All Forums | NFL Betting

My take on Championship weekend

...
Participants:
Search model icon
Views: 8453
Posts: 159
 
MVP
Participation Meter
Joined: Apr, 2007
Posts: 16932
Posted: #101
Kurt Warner in his career against Jim Johnson:

4 games, 1-3 record (only win was a FG in OT) 241 YPG, 4 TD, 7 INT, 16 sacks, 65.1 QB rating. Highest rating in 1 game was 79.9.

Games from 1 when he was with Arizona, 1 with the Giants and 2 with the Rams.
 
Hall of Fame
Participation Meter
Joined: Feb, 2007
Posts: 20628
Posted: #102
TEXANCAPPER


Your a Dick for taking up so much space between your responses.

I like reading what you say, but HATE that you have to draw attention to yourself by going into these threads and shining the light on yourself by using HUGE spacing.
 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Aug, 2007
Posts: 2196
Posted: #103
Quote Originally Posted by Ice4Blood:

yea Brass... cuz Westbrook is so turnover prone...
 
Captain
Participation Meter
Joined: Dec, 2008
Posts: 7850
Posted: #104
Quote Originally Posted by Ice4Blood:

so far i have learned that:
 
Westbrook is not even in the same league as Michael Turner or Deangelo Williams (two RBs that had their first ever productive seasons)...
 
Donovan McNabb would not have benefitted at all from the presence of Fitz or Boldin (if those two were on the Eagles)...
 
that the wind in NY adversely affects the home team, but not the road team...
 
and that the Eagles defense only APPEARS to be better than the Cards defense because the Eagles got to play against weaker offenses (like the Cowboys twice, Giants 3 times, Falcons, Bears, 49ers and Seahawks [the Cards played both of these teams twice, by the way], and oh yea... Arizona)...
 
 
i feel my brain being enlarged with every new tidbit of information...


you forgot to mention that they played Washington 2 times

 
MVP
Participation Meter
Joined: Apr, 2007
Posts: 16932
Posted: #105
Quote Originally Posted by Ice4Blood:

so far i have learned that:
 
Westbrook is not even in the same league as Michael Turner or Deangelo Williams (two RBs that had their first ever productive seasons)...
 
Donovan McNabb would not have benefitted at all from the presence of Fitz or Boldin (if those two were on the Eagles)...
 
that the wind in NY adversely affects the home team, but not the road team...
 
and that the Eagles defense only APPEARS to be better than the Cards defense because the Eagles got to play against weaker offenses (like the Cowboys twice, Giants 3 times, Falcons, Bears, 49ers and Seahawks [the Cards played both of these teams twice, by the way], and oh yea... Arizona)...
 
 
i feel my brain being enlarged with every new tidbit of information...





 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Jun, 2008
Posts: 1560
Posted: #106
Quote Originally Posted by AlphaDawg73:

I think is is toooo funny that people are on the Arizona bandwagon!  If someone wants to make the argument that the cards will keep it within 3,  I could stand to entertain that thought but the cards running away with it is down right hilarious.  First,  PHI has already embarassed them once.  Second, has the cards beat a good defense.  MINN and WASH both beat 'em with their mediocre QB.  NYG which PHI beat handled them.  Beating teams like Buff, SF twice and the Rams twice is hardly a measure of one dominance.   FYI the game in which PHI crushed ARIZ in ARIZ was on a short week.  What will the eagles D do with a full week to prepare?

FYI the game in which PHI crushed ARIZ was in PHILLY.

 
Captain
Participation Meter
Joined: Dec, 2008
Posts: 5702
Posted: #107
Quote Originally Posted by Cooler999:

TEXANCAPPER


Your a Dick for taking up so much space between your responses.

I like reading what you say, but HATE that you have to draw attention to yourself by going into these threads and shining the light on yourself by using HUGE spacing.

 

I agree, he is a Dick. F him,

 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Nov, 2006
Posts: 3457
Posted: #108
Sorry 3rd, I can't go with the Cards after what I have compared throughout the seasona and post season between these two teams........and more so......I can't put my money of the Cubs of the NFL.  GL to you though bro.....
 
Captain
Participation Meter
Joined: Dec, 2008
Posts: 5702
Posted: #109
With ya on Arizona.
 
Prospect
Participation Meter
Joined: Sep, 2008
Posts: 171
Posted: #110
Warner=vs  DEFENSE
 
OK Arizona beat SF twice, Rams twice, and Seatle twice,---laughs, soooooooooo not impressed!!!!!!  Six of their wins came from teams with a combined record of 13-35
add in Buff and an early win against MIA and should I add a laughable no Romo Dallas game in OT ----they play a decent pats team in the snow and get handled-----wake up guys------totally different leagues here pass every down and eagles still win easily   The first game was on a short week. The eagles have all week to see how to tighten the screws on Warner and company. I love a happy ending too but Dawkins and Asante Samuel
 
Banned
Participation Meter
Joined: Nov, 2006
Posts: 23333
Posted: #111
I see someone was listening to Mike Missanelli today.
 
Look, I think the Eagles are a fraud on offense with a decent defense, that's my opinion. I also don't think they are a very good road team, and they got a lot of help from the opponent to win their last two. I have the same opinion of Baltimore. You Eagle backers think the same about Arizona. You think the Eagles are on a roll, I think Arizona is on a roll. The truth probably lies somewhere in the middle. I'll gladly take the points with the home team that has consisitently moved the ball.
The back & forth was fun, but now it's getting ugly like it usually does around here. I'm taking Zona with the points, and a small play on the ML, and we'll know by Sunday night how that turned out.
 
The best play on the board Sunday is the Steelers, and play that one over too, weather permitting. I'll post my bets on Sunday like I always do, good luck guys.
 
MVP
Participation Meter
Joined: Apr, 2007
Posts: 16932
Posted: #112
Quote Originally Posted by 3rd_and_Long:

I see someone was listening to Mike Missanelli today.
 
Look, I think the Eagles are a fraud on offense with a decent defense, that's my opinion. I also don't think they are a very good road team, and they got a lot of help from the opponent to win their last two. I have the same opinion of Baltimore. You Eagle backers think the same about Arizona. You think the Eagles are on a roll, I think Arizona is on a roll. The truth probably lies somewhere in the middle. I'll gladly take the points with the home team that has consisitently moved the ball.
The back & forth was fun, but now it's getting ugly like it usually does around here. I'm taking Zona with the points, and a small play on the ML, and we'll know by Sunday night how that turned out.
 
The best play on the board Sunday is the Steelers, and play that one over too, weather permitting. I'll post my bets on Sunday like I always do, good luck guys.



 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: May, 2006
Posts: 3674
Posted: #113
Quote Originally Posted by 3rd_and_Long:

I've made my decisions, I'll post my plays when I make them. The back & forth here is a complete waste of time because Eagle backers refuse to acknowledge any of the Birds deficiencies. You're right, the Eagles are fucking awesome and are nothing short of a team of destiny. They will run all over the Cardinals in the desert. They should just cancel the game and award them the Super Bowl while they're at it.
 
Have a nice week everybody, I'll be back Sunday.  


Of course the eagles have deficiencies, just have way fewer than the cards.

The biggest joke is you're big beef with the eagles is "why are they so great they just beat one dimensional teams". many, rightly, point out that az is as one-dimensional as they come, and you make attempt some nonsensical argument that az is not one dimensional.

Hatred not a good way to cap, just as bad as homerism.

Obviously, the eagles are the better team, you know that. 

If the eagles are even or win the turnover battle, they win by DD,book it.


 
All-Star
Participation Meter
Joined: Nov, 2003
Posts: 14301
Posted: #114
Quote Originally Posted by Cooler999:

TEXANCAPPER


Your a Dick for taking up so much space between your responses.

I like reading what you say, but HATE that you have to draw attention to yourself by going into these threads and shining the light on yourself by using HUGE spacing.

 

Dude, I've been posting on covers since 03..that's almost 6yrs with about 13,500 posts. You have guys on here for 2-3 yrs and they have 15K plus posts. I may disagree with alot of comments and think out loud in all my comments, but never am I disrespectful or call anyone names.....lol. I wish you good health bro.

 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: May, 2006
Posts: 3674
Posted: #115
And the eagles fraud offense was 4th or 5th in the league in scoring, I believe.


 
Banned
Participation Meter
Joined: Nov, 2006
Posts: 23333
Posted: #116

Quote Originally Posted by ruffcutter2006:



Of course the eagles have deficiencies, just have way fewer than the cards.

The biggest joke is you're big beef with the eagles is "why are they so great they just beat one dimensional teams". many, rightly, point out that az is as one-dimensional as they come, and you make attempt some nonsensical argument that az is not one dimensional.

Hatred not a good way to cap, just as bad as homerism.

Obviously, the eagles are the better team, you know that. 

If the eagles are even or win the turnover battle, they win by DD,book it.


Well, they have 105 more on the ground than the Eagles do in the playoffs, but I'm sure you will just chalk that up to the competiton, but at the same time somehow slam me when I bring up the Eagles recent competition.

Postseason rush attempts - Arizona 71 for 231, Eagles 51 for 126. Who's one-dimensional?

And no, I don't think the Eagles are the better team.

 
Banned
Participation Meter
Joined: Nov, 2006
Posts: 23333
Posted: #117
Quote Originally Posted by ruffcutter2006:

And the eagles fraud offense was 4th or 5th in the league in scoring, I believe.


Actually they were 6th.

Arizona - 3rd.

Don't want to let my hatred get in the way of the facts here.

 
Banned
Participation Meter
Joined: Dec, 2008
Posts: 11845
Posted: #118
more facts:

Eagles scoring defense: 4th
Cards scoring defense: 28th
 
Hall of Fame
Participation Meter
Joined: Mar, 2004
Posts: 21568
Posted: #119
Quote Originally Posted by 3rd_and_Long:

Colts fan - quit being a Birds fan the day they drafted McNabb.



wow, really?
 
Banned
Participation Meter
Joined: Dec, 2008
Posts: 11845
Posted: #120
Quote Originally Posted by 3rd_and_Long:

Colts fan - quit being a Birds fan the day they drafted McNabb.



holy crap!!! 
 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Aug, 2007
Posts: 2196
Posted: #121
SUPER BOWL MATCHUP SAMPLE
 
I am sampling the public with a SU Question asked to random male and female adults, with many variating differences in age and interest level in football (gamblers vs. non-gamblers).
 
*Even sample for non-gamblers only b/c:
 
       - EVEN # of gamblers samples' did not pick winner in one of each games this wknd, so this has been accounted for. 
 
 
?: Who will play in the Super Bowl?
 
 
 
 
PHILLY is 57/43% to win SU (all sampled)
 
        GAMBLERS SU
        55.5% PHILLY 
        33.3% ARZ
        11.1 % No PICK
 
        NON-GAMBLERS SU
        50/50 PHILLY/ARZ
 
 
BALT/PIT is 50/50% to win SU (all sampled)
 
    Gamblers SU
    66.6% PITT
    22.2% BALT
    11.1% No PICK
 
    NON-GAMBLERS SU
    66.6% BALT
    22.2 PITT
 
 
From my perspective of knowing each of the sample, their average number of bets placed per year, athletic knowledge and ability to be persuaded by frequently losing public opinion...I have this conclusion.
 
#1 TAKE PTS with ZONA and PITT ML or vica-versa
 
Banned
Participation Meter
Joined: Dec, 2008
Posts: 11845
Posted: #122
Brass... i don't get it...
 
how did you come up with that conclusion?  those two picks are contradicted by your results... gamblers would suggest taking Philly/Pitt... non-gamblers would suggest taking Ariz/Balt... how do you come up with Ariz/Pitt?
 
All-Star
Participation Meter
Joined: Nov, 2003
Posts: 14301
Posted: #123
Quote Originally Posted by Ice4Blood:

more facts:

Eagles scoring defense: 4th
Cards scoring defense: 28th

Common, are you kidding me? How good were the Pats last yr before they bow down to Giants at a -10 fav in the Superbowl? Lets look at what both teams have done in the playoffs TY or are you too content on Philly you don't want to see Zona's angle? Both are playing right up there in terms of stats to be here this Sunday and you can't deny that fact. But go ahead and keep telling yourself Zona has no chance.

 

 
Banned
Participation Meter
Joined: Nov, 2006
Posts: 23333
Posted: #124
 
 
Banned
Participation Meter
Joined: Dec, 2008
Posts: 11845
Posted: #125
Quote Originally Posted by texancapper:

Common, are you kidding me? How good were the Pats last yr before they bow down to Giants at a -10 fav in the Superbowl? Lets look at what both teams have done in the playoffs TY or are you too content on Philly you don't want to see Zona's angle? Both are playing right up there in terms of stats to be here this Sunday and you can't deny that fact. But go ahead and keep telling yourself Zona has no chance.

come on what?  i posted the defensive stats for both teams, exactly like 3rd_and_Long posted the offensive stats... which one of us is in denial here?

just the facts, man!

All Forums | NFL Betting
About Us
Contact Us
Careers
Our Team
Brand
Testimonials
Betting Guides
Sportsbook Reviews
Sports Betting News
Podcasts
Responsible Gaming
Sports Betting
US Betting Sites
Canada Betting Sites
Canada Casinos
Best Betting Apps
Contests
Streak Survivor
King of Covers
Ultimate Race
Office Pools
The Covers community has
618,670
lifetime members worldwide
Covers 25 Years Logo Established in 1995,
Covers is the world
leader in sports
betting information.
Site Map Help Privacy Terms of Service youtube logo facebook logo twitter logo instagram logo linkedin logo google news logo
Covers is verified safe by: Evalon Logo GPWA Logo GDPR Logo GeoTrust Logo Evalon Logo
Copyright © 1995 - 2024 CS Media Limited All Rights Reserved.

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.