All Forums | NFL Betting

Setting my system aside for now until Friday... let's talk football

...

Participants:

Search

Posts: 34

bpickin

All-Star

Joined: Feb, 2010

Posts: 13189

Posted: Jan. 17, 2017 - 8:44 PM ET #26

Quote Originally Posted by CoreyPaus:

What is GOAT?

Greatest of all time

0

DrKnoNothing

Prospect

Joined: Jul, 2016

Posts: 214

Posted: Jan. 17, 2017 - 8:44 PM ET #27

Greatest of all time

0

HabsHater88

Captain

Joined: Jun, 2014

Posts: 7620

Posted: Jan. 18, 2017 - 10:59 PM ET #28

Quote Originally Posted by bpickin:

I thought the line would have been higher honestly considering Ryan should shred them wire to wire... or should he????? We know Rodgers will get his but can he go wire to wire as well? In my opinion ( which means crap which is why I uses systems) Rodgers is gonna bury them and Matt Ryan is gonna be too worried about blow in the game (because he hasn't gotten further) and it will cost him... Rodgers has been here before and knows that he has to give it his all wire to wire to win. Last time when Green Bay played Seattle they gave up at halftime. That won't happen again which is why they keep scoring so much each game...I am waiting to see how my systems unfold this week, but I will be honest and say I bet a money line parlay all ready with Green Bay and Pitt.Green Bay because of Rodgers is the manand Pitt because Goodell hates Brady for suing the league...I will however make different wagers later on if I have to according to my system.

I am thinking to tease both dogs. Both 1 possession games down the to the wire like on Sunday

0

Mortgageguru

Prospect

Joined: May, 2015

Posts: 321

Posted: Jan. 19, 2017 - 12:04 AM ET #29

Quote Originally Posted by monkeebooger:

Are you saying shady because it should be higher?Probably because ATL only won by 1 earlier this year at home

If I remember this game correctly GB jumped out to a 28 point lead and lost. Enough said. Atlanta is more complete with a ton of weapons. GB is limping into this game. Luck will run out.

0

bulldog79

Prospect

Joined: Nov, 2016

Posts: 8

Posted: Jan. 19, 2017 - 5:14 AM ET #30

Quote Originally Posted by Fishman13:

The reason line opened 4 and may seem low is because the masses of ave joe's think just like you, they love to back proven winners while fading guys who've never won or lost more in playoffs past.

The books know the masses will back Rodgers.

If you do your homework backing proven winners is foolsgold, backing the better team by effiency indicators will give you a far better record in the long run then backing proven winners and that'd be Falcons .

And you will get far better value with non proven winners because this deep in playoffs the line gets shaded to proven winners as we see here.

When proven winners win again it's because they play on teams better in effiency indicators and when proven winners no longer play on the better teams in these indicators like Seattle they get beaten and many times badly.

Where people get confused about proven winners is when the play on better teams and win then they say, see, see I told you the proven winner will win, well yea he played on the better team.

A much truer test of a proven winner is when he does not play on the better team and those results do not bode well for proven winners.

Had you back Rodgers as an unproven winner to win SB it would have taken you 2 trips to playoffs to win.

Had you backed him as a proven winner to win SB , 5 years later he still has not won it again or made it back again.

He even lost in his opening playoff game as a proven winner after going 15-1 in regular season but playing on a team which was out-gained in total yards in regular season which is again, a very poor indicator as a potential SB winner.

Bye teams that get out-gained in total yards you can kiss their arses goodbye in the playoffs, are you listening KC ?

And there's a 15-1 team with a proven winning QB who could not win a game in playoffs but could win as a unproven winner as a wild card 10-6 team that need the final game to make playoffs but was strong in total yards

My head hurts after reading that....So are you saying Falcons are the play?

He's saying that it's been proven that backing unproven winners when the unknowing public is underestimating the value of the previously shakey loser is a sure bet to happen. If you realize that, then look for certain situations where backing a proven winner is actually riding a loser, then switch to the shakey short-term winner who is about to become a proven winner (time-frame of this switch is variable however). The problem is that I have no idea whether the guy writing this thread is a proven winner. And even if he is, does that mean I should fade him?

Hmmmm

0

Quote Originally Posted by Fishman13:

The reason line opened 4 and may seem low is because the masses of ave joe's think just like you, they love to back proven winners while fading guys who've never won or lost more in playoffs past.

The books know the masses will back Rodgers.

If you do your homework backing proven winners is foolsgold, backing the better team by effiency indicators will give you a far better record in the long run then backing proven winners and that'd be Falcons .

And you will get far better value with non proven winners because this deep in playoffs the line gets shaded to proven winners as we see here.

When proven winners win again it's because they play on teams better in effiency indicators and when proven winners no longer play on the better teams in these indicators like Seattle they get beaten and many times badly.

Where people get confused about proven winners is when the play on better teams and win then they say, see, see I told you the proven winner will win, well yea he played on the better team.

A much truer test of a proven winner is when he does not play on the better team and those results do not bode well for proven winners.

Had you back Rodgers as an unproven winner to win SB it would have taken you 2 trips to playoffs to win.

Had you backed him as a proven winner to win SB , 5 years later he still has not won it again or made it back again.

He even lost in his opening playoff game as a proven winner after going 15-1 in regular season but playing on a team which was out-gained in total yards in regular season which is again, a very poor indicator as a potential SB winner.

Bye teams that get out-gained in total yards you can kiss their arses goodbye in the playoffs, are you listening KC ?

And there's a 15-1 team with a proven winning QB who could not win a game in playoffs but could win as a unproven winner as a wild card 10-6 team that need the final game to make playoffs but was strong in total yards

My head hurts after reading that....So are you saying Falcons are the play?

He's saying that it's been proven that backing unproven winners when the unknowing public is underestimating the value of the previously shakey loser is a sure bet to happen. If you realize that, then look for certain situations where backing a proven winner is actually riding a loser, then switch to the shakey short-term winner who is about to become a proven winner (time-frame of this switch is variable however). The problem is that I have no idea whether the guy writing this thread is a proven winner. And even if he is, does that mean I should fade him?

Hmmmm

BIGfnPOO

MVP

Joined: Jun, 2006

Posts: 18880

Posted: Jan. 19, 2017 - 5:47 AM ET #31

he is saying falcons are a lead pipe cinch.

bigFnPOO

0

theclaw

All-Star

Joined: May, 2008

Posts: 10311

Posted: Jan. 19, 2017 - 6:44 AM ET #32

Quote Originally Posted by Fishman13:

The reason line opened 4 and may seem low is because the masses of ave joe's think just like you, they love to back proven winners while fading guys who've never won or lost more in playoffs past.

The books know the masses will back Rodgers.

If you do your homework backing proven winners is foolsgold, backing the better team by effiency indicators will give you a far better record in the long run then backing proven winners and that'd be Falcons .

And you will get far better value with non proven winners because this deep in playoffs the line gets shaded to proven winners as we see here.

When proven winners win again it's because they play on teams better in effiency indicators and when proven winners no longer play on the better teams in these indicators like Seattle they get beaten and many times badly.

Where people get confused about proven winners is when the play on better teams and win then they say, see, see I told you the proven winner will win, well yea he played on the better team.

A much truer test of a proven winner is when he does not play on the better team and those results do not bode well for proven winners.

Had you back Rodgers as an unproven winner to win SB it would have taken you 2 trips to playoffs to win.

Had you backed him as a proven winner to win SB , 5 years later he still has not won it again or made it back again.

He even lost in his opening playoff game as a proven winner after going 15-1 in regular season but playing on a team which was out-gained in total yards in regular season which is again, a very poor indicator as a potential SB winner.

Bye teams that get out-gained in total yards you can kiss their arses goodbye in the playoffs, are you listening KC ?

And there's a 15-1 team with a proven winning QB who could not win a game in playoffs but could win as a unproven winner as a wild card 10-6 team that need the final game to make playoffs but was strong in total yards

My head hurts after reading that....So are you saying Falcons are the play?

Ha, ha, yes Falcons are the play but the point I'm trying to make is if you go back in history backing proven winners is foolsgold.

Rodgers won his 1st SB being only 0-1 in playoff games previously.

Never won anything not even a single playoff game.

Is 1 playoff game experience ?

As a proven winner he lost 3 straight operning round playoff games including being the only team to go 15-1 or better to lose it of the 7 teams to go 15-1.

Why did he win as an unproven winner but lose as a proven winner ?

Had you backed the better team which was Kapernick and his 9ers you'd be far ahead of backing proven winner Rodgers.

Remember that game, of course you don't, eveyone and his brother was on Rodgers to when I called the 9ers the best bet of that weekend riding Kap over Rodgers no one listen because they could not get past the powerful grip a proven winner holds over them and the 9ers rolled Packers by 14.