ONE OF TWO THINGS IS HAPPENING

Ok, so we all seen the GB/MIN game this week and the line that is bouncing between 3.5 and 3...

With GB being a heavily backed public team, the books KNOW that lopsided action will come in on the pack. Particularily in the situation we're in, which is GB off a miracalous last second victory on national TV, and Minnesota coming off a win, but a very unconvincing one against a rookie QB in his first start and the obivious issues with Bradford, which turned into Keenum. Not to mention the perception of that Keenum led offense without Cook and Diggs.

Now, there is really only one of two things happening:

1. The book thinks this is an easy GB victory, but if it sets the line at GB-6.5 or even GB up to say -8... then the public knows it has blowout potential and will pound it. So they set it at a reasonable 3.5 with the hopes some will second guess themselves or "overthink" as some say, hopefully discouraging some of the action from the squares.. and maybe even some sharps.

2. This is a legitimatly accurate line and oddsmakers think that the home team will rally behind Keenum, and even though they had trouble moving the ball before, and now have arguably three of their top four offensive players out of the game... that they will either contain the Packers offense and score enough themselves to win, or GB does score at their normal clip, and the Vikes will be able to match them score for score in this game.

Now, I personally think this line is a ruse. I think Green Back builds off their positive momentum and Minnesota succums to their negative issues and this is a 10 point Packers win. But I'm no genius and have been wrong plenty... lol.

So I'm curious to what others think. 

PS... Yes... if you're one of those dudes that wants to not answer the question but rather contridict the logic or the premise of the post.. feel free to post. Lol. You're gonna wanna hear yourself tell someone they are wrong so no worries. But if you could, please let us know your pick after you troll. Thanks!

In my opinion you are seeing a battle of sharps on both sides with the public pushing the GB line up.  Typically you see the sharps battle very close to game time (if they are even battling), but like you said, I would not have been surprised to see a line of GB -6.5.

A couple things on this game for me; I think Minnesota's defense at home is legit and Rodgers won't have a cake walk.  Minnesota's offense has been fairly better than I believe most people would think with Keenum, but there game plans have worked well.

Both of these teams know each other extremely well and while I do think that Diggs being out is a big deal, I believe home field advantage coupled with the Vikes playing for top spot in their division is why you are seeing the close line in the books.  I'm staying away from it all together.

All fair points and that's why I was curious to people's thoughts. I mean, I get it... division game, great Minny home defense, etc.

But when Rodgers is "on" he is so tough to bet against. I simply can't place a wager on Keenum when the other side is Rodgers at -3

Cook was huge, Diggs is very huge.. and yes they might actually be better with Keenum than a hurt Bradford. But it will have to be Roudolph going nuts to match Pack offense.. in my opinion.

Fun state that pertains to this game:

Since last season, in games vs the NFC North... Rodgers has 20 touchdowns and 1 interception. Could this all change tomorrow.. sure. But I wouldn't bet on it.

Anyone who says they haven't fell for this before is a liar... lol.

Feel the same way about the Pats and Jets... another Division game but at lease that is at -9 to steer some traffic away from Tom & Co.