Quote Originally Posted by undermysac: Indigo, if you have the time. Going as far back as you can, when non divisional teams met in the regular season, and play in week 17, what are the results? Bears/Saints. Thanks Remember, Foles was the starter in that close game. If I were the Bears, and was serious about a playoff run here, I’d start Foles in this spot. I don’t care how he did during the regular season. The guy has proven himself in the playoffs. He is just wired that way. But of course the dumb Chicago coaches will not think of this until they are down 20 in the 4th.
No way BB, Foles is awful. The players pushed for Mitch when Foles was starting. I watched every Bears game twice(if not more on certain games) to tell you that the comparison isn't even close.
Foles hasn't done crap since his SB year with Philly.
1
Quote Originally Posted by begginerboy:
Quote Originally Posted by undermysac: Indigo, if you have the time. Going as far back as you can, when non divisional teams met in the regular season, and play in week 17, what are the results? Bears/Saints. Thanks Remember, Foles was the starter in that close game. If I were the Bears, and was serious about a playoff run here, I’d start Foles in this spot. I don’t care how he did during the regular season. The guy has proven himself in the playoffs. He is just wired that way. But of course the dumb Chicago coaches will not think of this until they are down 20 in the 4th.
No way BB, Foles is awful. The players pushed for Mitch when Foles was starting. I watched every Bears game twice(if not more on certain games) to tell you that the comparison isn't even close.
Foles hasn't done crap since his SB year with Philly.
Quote Originally Posted by begginerboy: Quote Originally Posted by undermysac: Indigo, if you have the time. Going as far back as you can, when non divisional teams met in the regular season, and play in week 17, what are the results? Bears/Saints. Thanks Remember, Foles was the starter in that close game. If I were the Bears, and was serious about a playoff run here, I’d start Foles in this spot. I don’t care how he did during the regular season. The guy has proven himself in the playoffs. He is just wired that way. But of course the dumb Chicago coaches will not think of this until they are down 20 in the 4th. No way BB, Foles is awful. The players pushed for Mitch when Foles was starting. I watched every Bears game twice(if not more on certain games) to tell you that the comparison isn't even close. Foles hasn't done crap since his SB year with Philly.
I’ll take your word for it. But this game looks like a big mismatch, if the Saints Thomas and Kamara play.
1
Quote Originally Posted by undermysac:
Quote Originally Posted by begginerboy: Quote Originally Posted by undermysac: Indigo, if you have the time. Going as far back as you can, when non divisional teams met in the regular season, and play in week 17, what are the results? Bears/Saints. Thanks Remember, Foles was the starter in that close game. If I were the Bears, and was serious about a playoff run here, I’d start Foles in this spot. I don’t care how he did during the regular season. The guy has proven himself in the playoffs. He is just wired that way. But of course the dumb Chicago coaches will not think of this until they are down 20 in the 4th. No way BB, Foles is awful. The players pushed for Mitch when Foles was starting. I watched every Bears game twice(if not more on certain games) to tell you that the comparison isn't even close. Foles hasn't done crap since his SB year with Philly.
I’ll take your word for it. But this game looks like a big mismatch, if the Saints Thomas and Kamara play.
@DogbiteWilliams not to be picky but this is a numbers game home-away this season was 127-128 and 1, not the numbers you quoted, unless you removed the niners or something.
Deleted - I responded to the wrong person.
0
Quote Originally Posted by tkdc:
@DogbiteWilliams not to be picky but this is a numbers game home-away this season was 127-128 and 1, not the numbers you quoted, unless you removed the niners or something.
@DogbiteWilliams not to be picky but this is a numbers game home-away this season was 127-128 and 1, not the numbers you quoted, unless you removed the niners or something.
The query is very simple:
season = 2020 and A
SU: 125-127-1. That does exclude neutral-site games. You can check it for yourself at sportsdatabase.com. You can substitute "site = neutral" for "A" and you will see each team listed as "Team" and "Opp." Naturally the SU results are 3-3.
0
Quote Originally Posted by tkdc:
@DogbiteWilliams not to be picky but this is a numbers game home-away this season was 127-128 and 1, not the numbers you quoted, unless you removed the niners or something.
The query is very simple:
season = 2020 and A
SU: 125-127-1. That does exclude neutral-site games. You can check it for yourself at sportsdatabase.com. You can substitute "site = neutral" for "A" and you will see each team listed as "Team" and "Opp." Naturally the SU results are 3-3.
Someone on this covers' forum mentioned something about high scoring teams in the playoffs,....I don't recall who it was, so apologies for not giving credit for who did the original research.
Teams that average over 30 points per game in their first playoff game as home favorites.....Saints, Bills, Packers
Some of these teams obviously have gotten first round byes and the information below reflects that.
Home favorites averaging >30 points game in their first playoff game:
Game number 17, Saturday.........6-4 ATS......Bills
Game number 17, Sunday...........4-8 ATS......Saints
Game number 18, Sunday...........3-7 ATS......Packers?
tA(points) > 30 and HF and playoffs = 1 and game number = 17, 18 and PO = 1 and day
Chiefs surprisingly didn't average greater than 30 points per game this season.
0
Someone on this covers' forum mentioned something about high scoring teams in the playoffs,....I don't recall who it was, so apologies for not giving credit for who did the original research.
Teams that average over 30 points per game in their first playoff game as home favorites.....Saints, Bills, Packers
Some of these teams obviously have gotten first round byes and the information below reflects that.
Home favorites averaging >30 points game in their first playoff game:
Game number 17, Saturday.........6-4 ATS......Bills
Game number 17, Sunday...........4-8 ATS......Saints
Game number 18, Sunday...........3-7 ATS......Packers?
tA(points) > 30 and HF and playoffs = 1 and game number = 17, 18 and PO = 1 and day
Chiefs surprisingly didn't average greater than 30 points per game this season.
Quote Originally Posted by undermysac: Quote Originally Posted by begginerboy: Quote Originally Posted by undermysac: Indigo, if you have the time. Going as far back as you can, when non divisional teams met in the regular season, and play in week 17, what are the results? Bears/Saints. Thanks Remember, Foles was the starter in that close game. If I were the Bears, and was serious about a playoff run here, I’d start Foles in this spot. I don’t care how he did during the regular season. The guy has proven himself in the playoffs. He is just wired that way. But of course the dumb Chicago coaches will not think of this until they are down 20 in the 4th. No way BB, Foles is awful. The players pushed for Mitch when Foles was starting. I watched every Bears game twice(if not more on certain games) to tell you that the comparison isn't even close. Foles hasn't done crap since his SB year with Philly. I’ll take your word for it. But this game looks like a big mismatch, if the Saints Thomas and Kamara play.
Definitely true, it's the biggest mismatch on the board. Question is, can the Saints win by more than 10 or not?
For the question at hand, it's a pretty tough cap imo.
I posed another question on a different thread earlier in the week when the line was Saints -9.5. What teaser leg are the books more afraid of, Saints -3.5, or Bears +15.5?
Food for thought.
0
Quote Originally Posted by begginerboy:
Quote Originally Posted by undermysac: Quote Originally Posted by begginerboy: Quote Originally Posted by undermysac: Indigo, if you have the time. Going as far back as you can, when non divisional teams met in the regular season, and play in week 17, what are the results? Bears/Saints. Thanks Remember, Foles was the starter in that close game. If I were the Bears, and was serious about a playoff run here, I’d start Foles in this spot. I don’t care how he did during the regular season. The guy has proven himself in the playoffs. He is just wired that way. But of course the dumb Chicago coaches will not think of this until they are down 20 in the 4th. No way BB, Foles is awful. The players pushed for Mitch when Foles was starting. I watched every Bears game twice(if not more on certain games) to tell you that the comparison isn't even close. Foles hasn't done crap since his SB year with Philly. I’ll take your word for it. But this game looks like a big mismatch, if the Saints Thomas and Kamara play.
Definitely true, it's the biggest mismatch on the board. Question is, can the Saints win by more than 10 or not?
For the question at hand, it's a pretty tough cap imo.
I posed another question on a different thread earlier in the week when the line was Saints -9.5. What teaser leg are the books more afraid of, Saints -3.5, or Bears +15.5?
If one of the two opponents scores less than 21 points in the wildcard round game, the o/u results have been 14-33 o/u h in a case where the home team was favored and 1-11 o/u where the home team was a dog.
That's it.....I am betting that one or both teams in these games score less than 21 points.
o:game number = 17 and game number = 17 and (points<21 or o:points<21) and HD, HF
0
Adding two plays....
4) Rams UNDER 41'
5) Bucs UNDER 44'
1) Browns +3'
2) Rams +4'
3) Ravens -3, -120
If one of the two opponents scores less than 21 points in the wildcard round game, the o/u results have been 14-33 o/u h in a case where the home team was favored and 1-11 o/u where the home team was a dog.
That's it.....I am betting that one or both teams in these games score less than 21 points.
o:game number = 17 and game number = 17 and (points<21 or o:points<21) and HD, HF
"Ridicule is the first and last argument of a fool.".....Charles Simmons
"Ridicule dishonors a man more than dishonor does."
You receive what you give.
Every ugliness that a person tries to perpetrate to others is changeable into love.
I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you;........Matthew 5:44
Thanks for stopping by.
1
@morine126
Ridicule quotable quotes
"Ridicule is the first and last argument of a fool.".....Charles Simmons
"Ridicule dishonors a man more than dishonor does."
You receive what you give.
Every ugliness that a person tries to perpetrate to others is changeable into love.
I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you;........Matthew 5:44
I am attempting to middle/side the Seahawks/Rams game....
a). If the Seahawks win by three I have won my Rams bet and tied my Seahawks bet.
b) If the Seahawks win by 4 I've won both bets.
c) If neither of those things happen, I've lost the juice on one of my plays.
Obviously this week when you look at lines of my plays you'll see I've done a poor job with reading line movement.....we will see if that comes back to haunt me.
Adding:
6) Seahawks -3
to the already posted plays.
5) Rams +4'
4) UNDER Rams 41'
3) UNDER Bucs 44'
2) Browns +3'
1) Ravens -3, -120
0
I am attempting to middle/side the Seahawks/Rams game....
a). If the Seahawks win by three I have won my Rams bet and tied my Seahawks bet.
b) If the Seahawks win by 4 I've won both bets.
c) If neither of those things happen, I've lost the juice on one of my plays.
Obviously this week when you look at lines of my plays you'll see I've done a poor job with reading line movement.....we will see if that comes back to haunt me.
I looked to see whether your not Rams bet could somehow have been hedged with a TT instead...sadly they're on either side of a key number, Sea 21.5 and LAR 19.5. So it looks like you're rooting for Sea 17-14 or something...good luck.
1
I looked to see whether your not Rams bet could somehow have been hedged with a TT instead...sadly they're on either side of a key number, Sea 21.5 and LAR 19.5. So it looks like you're rooting for Sea 17-14 or something...good luck.
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.