matched up with the nfc west which was pretty terrible this season. i'm not sure it's fine against this offense.
the only think that makes me pause when comparing this to the seattle/denver situation a few years ago is NE has belichik and two weeks. no one else has anything like that. they won't stop atlanta much, but he might be able slow atlanta down enough. NE should get their points and that could be enough. but if NE does slow atlanta down, it''ll be the first time they've done anything like that all season and again, the super bowl is never a good time for your first huge test.
1) Their defense is much better than what Atlanta has seen thus far
(Seattle was a shell of itself, especially in the secondary) and GB had
no secondary or pass rush:)
meant to put that first part in italics as i copied it from a previous post and that was what i was responding to.
0
1) Their defense is much better than what Atlanta has seen thus far
(Seattle was a shell of itself, especially in the secondary) and GB had
no secondary or pass rush:)
meant to put that first part in italics as i copied it from a previous post and that was what i was responding to.
According to Steve Fezzik you will never see an Atlanta + 3.5 available throughout the betting cycle .. maybe offshore but not in Vegas .. the juice is already moving though
0
According to Steve Fezzik you will never see an Atlanta + 3.5 available throughout the betting cycle .. maybe offshore but not in Vegas .. the juice is already moving though
1) Their defense is much better than what Atlanta has seen thus far
(Seattle was a shell of itself, especially in the secondary) and GB had
no secondary or pass rush:)
i have two issues with this comment. one, at least statistically (although it's hard to decide what statistic accurately ranks nfl defenses), atlanta faced the following top defenses: 5th (twice), 2nd and 9th. They scored 36, 24, 32 and 42.
now, look at it the other way. NE has not faced an offense anywhere near what atlanta's has done this season. NE has faced one healthy top 10 offense. that was arizona in week one. so, NE has not faced one healthy top 10 offense since early september. of course i say healthy because they did play pitt twice but they played them with landry in the first game and without their best player in the second game.
so if you say atlanta hasn't faced a defense like this, i think that's incorrect. they have and they've scored a ton of points. and this atlanta offense is hi9storically good.
but if you say NE hasn't faced an offense like NE, i'd say that's true and they really haven't faced anything close to an offense like this.
it reminds me of the seattle/denver super bowl when denver hadn't faced a defense anywhere close to what seattle had. the super bowl is not a good time to face a unit much better than anything you've faced all season. and it showed when seattle dominated denver's offense that people thought was so good.
NE's defense is fine in the afc east and matched up with the nfc west which was pretty terrible this season. i'm not sure it's fine against this offense.
the only think that makes me pause when comparing this to the seattle/denver situation a few years ago is NE has belichik and two weeks. no one else has anything like that. they won't stop atlanta much, but he might be able slow atlanta down enough. NE should get their points and that could be enough. but if NE does slow atlanta down, it''ll be the first time they've done anything like that all season and again, the super bowl is never a good time for your first huge test.
This stat is so skewed that it is almost laughable. If you agree with me, and maybe you don't, that the best defense is a good offense, then you should look at the offenses of those defensive juggernauts you just mentioned. NE's offense is light years ahead of the Rams, Seattle and Denver, so if you are betting Atlanta, you should not bet on Atlanta based on that trend.
0
Quote Originally Posted by ClubDirt:
1) Their defense is much better than what Atlanta has seen thus far
(Seattle was a shell of itself, especially in the secondary) and GB had
no secondary or pass rush:)
i have two issues with this comment. one, at least statistically (although it's hard to decide what statistic accurately ranks nfl defenses), atlanta faced the following top defenses: 5th (twice), 2nd and 9th. They scored 36, 24, 32 and 42.
now, look at it the other way. NE has not faced an offense anywhere near what atlanta's has done this season. NE has faced one healthy top 10 offense. that was arizona in week one. so, NE has not faced one healthy top 10 offense since early september. of course i say healthy because they did play pitt twice but they played them with landry in the first game and without their best player in the second game.
so if you say atlanta hasn't faced a defense like this, i think that's incorrect. they have and they've scored a ton of points. and this atlanta offense is hi9storically good.
but if you say NE hasn't faced an offense like NE, i'd say that's true and they really haven't faced anything close to an offense like this.
it reminds me of the seattle/denver super bowl when denver hadn't faced a defense anywhere close to what seattle had. the super bowl is not a good time to face a unit much better than anything you've faced all season. and it showed when seattle dominated denver's offense that people thought was so good.
NE's defense is fine in the afc east and matched up with the nfc west which was pretty terrible this season. i'm not sure it's fine against this offense.
the only think that makes me pause when comparing this to the seattle/denver situation a few years ago is NE has belichik and two weeks. no one else has anything like that. they won't stop atlanta much, but he might be able slow atlanta down enough. NE should get their points and that could be enough. but if NE does slow atlanta down, it''ll be the first time they've done anything like that all season and again, the super bowl is never a good time for your first huge test.
This stat is so skewed that it is almost laughable. If you agree with me, and maybe you don't, that the best defense is a good offense, then you should look at the offenses of those defensive juggernauts you just mentioned. NE's offense is light years ahead of the Rams, Seattle and Denver, so if you are betting Atlanta, you should not bet on Atlanta based on that trend.
This stat is so skewed that it is almost laughable. If you agree with me, and maybe you don't, that the best defense is a good offense, then you should look at the offenses of those defensive juggernauts you just mentioned. NE's offense is light years ahead of the Rams, Seattle and Denver, so if you are betting Atlanta, you should not bet on Atlanta based on that trend.
i don't think i'm following you here. first, i didn't mention any trend. what i said has nothing to do with any trend or trend betting. second, i didn't even mention a stat but i did refer to statistical rankings of defenses, whichever measure you want to use. and those defenses i referred to are likely going to be in the top 10 of most defensive statistical measures. third, i don't understand what it means to say NE's offense is light years ahead of the rams, seattle and denver.
0
Quote Originally Posted by begginerboy:
This stat is so skewed that it is almost laughable. If you agree with me, and maybe you don't, that the best defense is a good offense, then you should look at the offenses of those defensive juggernauts you just mentioned. NE's offense is light years ahead of the Rams, Seattle and Denver, so if you are betting Atlanta, you should not bet on Atlanta based on that trend.
i don't think i'm following you here. first, i didn't mention any trend. what i said has nothing to do with any trend or trend betting. second, i didn't even mention a stat but i did refer to statistical rankings of defenses, whichever measure you want to use. and those defenses i referred to are likely going to be in the top 10 of most defensive statistical measures. third, i don't understand what it means to say NE's offense is light years ahead of the rams, seattle and denver.
I'd say they are due for a blowout win. Hard for me to see the Falcons blowing them out and hard for me to see NE in yet another close SB. That would make 7 SBs they were in that were decided by 4 or less points. Incredible if it happens:
Good Luck
So you're basically gunning for the trend (which happens to be coincidental, by the way) to buck and then giving a few observations to back that up? I think you're better off finding out which team has a better chance of exploiting the other team's defense, use that to back up your reasoning and roll with your pick there.
0
Quote Originally Posted by begginerboy:
I'd say they are due for a blowout win. Hard for me to see the Falcons blowing them out and hard for me to see NE in yet another close SB. That would make 7 SBs they were in that were decided by 4 or less points. Incredible if it happens:
Good Luck
So you're basically gunning for the trend (which happens to be coincidental, by the way) to buck and then giving a few observations to back that up? I think you're better off finding out which team has a better chance of exploiting the other team's defense, use that to back up your reasoning and roll with your pick there.
It's interesting you say that as you know I've always respected your opinion, and this is why books always get their 2-way action.
I think "on paper" Atlanta wins this game going away. But I'm scared to bet against New England if the Super Bowl is called anywhere close to how yesterday's game vs the Steelers was. I think the Pats finally got their first penalty of the game just before the end of the 3rd quarter, after they had amassed a 24 point lead...and I can assure you that wasn't the first play of the game where an infraction was committed. I wouldn't go as far as to say that Pittsburgh should have won that game, but the score wasn't overly indicative of anything that happened other than New England getting every break/call imaginable.
The Pats still have yet to impress me, and maybe they finally do on February 5th, but it would be a stark contrast to anything they've done thus far this season. I haven't decided what I'm doing with the game yet FWIW.
Have always respected your opinion as well, but would love to hear how Atlanta is wins going away on paper? I can't see anything to suggest that.
Refs had no impact on that game. PIT had 1 more penalty for 9 more yards. Don't see anyone but PIT backers complaining about the refs. NE raped them.
0
Quote Originally Posted by P4P:
It's interesting you say that as you know I've always respected your opinion, and this is why books always get their 2-way action.
I think "on paper" Atlanta wins this game going away. But I'm scared to bet against New England if the Super Bowl is called anywhere close to how yesterday's game vs the Steelers was. I think the Pats finally got their first penalty of the game just before the end of the 3rd quarter, after they had amassed a 24 point lead...and I can assure you that wasn't the first play of the game where an infraction was committed. I wouldn't go as far as to say that Pittsburgh should have won that game, but the score wasn't overly indicative of anything that happened other than New England getting every break/call imaginable.
The Pats still have yet to impress me, and maybe they finally do on February 5th, but it would be a stark contrast to anything they've done thus far this season. I haven't decided what I'm doing with the game yet FWIW.
Have always respected your opinion as well, but would love to hear how Atlanta is wins going away on paper? I can't see anything to suggest that.
Refs had no impact on that game. PIT had 1 more penalty for 9 more yards. Don't see anyone but PIT backers complaining about the refs. NE raped them.
Have always respected your opinion as well, but would love to hear how Atlanta is wins going away on paper? I can't see anything to suggest that.
Refs had no impact on that game. PIT had 1 more penalty for 9 more yards. Don't see anyone but PIT backers complaining about the refs. NE raped them.
You're telling me the Brady fumble had zero effect on that game? The Steelers would have had the ball at midfield down 1 score. And that ignores the previously dropped TD pass and the inexplicable play-calling from 1st and goal at the half yard line. Pittsburgh shot themselves in the foot all night, but there was a couple times that drives probably ended prematurely due to the refs swallowing their whistles.
That game aside, the Super Bowl comes down to how much one buys the "bend, but don't break" Pats defense. Maybe Belichick is just happy to concede yardage between the 20's and that's just their plan...or maybe their 32nd-ranked SOS and complete lack of playing respectable quarterbacks/offenses has something to do with teams' inability to finish those drives. Prior to last weekend, the Pats had played exactly one "good" team, and lost at home, to Seattle. Keep in mind this wasn't the same Seahawks team we've seen the past couple of seasons, and their offense was especially putrid on the road (3 points at St Louis, 6 points in 5 quarters at Arizona, 5 points at Tampa, and 10 points at Green Bay). That Seattle team went into Foxborough and absolutely abused the "vaunted" Patriots' D.
Last week was the only other respectable offense that New England faced all year, and we obviously saw that game very differently, but the Steelers moved the ball just fine (despite losing their best offensive player in the first quarter and most of their receivers having serious cases of the dropsies). Some egregious play-calling and possibly even more egregious drops kept their scoring down, but I don't think that had much to do with the Pats' D.
Now they face Atlanta's historically great offense, and I just don't see them being able to get stops. The Falcons, unlike teams quarterbacked by Brock Osweiler, Charlie Whitehurst, Jared Goff, and Landry Jones that the Pats have feasted on all season, don't just move the ball between the 20's...they finish drives. And they've done so against any defense they've faced. Liking the Pats in this game is making a huge leap of faith that Matt Ryan's offense is going to perform closer to these horrible offenses New England has faced all season than what they've done for 19 straight weeks. Good luck with that...
That being said, it's not like the Falcons defense is good either; they're not. And for anyone backing Atlanta that is clearly the biggest concern. Personally I feel more confident in them slowing Brady down enough to get the job done than I do with the Pats' D slowing Atlanta's offense down. This would be a much more interesting matchup in my opinion if you pitted last year's Broncos vs this Atlanta team. They might be able to do some damage. But you're not stopping a historically good offense with the cast of misfits masquerading as the "statistically ranked best defense" in the league that the Pats put out on a weekly basis.
Again, I still haven't placed a bet. If anything I might lean towards the Atlanta team total over 27.5 more than anything. They've eclipsed that number in 14/18 games this season and as you can see from all of the aforementioned, I don't have any reason to believe New England has the capability to stop them from making that 15/19.
0
Quote Originally Posted by andarmac99:
Have always respected your opinion as well, but would love to hear how Atlanta is wins going away on paper? I can't see anything to suggest that.
Refs had no impact on that game. PIT had 1 more penalty for 9 more yards. Don't see anyone but PIT backers complaining about the refs. NE raped them.
You're telling me the Brady fumble had zero effect on that game? The Steelers would have had the ball at midfield down 1 score. And that ignores the previously dropped TD pass and the inexplicable play-calling from 1st and goal at the half yard line. Pittsburgh shot themselves in the foot all night, but there was a couple times that drives probably ended prematurely due to the refs swallowing their whistles.
That game aside, the Super Bowl comes down to how much one buys the "bend, but don't break" Pats defense. Maybe Belichick is just happy to concede yardage between the 20's and that's just their plan...or maybe their 32nd-ranked SOS and complete lack of playing respectable quarterbacks/offenses has something to do with teams' inability to finish those drives. Prior to last weekend, the Pats had played exactly one "good" team, and lost at home, to Seattle. Keep in mind this wasn't the same Seahawks team we've seen the past couple of seasons, and their offense was especially putrid on the road (3 points at St Louis, 6 points in 5 quarters at Arizona, 5 points at Tampa, and 10 points at Green Bay). That Seattle team went into Foxborough and absolutely abused the "vaunted" Patriots' D.
Last week was the only other respectable offense that New England faced all year, and we obviously saw that game very differently, but the Steelers moved the ball just fine (despite losing their best offensive player in the first quarter and most of their receivers having serious cases of the dropsies). Some egregious play-calling and possibly even more egregious drops kept their scoring down, but I don't think that had much to do with the Pats' D.
Now they face Atlanta's historically great offense, and I just don't see them being able to get stops. The Falcons, unlike teams quarterbacked by Brock Osweiler, Charlie Whitehurst, Jared Goff, and Landry Jones that the Pats have feasted on all season, don't just move the ball between the 20's...they finish drives. And they've done so against any defense they've faced. Liking the Pats in this game is making a huge leap of faith that Matt Ryan's offense is going to perform closer to these horrible offenses New England has faced all season than what they've done for 19 straight weeks. Good luck with that...
That being said, it's not like the Falcons defense is good either; they're not. And for anyone backing Atlanta that is clearly the biggest concern. Personally I feel more confident in them slowing Brady down enough to get the job done than I do with the Pats' D slowing Atlanta's offense down. This would be a much more interesting matchup in my opinion if you pitted last year's Broncos vs this Atlanta team. They might be able to do some damage. But you're not stopping a historically good offense with the cast of misfits masquerading as the "statistically ranked best defense" in the league that the Pats put out on a weekly basis.
Again, I still haven't placed a bet. If anything I might lean towards the Atlanta team total over 27.5 more than anything. They've eclipsed that number in 14/18 games this season and as you can see from all of the aforementioned, I don't have any reason to believe New England has the capability to stop them from making that 15/19.
BB you're cold as ice man.. Pats is another loser. Stay away or go big on ATL money line. Speed kills, ATL has a young, strong and swarming opportune defense. Quinn knows this Pats team, he knows them well, he was SEA DC during that brutal SB loss and will get his revenge with his Falcon team. Shanahan is beasting as the OC. ATL will ring up the scoreboard like a pinball machine..
I laugh every time I read idiots all over posting about how Goodel is destined to hand thout trophy to the Pats. ATL manhandled one of the best passblocking lines yesterday and put some licks on Rodgers. Brady will get tagged. I'm seeing a double sick shocking ATL win here. I know I'm in the minority. All good.
By the way I had Pitt +6 yesterday and was blown away by the play of Pitts secondary (6 blown coverages) and Tomlin's preparation and lack of adjustments. Ben sailed many throws, Bell getting hurt before game broke their whole game plan. ATL is 100% healthy, physical and speed all over the field.
you, sir, are correct. ATL with a convincing win.
0
Quote Originally Posted by ActionMagnet:
BB you're cold as ice man.. Pats is another loser. Stay away or go big on ATL money line. Speed kills, ATL has a young, strong and swarming opportune defense. Quinn knows this Pats team, he knows them well, he was SEA DC during that brutal SB loss and will get his revenge with his Falcon team. Shanahan is beasting as the OC. ATL will ring up the scoreboard like a pinball machine..
I laugh every time I read idiots all over posting about how Goodel is destined to hand thout trophy to the Pats. ATL manhandled one of the best passblocking lines yesterday and put some licks on Rodgers. Brady will get tagged. I'm seeing a double sick shocking ATL win here. I know I'm in the minority. All good.
By the way I had Pitt +6 yesterday and was blown away by the play of Pitts secondary (6 blown coverages) and Tomlin's preparation and lack of adjustments. Ben sailed many throws, Bell getting hurt before game broke their whole game plan. ATL is 100% healthy, physical and speed all over the field.
NE defense is not as good as Denver, but when Matty Ice walks into that game as the MVP, that will only fire up the opposing defense. And when the game is on the line, would you rather have a guy playing in his 7th SB or his first one?
first.
0
Quote Originally Posted by begginerboy:
NE defense is not as good as Denver, but when Matty Ice walks into that game as the MVP, that will only fire up the opposing defense. And when the game is on the line, would you rather have a guy playing in his 7th SB or his first one?
You're telling me the Brady fumble had zero effect on that game? The Steelers would have had the ball at midfield down 1 score. And that ignores the previously dropped TD pass and the inexplicable play-calling from 1st and goal at the half yard line. Pittsburgh shot themselves in the foot all night, but there was a couple times that drives probably ended prematurely due to the refs swallowing their whistles.
That game aside, the Super Bowl comes down to how much one buys the "bend, but don't break" Pats defense. Maybe Belichick is just happy to concede yardage between the 20's and that's just their plan...or maybe their 32nd-ranked SOS and complete lack of playing respectable quarterbacks/offenses has something to do with teams' inability to finish those drives. Prior to last weekend, the Pats had played exactly one "good" team, and lost at home, to Seattle. Keep in mind this wasn't the same Seahawks team we've seen the past couple of seasons, and their offense was especially putrid on the road (3 points at St Louis, 6 points in 5 quarters at Arizona, 5 points at Tampa, and 10 points at Green Bay). That Seattle team went into Foxborough and absolutely abused the "vaunted" Patriots' D.
Last week was the only other respectable offense that New England faced all year, and we obviously saw that game very differently, but the Steelers moved the ball just fine (despite losing their best offensive player in the first quarter and most of their receivers having serious cases of the dropsies). Some egregious play-calling and possibly even more egregious drops kept their scoring down, but I don't think that had much to do with the Pats' D.
Now they face Atlanta's historically great offense, and I just don't see them being able to get stops. The Falcons, unlike teams quarterbacked by Brock Osweiler, Charlie Whitehurst, Jared Goff, and Landry Jones that the Pats have feasted on all season, don't just move the ball between the 20's...they finish drives. And they've done so against any defense they've faced. Liking the Pats in this game is making a huge leap of faith that Matt Ryan's offense is going to perform closer to these horrible offenses New England has faced all season than what they've done for 19 straight weeks. Good luck with that...
That being said, it's not like the Falcons defense is good either; they're not. And for anyone backing Atlanta that is clearly the biggest concern. Personally I feel more confident in them slowing Brady down enough to get the job done than I do with the Pats' D slowing Atlanta's offense down. This would be a much more interesting matchup in my opinion if you pitted last year's Broncos vs this Atlanta team. They might be able to do some damage. But you're not stopping a historically good offense with the cast of misfits masquerading as the "statistically ranked best defense" in the league that the Pats put out on a weekly basis.
Again, I still haven't placed a bet. If anything I might lean towards the Atlanta team total over 27.5 more than anything. They've eclipsed that number in 14/18 games this season and as you can see from all of the aforementioned, I don't have any reason to believe New England has the capability to stop them from making that 15/19.
Great reply.
We are probably going to see this game very differently. I've watched every Pats game since Mo Lewis hit Drew Bledsoe and know this team inside and out, and Brady is going to eviscerate that defense. Belichick with 2 weeks and a better coaching staff will find a few stops and that's all they'll need. Pats defense may not be great but they are certainly better than ATL. Better coach, QB, and defense. People are way overthinking this. Will try to post a writeup before the game.
0
Quote Originally Posted by P4P:
You're telling me the Brady fumble had zero effect on that game? The Steelers would have had the ball at midfield down 1 score. And that ignores the previously dropped TD pass and the inexplicable play-calling from 1st and goal at the half yard line. Pittsburgh shot themselves in the foot all night, but there was a couple times that drives probably ended prematurely due to the refs swallowing their whistles.
That game aside, the Super Bowl comes down to how much one buys the "bend, but don't break" Pats defense. Maybe Belichick is just happy to concede yardage between the 20's and that's just their plan...or maybe their 32nd-ranked SOS and complete lack of playing respectable quarterbacks/offenses has something to do with teams' inability to finish those drives. Prior to last weekend, the Pats had played exactly one "good" team, and lost at home, to Seattle. Keep in mind this wasn't the same Seahawks team we've seen the past couple of seasons, and their offense was especially putrid on the road (3 points at St Louis, 6 points in 5 quarters at Arizona, 5 points at Tampa, and 10 points at Green Bay). That Seattle team went into Foxborough and absolutely abused the "vaunted" Patriots' D.
Last week was the only other respectable offense that New England faced all year, and we obviously saw that game very differently, but the Steelers moved the ball just fine (despite losing their best offensive player in the first quarter and most of their receivers having serious cases of the dropsies). Some egregious play-calling and possibly even more egregious drops kept their scoring down, but I don't think that had much to do with the Pats' D.
Now they face Atlanta's historically great offense, and I just don't see them being able to get stops. The Falcons, unlike teams quarterbacked by Brock Osweiler, Charlie Whitehurst, Jared Goff, and Landry Jones that the Pats have feasted on all season, don't just move the ball between the 20's...they finish drives. And they've done so against any defense they've faced. Liking the Pats in this game is making a huge leap of faith that Matt Ryan's offense is going to perform closer to these horrible offenses New England has faced all season than what they've done for 19 straight weeks. Good luck with that...
That being said, it's not like the Falcons defense is good either; they're not. And for anyone backing Atlanta that is clearly the biggest concern. Personally I feel more confident in them slowing Brady down enough to get the job done than I do with the Pats' D slowing Atlanta's offense down. This would be a much more interesting matchup in my opinion if you pitted last year's Broncos vs this Atlanta team. They might be able to do some damage. But you're not stopping a historically good offense with the cast of misfits masquerading as the "statistically ranked best defense" in the league that the Pats put out on a weekly basis.
Again, I still haven't placed a bet. If anything I might lean towards the Atlanta team total over 27.5 more than anything. They've eclipsed that number in 14/18 games this season and as you can see from all of the aforementioned, I don't have any reason to believe New England has the capability to stop them from making that 15/19.
Great reply.
We are probably going to see this game very differently. I've watched every Pats game since Mo Lewis hit Drew Bledsoe and know this team inside and out, and Brady is going to eviscerate that defense. Belichick with 2 weeks and a better coaching staff will find a few stops and that's all they'll need. Pats defense may not be great but they are certainly better than ATL. Better coach, QB, and defense. People are way overthinking this. Will try to post a writeup before the game.
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.
whatever direction you take fellas it's just my two cents
Hot Forum Topics
