OTOH, Jeff Sagarin has KC ranked #1 and NO #20. His ratings say that KC has faced a tougher Strength of Schedule: #11 vs. #25. He certainly knows more about football than I do. A link to his ratings page which currently features a powerful quote from Colin Powell: http://sagarin.com/sports/nflsend.htm
I don't see how KC can be no.1 in any PR. Point margin is a better indicator then record, the only thing KC is good at is record.
Ave per pass margin is 6.7- 6.5 = .2 how can that be a no. 1 team ?
Mahomes Passer Rating is 89, league ave is 91. A below league ave Passer is no. 1 ?
I think he is giving KC to much credit for past success not how they have done this season.
1
Quote Originally Posted by DogbiteWilliams:
OTOH, Jeff Sagarin has KC ranked #1 and NO #20. His ratings say that KC has faced a tougher Strength of Schedule: #11 vs. #25. He certainly knows more about football than I do. A link to his ratings page which currently features a powerful quote from Colin Powell: http://sagarin.com/sports/nflsend.htm
I don't see how KC can be no.1 in any PR. Point margin is a better indicator then record, the only thing KC is good at is record.
Ave per pass margin is 6.7- 6.5 = .2 how can that be a no. 1 team ?
Mahomes Passer Rating is 89, league ave is 91. A below league ave Passer is no. 1 ?
I think he is giving KC to much credit for past success not how they have done this season.
Quote Originally Posted by theclaw: Some trends I saw online I thought were interesting...... Dogs of over 6 pts are 65% ATS past 20 years Team plays 3 home games then goes on the road, 45% ATS. 15-32 past 5 years. After playing the Bills since Allen , teams are 33-53 SU. Teams after playing the 9ers are worse. Won 4 straight games by 7 pts or less 16-27 ATS 37% IF fav by 3 or more 32% ATS .......fade KC The query works for "won 4+ straight games by 7 points or less." The query: streak > 3.5 and p:margin < 7.5 and pp:margin < 7.5 and ppp:margin < 7.5 and pppp:margin < 7.5 ATS: 16-27-0 (-1.4, 37.2%) I personally would not fade KC on just this query alone. An average ATS margin of only -1.4 points provides little confidence and little margin for error. I am not a fundamental handicapper, but I did uncover these nuggets which might put me on NO: There has been a lot of chatter about how good KC's DEF is this year and that it compensates for a weaker-than-usual OFF. Comparing the passing DEF stats from NFL.com, sorting the team passing DEF stats by rating puts NO #1 at 68.0 and KC #21 at 94.2. That is a huge gap. Mahomes is missing some weapons this year and it shows. Checking out Mahomes at Pro Football Reference, I was surprised to see that he is the all-time career leader at PY/game with a whopping 293.3! He is averaging just 226.0 this season with 6 TDs and 5 INTs. Good luck everybody.
Yes that is a small margin, they never mentioned that.
Here's another trend dog that will blow your mind talking about KC's defense.
Saints QB Carr when playing a defense gives up 18 pts or fewer is 5th best ATS all-time only behind Brady, Bress, P.Manning I forget the 4th
But when he plays weaker defenses he has a poor losing ATS record.
2
Quote Originally Posted by DogbiteWilliams:
Quote Originally Posted by theclaw: Some trends I saw online I thought were interesting...... Dogs of over 6 pts are 65% ATS past 20 years Team plays 3 home games then goes on the road, 45% ATS. 15-32 past 5 years. After playing the Bills since Allen , teams are 33-53 SU. Teams after playing the 9ers are worse. Won 4 straight games by 7 pts or less 16-27 ATS 37% IF fav by 3 or more 32% ATS .......fade KC The query works for "won 4+ straight games by 7 points or less." The query: streak > 3.5 and p:margin < 7.5 and pp:margin < 7.5 and ppp:margin < 7.5 and pppp:margin < 7.5 ATS: 16-27-0 (-1.4, 37.2%) I personally would not fade KC on just this query alone. An average ATS margin of only -1.4 points provides little confidence and little margin for error. I am not a fundamental handicapper, but I did uncover these nuggets which might put me on NO: There has been a lot of chatter about how good KC's DEF is this year and that it compensates for a weaker-than-usual OFF. Comparing the passing DEF stats from NFL.com, sorting the team passing DEF stats by rating puts NO #1 at 68.0 and KC #21 at 94.2. That is a huge gap. Mahomes is missing some weapons this year and it shows. Checking out Mahomes at Pro Football Reference, I was surprised to see that he is the all-time career leader at PY/game with a whopping 293.3! He is averaging just 226.0 this season with 6 TDs and 5 INTs. Good luck everybody.
Yes that is a small margin, they never mentioned that.
Here's another trend dog that will blow your mind talking about KC's defense.
Saints QB Carr when playing a defense gives up 18 pts or fewer is 5th best ATS all-time only behind Brady, Bress, P.Manning I forget the 4th
But when he plays weaker defenses he has a poor losing ATS record.
All the guys I follow are on NO, when I have no info to fade them or when I have at least some information on the same team those games do pretty well.
I would lean NO before I listen to anyone else. The trends I posted on the game came after I was already leaning NO. They made my lean even stronger.
Hopefully it works out here on Saints game.
0
All the guys I follow are on NO, when I have no info to fade them or when I have at least some information on the same team those games do pretty well.
I would lean NO before I listen to anyone else. The trends I posted on the game came after I was already leaning NO. They made my lean even stronger.
Teams lost by 17 pts or more playing a team won by 17 pts or more.
Team that lost won 60% ATS........play on Zona
Teams lost by 28 pts or more and are +4 or better, 62% ATS over 20 years........play on Zona
Some nice regression angles. What I like to do is take these basic regression angles, do some research and make them more selective by adding in other info and hopefully make them better.
I don't really like regression angles based on 1 game. But it can be useful info when supporting other info one might have on playing Zona.
0
Couple more interesting trends I saw online.
Teams lost by 17 pts or more playing a team won by 17 pts or more.
Team that lost won 60% ATS........play on Zona
Teams lost by 28 pts or more and are +4 or better, 62% ATS over 20 years........play on Zona
Some nice regression angles. What I like to do is take these basic regression angles, do some research and make them more selective by adding in other info and hopefully make them better.
I don't really like regression angles based on 1 game. But it can be useful info when supporting other info one might have on playing Zona.
Quote Originally Posted by DogbiteWilliams: I wonder if TheClaw thinks NO might be due for some negative regression on their stellar passing DEF which has allowed just 1 TD while grabbing 6 INTs, but NO has still lost its last two games. I don't do offense or defensive regression, I may talk about it but only when it applies along with team regression. I'm sure you could but I haven't researched that out to know what to look for. NO is off 2 SU & ATS losses I'd lean more to them ATS this week. And remember they were one of my 3 biggest performers week 1. I think they bounce back VS KC.
They should. Do you know how your Week 1 superstars do coming off two losses? Unfortunately I bet the sample size is small.
0
Quote Originally Posted by theclaw:
Quote Originally Posted by DogbiteWilliams: I wonder if TheClaw thinks NO might be due for some negative regression on their stellar passing DEF which has allowed just 1 TD while grabbing 6 INTs, but NO has still lost its last two games. I don't do offense or defensive regression, I may talk about it but only when it applies along with team regression. I'm sure you could but I haven't researched that out to know what to look for. NO is off 2 SU & ATS losses I'd lean more to them ATS this week. And remember they were one of my 3 biggest performers week 1. I think they bounce back VS KC.
They should. Do you know how your Week 1 superstars do coming off two losses? Unfortunately I bet the sample size is small.
I like your plays, Commandos + Pats are the only 2 teams to allow opponents over 50% 3rd down conversions
as far as the Chiefs, they are very average in some ways. Their opponents have run total 6 more offensive plays this season, and yards per play is also virtually identical. Chiefs gain an average 3 inches more per play lol. Chiefs are also -4 in turnovers this season so far
I Looked at turnover differential of SB winners since 2010. Most are in the plus category, unless they had an unusually strong defense (broncos) or offense (recent Chiefs teams)
SB WINNERS TURNOVERS DIFFERENTIAL
2010 GBY +10
2011 NYG+7
2012 BAL+9
2013 SEA +20
2014 NEP +12
2015 DEN-4
2016 NEP +12
2017 PHI+11
2018 NEP +10
2019 KCC+8
2020 TBY +8
2021 LAR+2
2022 KCC-3
2023 KCC -11
I don’t think this years chiefs team is good enough to overcome problems with giving the ball away too much. Along with the fact that they’ve played an extra season (16 playoff games) over the past 5 years, and recent injuries, I think it’d be better to play against them. They’re currently 3-1 ATS, I wouldn’t be surprised if they go 5-8 the rest of the season.
BOL
1
I like your plays, Commandos + Pats are the only 2 teams to allow opponents over 50% 3rd down conversions
as far as the Chiefs, they are very average in some ways. Their opponents have run total 6 more offensive plays this season, and yards per play is also virtually identical. Chiefs gain an average 3 inches more per play lol. Chiefs are also -4 in turnovers this season so far
I Looked at turnover differential of SB winners since 2010. Most are in the plus category, unless they had an unusually strong defense (broncos) or offense (recent Chiefs teams)
SB WINNERS TURNOVERS DIFFERENTIAL
2010 GBY +10
2011 NYG+7
2012 BAL+9
2013 SEA +20
2014 NEP +12
2015 DEN-4
2016 NEP +12
2017 PHI+11
2018 NEP +10
2019 KCC+8
2020 TBY +8
2021 LAR+2
2022 KCC-3
2023 KCC -11
I don’t think this years chiefs team is good enough to overcome problems with giving the ball away too much. Along with the fact that they’ve played an extra season (16 playoff games) over the past 5 years, and recent injuries, I think it’d be better to play against them. They’re currently 3-1 ATS, I wouldn’t be surprised if they go 5-8 the rest of the season.
All true. Another CLV negative: While I am not a fundamental handicapper, I did look at CLV's depth chart at ESPN. CLV does not have a MLB active for the WAS game, so some guy will have to play at an unfamiliar position, not good facing an excellent QB.
Two positives for CLV: Jerome Ford's career average is only 4.1 YPRA, but this season it's 5.2, right up in Nick Chubb territory. WAS is ranked only #30 in DEF DVOA, which means they are capable of making Watson look good.
1
@Brooklyncapper
All true. Another CLV negative: While I am not a fundamental handicapper, I did look at CLV's depth chart at ESPN. CLV does not have a MLB active for the WAS game, so some guy will have to play at an unfamiliar position, not good facing an excellent QB.
Two positives for CLV: Jerome Ford's career average is only 4.1 YPRA, but this season it's 5.2, right up in Nick Chubb territory. WAS is ranked only #30 in DEF DVOA, which means they are capable of making Watson look good.
I like your plays, Commandos + Pats are the only 2 teams to allow opponents over 50% 3rd down conversions as far as the Chiefs, they are very average in some ways. Their opponents have run total 6 more offensive plays this season, and yards per play is also virtually identical. Chiefs gain an average 3 inches more per play lol. Chiefs are also -4 in turnovers this season so far I Looked at turnover differential of SB winners since 2010. Most are in the plus category, unless they had an unusually strong defense (broncos) or offense (recent Chiefs teams) SB WINNERS TURNOVERS DIFFERENTIAL 2010 GBY +10 2011 NYG +7 2012 BAL +9 2013 SEA +20 2014 NEP +12 2015 DEN -4 2016 NEP +12 2017 PHI +11 2018 NEP +10 2019 KCC +8 2020 TBY +8 2021 LAR +2 2022 KCC -3 2023 KCC -11 I don’t think this years chiefs team is good enough to overcome problems with giving the ball away too much. Along with the fact that they’ve played an extra season (16 playoff games) over the past 5 years, and recent injuries, I think it’d be better to play against them. They’re currently 3-1 ATS, I wouldn’t be surprised if they go 5-8 the rest of the season. BOL
Yep KC is not very good right now.
Last season when they were -11 TO'S they did right the ship before playoffs started. The receivers were mostly responsible for TO and drops. They gave Rice more playing time al8ng with other adjustments that did work down the stretch.
So yea -11 in TO'S is not SB calibre play.
If you look at those teams most were +7 or better.
For KC to 3peat they need to turn many things around. Plenty of time for them but I doubt they do it.
1
Quote Originally Posted by Biscuit:
I like your plays, Commandos + Pats are the only 2 teams to allow opponents over 50% 3rd down conversions as far as the Chiefs, they are very average in some ways. Their opponents have run total 6 more offensive plays this season, and yards per play is also virtually identical. Chiefs gain an average 3 inches more per play lol. Chiefs are also -4 in turnovers this season so far I Looked at turnover differential of SB winners since 2010. Most are in the plus category, unless they had an unusually strong defense (broncos) or offense (recent Chiefs teams) SB WINNERS TURNOVERS DIFFERENTIAL 2010 GBY +10 2011 NYG +7 2012 BAL +9 2013 SEA +20 2014 NEP +12 2015 DEN -4 2016 NEP +12 2017 PHI +11 2018 NEP +10 2019 KCC +8 2020 TBY +8 2021 LAR +2 2022 KCC -3 2023 KCC -11 I don’t think this years chiefs team is good enough to overcome problems with giving the ball away too much. Along with the fact that they’ve played an extra season (16 playoff games) over the past 5 years, and recent injuries, I think it’d be better to play against them. They’re currently 3-1 ATS, I wouldn’t be surprised if they go 5-8 the rest of the season. BOL
Yep KC is not very good right now.
Last season when they were -11 TO'S they did right the ship before playoffs started. The receivers were mostly responsible for TO and drops. They gave Rice more playing time al8ng with other adjustments that did work down the stretch.
So yea -11 in TO'S is not SB calibre play.
If you look at those teams most were +7 or better.
For KC to 3peat they need to turn many things around. Plenty of time for them but I doubt they do it.
@DogbiteWilliams Only thing is Deshaun watson is so bad and has not run the browns offense with the smooth efficiency he used to run the texans with. Their offense without a consistent running game has been a complete embarassment. Not saying they can't make this an ugly game and their defense can't take over but commanders have looked great the last 2 weeks and it would kind of be a waste if they didn't get the win at home.
No doubt that is a concern.
He looks pretty bad but when regression calls things just tend to workout.
To me it's about Wash regressing, has nothing to do with Browns. When we are talking about Wash obviously we are talking the offense regressing. The defense can't get much worse. When the QB completes the highest % ever at this point you have to know that is not sustainable. Unless you think he be the greatest of all-time.
If you look at any 4 game stretch not just over the 1st 4 games very likely it has been done many times. Players can have very strong moments over 4 games, it can't be sustained though.
0
Quote Originally Posted by Brooklyncapper:
@DogbiteWilliams Only thing is Deshaun watson is so bad and has not run the browns offense with the smooth efficiency he used to run the texans with. Their offense without a consistent running game has been a complete embarassment. Not saying they can't make this an ugly game and their defense can't take over but commanders have looked great the last 2 weeks and it would kind of be a waste if they didn't get the win at home.
No doubt that is a concern.
He looks pretty bad but when regression calls things just tend to workout.
To me it's about Wash regressing, has nothing to do with Browns. When we are talking about Wash obviously we are talking the offense regressing. The defense can't get much worse. When the QB completes the highest % ever at this point you have to know that is not sustainable. Unless you think he be the greatest of all-time.
If you look at any 4 game stretch not just over the 1st 4 games very likely it has been done many times. Players can have very strong moments over 4 games, it can't be sustained though.
Quote Originally Posted by theclaw: Quote Originally Posted by DogbiteWilliams: I wonder if TheClaw thinks NO might be due for some negative regression on their stellar passing DEF which has allowed just 1 TD while grabbing 6 INTs, but NO has still lost its last two games. I don't do offense or defensive regression, I may talk about it but only when it applies along with team regression. I'm sure you could but I haven't researched that out to know what to look for. NO is off 2 SU & ATS losses I'd lean more to them ATS this week. And remember they were one of my 3 biggest performers week 1. I think they bounce back VS KC. They should. Do you know how your Week 1 superstars do coming off two losses? Unfortunately I bet the sample size is small.
pretty good if they are off a 10 win or more season the year before which the Saints are not. 9-8.
They are better off 3 ATS losses but many teams are as well.
But not many teams get to that 3rd ATS loss because they cover after 2.
9ers already did it off 2 ATS losses when they crushed the Pats.
Steelers could be in that spot next week. Most likely I'd back them if the lose ATS VS Boys this week.
What intrigues me about the Saints in this spot is the new coach, with his pedigree very likely a very good offensive mind and the players have already commented on him putting them in position to be successful.
That new coach might carry as much weight as coming off a 10 win season, they only needed 1 more win and he is likely worth that and more.
0
Quote Originally Posted by DogbiteWilliams:
Quote Originally Posted by theclaw: Quote Originally Posted by DogbiteWilliams: I wonder if TheClaw thinks NO might be due for some negative regression on their stellar passing DEF which has allowed just 1 TD while grabbing 6 INTs, but NO has still lost its last two games. I don't do offense or defensive regression, I may talk about it but only when it applies along with team regression. I'm sure you could but I haven't researched that out to know what to look for. NO is off 2 SU & ATS losses I'd lean more to them ATS this week. And remember they were one of my 3 biggest performers week 1. I think they bounce back VS KC. They should. Do you know how your Week 1 superstars do coming off two losses? Unfortunately I bet the sample size is small.
pretty good if they are off a 10 win or more season the year before which the Saints are not. 9-8.
They are better off 3 ATS losses but many teams are as well.
But not many teams get to that 3rd ATS loss because they cover after 2.
9ers already did it off 2 ATS losses when they crushed the Pats.
Steelers could be in that spot next week. Most likely I'd back them if the lose ATS VS Boys this week.
What intrigues me about the Saints in this spot is the new coach, with his pedigree very likely a very good offensive mind and the players have already commented on him putting them in position to be successful.
That new coach might carry as much weight as coming off a 10 win season, they only needed 1 more win and he is likely worth that and more.
Couple more interesting trends I saw online. Teams lost by 17 pts or more playing a team won by 17 pts or more. Team that lost won 60% ATS........play on Zona Teams lost by 28 pts or more and are +4 or better, 62% ATS over 20 years........play on Zona Some nice regression angles. What I like to do is take these basic regression angles, do some research and make them more selective by adding in other info and hopefully make them better. I don't really like regression angles based on 1 game. But it can be useful info when supporting other info one might have on playing Zona.
The queries at Killer Sports generate different numbers.
p:margin < -16.5 and op:margin > 16.5 ATS: 170-140-4 (0.9, 55.4%) 55.4% winners is nice, but an average ATS margin of 0.9 points is not worth betting.
p:margin < -27.5 and line > 3.7 ATS: 163-119-7 (1.3, 57.8%) That is certainly better, but I did query for +3.5 points.
p:margin < -27.5 and line > 3.2 ATS: 177-128-7 (1.5, 58.0%) Even better.
I do have a query that favors SF, so I passed on the game.
0
Quote Originally Posted by theclaw:
Couple more interesting trends I saw online. Teams lost by 17 pts or more playing a team won by 17 pts or more. Team that lost won 60% ATS........play on Zona Teams lost by 28 pts or more and are +4 or better, 62% ATS over 20 years........play on Zona Some nice regression angles. What I like to do is take these basic regression angles, do some research and make them more selective by adding in other info and hopefully make them better. I don't really like regression angles based on 1 game. But it can be useful info when supporting other info one might have on playing Zona.
The queries at Killer Sports generate different numbers.
p:margin < -16.5 and op:margin > 16.5 ATS: 170-140-4 (0.9, 55.4%) 55.4% winners is nice, but an average ATS margin of 0.9 points is not worth betting.
p:margin < -27.5 and line > 3.7 ATS: 163-119-7 (1.3, 57.8%) That is certainly better, but I did query for +3.5 points.
p:margin < -27.5 and line > 3.2 ATS: 177-128-7 (1.5, 58.0%) Even better.
I do have a query that favors SF, so I passed on the game.
AD and 2.2 < line < 8.7 and op:INT > 0.5 and n:HF and wins < o:wins and NDIV and n:DIV
Away Dog, +2.5 to +8.5, opposing team's QB threw at least 1 INT in the previous game, NO will be a Home Favorite in the next game, NO has fewer wins than KC this season, this is a Non-DIV game, NO's next game will be a DIV game
ATS: 73-39-1 (3.6, 65.2%)
Good luck everybody.
0
This query favors NO, so I acted.
AD and 2.2 < line < 8.7 and op:INT > 0.5 and n:HF and wins < o:wins and NDIV and n:DIV
Away Dog, +2.5 to +8.5, opposing team's QB threw at least 1 INT in the previous game, NO will be a Home Favorite in the next game, NO has fewer wins than KC this season, this is a Non-DIV game, NO's next game will be a DIV game
Quote Originally Posted by theclaw: Couple more interesting trends I saw online. Teams lost by 17 pts or more playing a team won by 17 pts or more. Team that lost won 60% ATS........play on Zona Teams lost by 28 pts or more and are +4 or better, 62% ATS over 20 years........play on Zona Some nice regression angles. What I like to do is take these basic regression angles, do some research and make them more selective by adding in other info and hopefully make them better. I don't really like regression angles based on 1 game. But it can be useful info when supporting other info one might have on playing Zona. The queries at Killer Sports generate different numbers. p:margin < -16.5 and op:margin > 16.5 ATS: 170-140-4 (0.9, 55.4%) 55.4% winners is nice, but an average ATS margin of 0.9 points is not worth betting. p:margin < -27.5 and line > 3.7 ATS: 163-119-7 (1.3, 57.8%) That is certainly better, but I did query for +3.5 points. p:margin < -27.5 and line > 3.2 ATS: 177-128-7 (1.5, 58.0%) Even better. I do have a query that favors SF, so I passed on the game.
Interesting you get different numbers, one reason I don't totally trust those. Andvthey never mention the margin of covering.
Not worth a play.
What I'd do is look that up and add more to it make it very selective based on past results . Something there to work with i think.
I like 9ers myself but will pass on game.
9ers being a week 1 top 3 biggest performer off a 10 win season. And 1-2 ATS since week 2. These teams don't finish with losing ATS records.
0
Quote Originally Posted by DogbiteWilliams:
Quote Originally Posted by theclaw: Couple more interesting trends I saw online. Teams lost by 17 pts or more playing a team won by 17 pts or more. Team that lost won 60% ATS........play on Zona Teams lost by 28 pts or more and are +4 or better, 62% ATS over 20 years........play on Zona Some nice regression angles. What I like to do is take these basic regression angles, do some research and make them more selective by adding in other info and hopefully make them better. I don't really like regression angles based on 1 game. But it can be useful info when supporting other info one might have on playing Zona. The queries at Killer Sports generate different numbers. p:margin < -16.5 and op:margin > 16.5 ATS: 170-140-4 (0.9, 55.4%) 55.4% winners is nice, but an average ATS margin of 0.9 points is not worth betting. p:margin < -27.5 and line > 3.7 ATS: 163-119-7 (1.3, 57.8%) That is certainly better, but I did query for +3.5 points. p:margin < -27.5 and line > 3.2 ATS: 177-128-7 (1.5, 58.0%) Even better. I do have a query that favors SF, so I passed on the game.
Interesting you get different numbers, one reason I don't totally trust those. Andvthey never mention the margin of covering.
Not worth a play.
What I'd do is look that up and add more to it make it very selective based on past results . Something there to work with i think.
I like 9ers myself but will pass on game.
9ers being a week 1 top 3 biggest performer off a 10 win season. And 1-2 ATS since week 2. These teams don't finish with losing ATS records.
This query favors NO, so I acted. AD and 2.2 < line < 8.7 and op:INT > 0.5 and n:HF and wins < o:wins and NDIV and n:DIV Away Dog, +2.5 to +8.5, opposing team's QB threw at least 1 INT in the previous game, NO will be a Home Favorite in the next game, NO has fewer wins than KC this season, this is a Non-DIV game, NO's next game will be a DIV game ATS: 73-39-1 (3.6, 65.2%) Good luck everybody.
Very nice dog.
I see this game as a good barometer of who the Saints will be this season. Will they live up to my top 3 week 1 biggest performers of the past or fade away after their big win.
Off 2 SU & ATS losses which I think is somewhat understandable after blowing out 2 opps and being with a new coach.
But they need to settle down and play good ball and be in this game with a chance to win SU.
If they can I think they likely make playoffs but if they don't I won't like them too much going forward.
0
Quote Originally Posted by DogbiteWilliams:
This query favors NO, so I acted. AD and 2.2 < line < 8.7 and op:INT > 0.5 and n:HF and wins < o:wins and NDIV and n:DIV Away Dog, +2.5 to +8.5, opposing team's QB threw at least 1 INT in the previous game, NO will be a Home Favorite in the next game, NO has fewer wins than KC this season, this is a Non-DIV game, NO's next game will be a DIV game ATS: 73-39-1 (3.6, 65.2%) Good luck everybody.
Very nice dog.
I see this game as a good barometer of who the Saints will be this season. Will they live up to my top 3 week 1 biggest performers of the past or fade away after their big win.
Off 2 SU & ATS losses which I think is somewhat understandable after blowing out 2 opps and being with a new coach.
But they need to settle down and play good ball and be in this game with a chance to win SU.
If they can I think they likely make playoffs but if they don't I won't like them too much going forward.
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.
Jets 
Hot Forum Topics
