It's my opinion that there is too much money wagered on these games for them to be a "FAIR VALUE" I'm not saying there fixed I'm also not saying that they aren't. I am saying that for the past few weeks i have watched these games look extremely BIZARRE.
I can't put my finger on what it is but from a gambling perspective it seems that the regular pack of games on a Saturday and or Sunday go alittle more like they are suppossed to as far as the better team winning the game.
I don't know if the players get caught up in PRIME TIME or what I don't know .Jus watching Rodgers break his collerbone on MNF reminded me of when my 16yr old son broke his while skiing. I can assure you there were two completely different reactions . Now I know I my kid isn't Arron Rodgers and he didn't have pads on, and all breaks are different ,but when he broke his collerbone Sking the pain was OUTRAGEOUS and all over his face. Rodgers laid on the ground for like 3mins went to the sideline looked normal for a few mins then JOGGED to the locker room. All with a broken collarbone. My kid laid in the snow was inmobile and rushed off via ambulance to the hospitol and you knew he BROKE something PERIOD NO QUESTION and he barely wanted to move none less JOG.Maybe he's a baby I hear ya i know things are different and people respond to pain differently. I'm not saying Rodgers didn't break his, it's jus his reaction was not like his collarbone was broken. I doin't know .
Jus too much bizarre things with the MNF SNF and TNF games. You people know that these games have much more money gambled on them than the other games. I;m not saying there fixed I'm jus sayin..... Understand me?
0
To remove first post, remove entire topic.
It's my opinion that there is too much money wagered on these games for them to be a "FAIR VALUE" I'm not saying there fixed I'm also not saying that they aren't. I am saying that for the past few weeks i have watched these games look extremely BIZARRE.
I can't put my finger on what it is but from a gambling perspective it seems that the regular pack of games on a Saturday and or Sunday go alittle more like they are suppossed to as far as the better team winning the game.
I don't know if the players get caught up in PRIME TIME or what I don't know .Jus watching Rodgers break his collerbone on MNF reminded me of when my 16yr old son broke his while skiing. I can assure you there were two completely different reactions . Now I know I my kid isn't Arron Rodgers and he didn't have pads on, and all breaks are different ,but when he broke his collerbone Sking the pain was OUTRAGEOUS and all over his face. Rodgers laid on the ground for like 3mins went to the sideline looked normal for a few mins then JOGGED to the locker room. All with a broken collarbone. My kid laid in the snow was inmobile and rushed off via ambulance to the hospitol and you knew he BROKE something PERIOD NO QUESTION and he barely wanted to move none less JOG.Maybe he's a baby I hear ya i know things are different and people respond to pain differently. I'm not saying Rodgers didn't break his, it's jus his reaction was not like his collarbone was broken. I doin't know .
Jus too much bizarre things with the MNF SNF and TNF games. You people know that these games have much more money gambled on them than the other games. I;m not saying there fixed I'm jus sayin..... Understand me?
So, your theory is that Aaron Rodgers did not break his collarbone? Who was paying him to pretend to be injured? The NFL? A large casino? A betting syndicate?
0
So, your theory is that Aaron Rodgers did not break his collarbone? Who was paying him to pretend to be injured? The NFL? A large casino? A betting syndicate?
Last Sunday the Jets beat the Saints, the Browns beat the Ravens for the first time in a long time, and they did it with Jason Campbell getting hurt and coming back in during the game. The Bucs took Seattle to Overtime. The Vikings nearly beat Dallas. The Eagles obliterated the Raiders in Oakland.
If any of those things happened during a prime time game you would be thinking it's strange too, but they seem less significant to you because they happened during a grouping of games taking your focus off them a bit.
It is the viewer that over analyzes the prime time game because it stands on it's own.
The lion and the tiger may be more powerful, but the wolf doesn't perform in the circus.
0
Last Sunday the Jets beat the Saints, the Browns beat the Ravens for the first time in a long time, and they did it with Jason Campbell getting hurt and coming back in during the game. The Bucs took Seattle to Overtime. The Vikings nearly beat Dallas. The Eagles obliterated the Raiders in Oakland.
If any of those things happened during a prime time game you would be thinking it's strange too, but they seem less significant to you because they happened during a grouping of games taking your focus off them a bit.
It is the viewer that over analyzes the prime time game because it stands on it's own.
Last Sunday the Jets beat the Saints, the Browns beat the Ravens for the first time in a long time, and they did it with Jason Campbell getting hurt and coming back in during the game. The Bucs took Seattle to Overtime. The Vikings nearly beat Dallas. The Eagles obliterated the Raiders in Oakland.
If any of those things happened during a prime time game you would be thinking it's strange too, but they seem less significant to you because they happened during a grouping of games taking your focus off them a bit.
It is the viewer that over analyzes the prime time game because it stands on it's own.
0
Quote Originally Posted by Polar_Bear:
Last Sunday the Jets beat the Saints, the Browns beat the Ravens for the first time in a long time, and they did it with Jason Campbell getting hurt and coming back in during the game. The Bucs took Seattle to Overtime. The Vikings nearly beat Dallas. The Eagles obliterated the Raiders in Oakland.
If any of those things happened during a prime time game you would be thinking it's strange too, but they seem less significant to you because they happened during a grouping of games taking your focus off them a bit.
It is the viewer that over analyzes the prime time game because it stands on it's own.
i never said Rodgers was paid off jus said his emotion really didn't look like someone that broke his collarbone...As for the other comments the Jets beat the saints but noone in cCOVERS LOST that play cuz everyone in here LOVED THE JETS...Ravens SUCK this year that was no Shocker.. Seattle beating Buc's was no shocker either esp after they aslmost lost to the RAMS on MNF Seattle not covering thier point spread maybe. Eagles Raiders who cared/// what I'm looking at on MNF there is more money bet on that game... than any other game... and all those sunday games listed combined. Not only is everybody playing but you got people putting UNGODLY numbers on those games cuz theyre doiwn and the week ends Monday and people sometimes bet money they dont have. It's jus too much money on those gamesand if there was a way to intentionally effect a game that would be the TARGET game to pick.
0
i never said Rodgers was paid off jus said his emotion really didn't look like someone that broke his collarbone...As for the other comments the Jets beat the saints but noone in cCOVERS LOST that play cuz everyone in here LOVED THE JETS...Ravens SUCK this year that was no Shocker.. Seattle beating Buc's was no shocker either esp after they aslmost lost to the RAMS on MNF Seattle not covering thier point spread maybe. Eagles Raiders who cared/// what I'm looking at on MNF there is more money bet on that game... than any other game... and all those sunday games listed combined. Not only is everybody playing but you got people putting UNGODLY numbers on those games cuz theyre doiwn and the week ends Monday and people sometimes bet money they dont have. It's jus too much money on those gamesand if there was a way to intentionally effect a game that would be the TARGET game to pick.
You take a GB team at home that are kinda in a groove playing well Rodgers looking the best he's looked so far this season up agiant the Bears without thier STARTING QB...wheres all the money going?
Then you take a SEATTLE team thats got a incredible Defense one of the best RB's in the game right now playing agianst one of the WORST TEAMS IN THE LEAGUE with the WORST RUN DEFENSE wheres all the money gonna be?
Then Peyton Manning and the INVINCIBLE BRONCO'S coming in to play his old team the Broncos look LEVEL'S above every other team in the league and if they can't stop you defensivly they'll jus outscore you VS a Indy team whose D has never been good and jus lost to SD.Look good at times and terrible at other times. Plus the owner has spurned some small emotion. Wheres all the money gonna be?
THERES MORE BUT THATS JUS A FEW !!!!
I know I'm crazy... I'm stupid...I know
0
You take a GB team at home that are kinda in a groove playing well Rodgers looking the best he's looked so far this season up agiant the Bears without thier STARTING QB...wheres all the money going?
Then you take a SEATTLE team thats got a incredible Defense one of the best RB's in the game right now playing agianst one of the WORST TEAMS IN THE LEAGUE with the WORST RUN DEFENSE wheres all the money gonna be?
Then Peyton Manning and the INVINCIBLE BRONCO'S coming in to play his old team the Broncos look LEVEL'S above every other team in the league and if they can't stop you defensivly they'll jus outscore you VS a Indy team whose D has never been good and jus lost to SD.Look good at times and terrible at other times. Plus the owner has spurned some small emotion. Wheres all the money gonna be?
i never said Rodgers was paid off jus said his emotion really didn't look like someone that broke his collarbone...As for the other comments the Jets beat the saints but noone in cCOVERS LOST that play cuz everyone in here LOVED THE JETS...Ravens SUCK this year that was no Shocker.. Seattle beating Buc's was no shocker either esp after they aslmost lost to the RAMS on MNF Seattle not covering thier point spread maybe. Eagles Raiders who cared/// what I'm looking at on MNF there is more money bet on that game... than any other game... and all those sunday games listed combined. Not only is everybody playing but you got people putting UNGODLY numbers on those games cuz theyre doiwn and the week ends Monday and people sometimes bet money they dont have. It's jus too much money on those gamesand if there was a way to intentionally effect a game that would be the TARGET game to pick.
There were tons of people on the Saints...tons....on this forum and on others I looked at. Both the saints losing and seahawks not covering wiped out every teaser and parlay going, especially the saints, many of the more intelligent and more popualr posters were on the jets so it seemed like many were on them but there are hundreds of threads that barely get seen with only a few posts that barely get seen and tons of saints love and plays. I was one of only a few people on the browns, again the forum was littered with ravens plays, whether you were shocked or not is irrelevant to your point. Everyone was on the Raiders and you not caring just makes my point for me. If that game was on a Monday or Thursday you would have focused on it and seen everyone get killed and there would have been a page full of threads with thick skulls wondering in amazement how the Raiders could beat up Pitt, and the Eagles who suck so bad, with Foles at QB, who everyone was laughing at heading into the game, could possibly beat the Raiders so badly. All that would have appeared very strange if they were the only game focused on.
Dolphins beat the Bengals....Zero shock there, Bengals suck on the road.
Indy beats the Texans, and again so? Houston blows and have a rookie qb, public cashed in big with Indy so that was a mega square win.
Bears upset their hated division rival with a QB who I personally feel makes them more dangerous than Cutler. There were many posters including myself that posted and played the Bears. Ya Rodgers got hurt. Players get hurt every Sunday, it's football, there is nothing weird about that. People that bet the dog Texans to upset the Chiefs a couple of sundays ago got screwed because the Texans lost their star running back right at the star of the game they otherwise probably would have won and so public got lucky and got to cash in barely. But it was not a prime time game so not blown up like the Rodgers injury.
The lion and the tiger may be more powerful, but the wolf doesn't perform in the circus.
0
Quote Originally Posted by Daywalker331:
i never said Rodgers was paid off jus said his emotion really didn't look like someone that broke his collarbone...As for the other comments the Jets beat the saints but noone in cCOVERS LOST that play cuz everyone in here LOVED THE JETS...Ravens SUCK this year that was no Shocker.. Seattle beating Buc's was no shocker either esp after they aslmost lost to the RAMS on MNF Seattle not covering thier point spread maybe. Eagles Raiders who cared/// what I'm looking at on MNF there is more money bet on that game... than any other game... and all those sunday games listed combined. Not only is everybody playing but you got people putting UNGODLY numbers on those games cuz theyre doiwn and the week ends Monday and people sometimes bet money they dont have. It's jus too much money on those gamesand if there was a way to intentionally effect a game that would be the TARGET game to pick.
There were tons of people on the Saints...tons....on this forum and on others I looked at. Both the saints losing and seahawks not covering wiped out every teaser and parlay going, especially the saints, many of the more intelligent and more popualr posters were on the jets so it seemed like many were on them but there are hundreds of threads that barely get seen with only a few posts that barely get seen and tons of saints love and plays. I was one of only a few people on the browns, again the forum was littered with ravens plays, whether you were shocked or not is irrelevant to your point. Everyone was on the Raiders and you not caring just makes my point for me. If that game was on a Monday or Thursday you would have focused on it and seen everyone get killed and there would have been a page full of threads with thick skulls wondering in amazement how the Raiders could beat up Pitt, and the Eagles who suck so bad, with Foles at QB, who everyone was laughing at heading into the game, could possibly beat the Raiders so badly. All that would have appeared very strange if they were the only game focused on.
Dolphins beat the Bengals....Zero shock there, Bengals suck on the road.
Indy beats the Texans, and again so? Houston blows and have a rookie qb, public cashed in big with Indy so that was a mega square win.
Bears upset their hated division rival with a QB who I personally feel makes them more dangerous than Cutler. There were many posters including myself that posted and played the Bears. Ya Rodgers got hurt. Players get hurt every Sunday, it's football, there is nothing weird about that. People that bet the dog Texans to upset the Chiefs a couple of sundays ago got screwed because the Texans lost their star running back right at the star of the game they otherwise probably would have won and so public got lucky and got to cash in barely. But it was not a prime time game so not blown up like the Rodgers injury.
I kinda see your point. Denver versus Oakland on MNF, a while back. Spread closes at -16.5. Broncos win by 16. Raiders score late with a backup as Terrell goes down hurt. Two turnovers by Peyton cost them the cover. I had Denver at the half at -10, teased Denver and the total, took Raiders plus 16.5 on a straight bet. Unreal luck. But also lost on Tigers in MLB with Verlander versus Twins laying 200.
Do not necessarily believe fixes, etc. but Denver losing to Indy on SNF and other examples make you wonder how so many games land on or near the predicted spread. Indy at SF, Seattle at Indy, NO at New Eng, all seemed to have better team losing . Some of these were not MNF or SNF, etc. but NYG versus MN was the worst. You have to believe the public won that won easy. Who would think a starting qb with only a week of practice had a chance?
0
I kinda see your point. Denver versus Oakland on MNF, a while back. Spread closes at -16.5. Broncos win by 16. Raiders score late with a backup as Terrell goes down hurt. Two turnovers by Peyton cost them the cover. I had Denver at the half at -10, teased Denver and the total, took Raiders plus 16.5 on a straight bet. Unreal luck. But also lost on Tigers in MLB with Verlander versus Twins laying 200.
Do not necessarily believe fixes, etc. but Denver losing to Indy on SNF and other examples make you wonder how so many games land on or near the predicted spread. Indy at SF, Seattle at Indy, NO at New Eng, all seemed to have better team losing . Some of these were not MNF or SNF, etc. but NYG versus MN was the worst. You have to believe the public won that won easy. Who would think a starting qb with only a week of practice had a chance?
I kinda see your point. Denver versus Oakland on MNF, a while back. Spread closes at -16.5. Broncos win by 16. Raiders score late with a backup as Terrell goes down hurt. Two turnovers by Peyton cost them the cover. I had Denver at the half at -10, teased Denver and the total, took Raiders plus 16.5 on a straight bet. Unreal luck. But also lost on Tigers in MLB with Verlander versus Twins laying 200.
Do not necessarily believe fixes, etc. but Denver losing to Indy on SNF and other examples make you wonder how so many games land on or near the predicted spread. Indy at SF, Seattle at Indy, NO at New Eng, all seemed to have better team losing . Some of these were not MNF or SNF, etc. but NYG versus MN was the worst. You have to believe the public won that won easy. Who would think a starting qb with only a week of practice had a chance?
0
I kinda see your point. Denver versus Oakland on MNF, a while back. Spread closes at -16.5. Broncos win by 16. Raiders score late with a backup as Terrell goes down hurt. Two turnovers by Peyton cost them the cover. I had Denver at the half at -10, teased Denver and the total, took Raiders plus 16.5 on a straight bet. Unreal luck. But also lost on Tigers in MLB with Verlander versus Twins laying 200.
Do not necessarily believe fixes, etc. but Denver losing to Indy on SNF and other examples make you wonder how so many games land on or near the predicted spread. Indy at SF, Seattle at Indy, NO at New Eng, all seemed to have better team losing . Some of these were not MNF or SNF, etc. but NYG versus MN was the worst. You have to believe the public won that won easy. Who would think a starting qb with only a week of practice had a chance?
I kinda see your point. Denver versus Oakland on MNF, a while back. Spread closes at -16.5. Broncos win by 16. Raiders score late with a backup as Terrell goes down hurt. Two turnovers by Peyton cost them the cover. I had Denver at the half at -10, teased Denver and the total, took Raiders plus 16.5 on a straight bet. Unreal luck. But also lost on Tigers in MLB with Verlander versus Twins laying 200.
Do not necessarily believe fixes, etc. but Denver losing to Indy on SNF and other examples make you wonder how so many games land on or near the predicted spread. Indy at SF, Seattle at Indy, NO at New Eng, all seemed to have better team losing . Some of these were not MNF or SNF, etc. but NYG versus MN was the worst. You have to believe the public won that won easy. Who would think a starting qb with only a week of practice had a chance?
0
I kinda see your point. Denver versus Oakland on MNF, a while back. Spread closes at -16.5. Broncos win by 16. Raiders score late with a backup as Terrell goes down hurt. Two turnovers by Peyton cost them the cover. I had Denver at the half at -10, teased Denver and the total, took Raiders plus 16.5 on a straight bet. Unreal luck. But also lost on Tigers in MLB with Verlander versus Twins laying 200.
Do not necessarily believe fixes, etc. but Denver losing to Indy on SNF and other examples make you wonder how so many games land on or near the predicted spread. Indy at SF, Seattle at Indy, NO at New Eng, all seemed to have better team losing . Some of these were not MNF or SNF, etc. but NYG versus MN was the worst. You have to believe the public won that won easy. Who would think a starting qb with only a week of practice had a chance?
I kinda see your point. Denver versus Oakland on MNF, a while back. Spread closes at -16.5. Broncos win by 16. Raiders score late with a backup as Terrell goes down hurt. Two turnovers by Peyton cost them the cover. I had Denver at the half at -10, teased Denver and the total, took Raiders plus 16.5 on a straight bet. Unreal luck. But also lost on Tigers in MLB with Verlander versus Twins laying 200.
Do not necessarily believe fixes, etc. but Denver losing to Indy on SNF and other examples make you wonder how so many games land on or near the predicted spread. Indy at SF, Seattle at Indy, NO at New Eng, all seemed to have better team losing . Some of these were not MNF or SNF, etc. but NYG versus MN was the worst. You have to believe the public won that won easy. Who would think a starting qb with only a week of practice had a chance?
0
I kinda see your point. Denver versus Oakland on MNF, a while back. Spread closes at -16.5. Broncos win by 16. Raiders score late with a backup as Terrell goes down hurt. Two turnovers by Peyton cost them the cover. I had Denver at the half at -10, teased Denver and the total, took Raiders plus 16.5 on a straight bet. Unreal luck. But also lost on Tigers in MLB with Verlander versus Twins laying 200.
Do not necessarily believe fixes, etc. but Denver losing to Indy on SNF and other examples make you wonder how so many games land on or near the predicted spread. Indy at SF, Seattle at Indy, NO at New Eng, all seemed to have better team losing . Some of these were not MNF or SNF, etc. but NYG versus MN was the worst. You have to believe the public won that won easy. Who would think a starting qb with only a week of practice had a chance?
I kinda see your point. Denver versus Oakland on MNF, a while back. Spread closes at -16.5. Broncos win by 16. Raiders score late with a backup as Terrell goes down hurt. Two turnovers by Peyton cost them the cover. I had Denver at the half at -10, teased Denver and the total, took Raiders plus 16.5 on a straight bet. Unreal luck. But also lost on Tigers in MLB with Verlander versus Twins laying 200.
Do not necessarily believe fixes, etc. but Denver losing to Indy on SNF and other examples make you wonder how so many games land on or near the predicted spread. Indy at SF, Seattle at Indy, NO at New Eng, all seemed to have better team losing . Some of these were not MNF or SNF, etc. but NYG versus MN was the worst. You have to believe the public won that won easy. Who would think a starting qb with only a week of practice had a chance?
0
I kinda see your point. Denver versus Oakland on MNF, a while back. Spread closes at -16.5. Broncos win by 16. Raiders score late with a backup as Terrell goes down hurt. Two turnovers by Peyton cost them the cover. I had Denver at the half at -10, teased Denver and the total, took Raiders plus 16.5 on a straight bet. Unreal luck. But also lost on Tigers in MLB with Verlander versus Twins laying 200.
Do not necessarily believe fixes, etc. but Denver losing to Indy on SNF and other examples make you wonder how so many games land on or near the predicted spread. Indy at SF, Seattle at Indy, NO at New Eng, all seemed to have better team losing . Some of these were not MNF or SNF, etc. but NYG versus MN was the worst. You have to believe the public won that won easy. Who would think a starting qb with only a week of practice had a chance?
As to my point on the Chiefs game, meant Chiefs still won but did not cover but most dog bettors for that game had something on the Texans moneyline as well as ats like myself so it sucked losing Foster right at the start as he was a key factor in capping that game.
I get your thinking with the prime time games man, I just feel weird stuff happens in other games as well but is just not noticed as much.
The lion and the tiger may be more powerful, but the wolf doesn't perform in the circus.
0
As to my point on the Chiefs game, meant Chiefs still won but did not cover but most dog bettors for that game had something on the Texans moneyline as well as ats like myself so it sucked losing Foster right at the start as he was a key factor in capping that game.
I get your thinking with the prime time games man, I just feel weird stuff happens in other games as well but is just not noticed as much.
Last Sunday the Jets beat the Saints, the Browns beat the Ravens for the first time in a long time, and they did it with Jason Campbell getting hurt and coming back in during the game. The Bucs took Seattle to Overtime. The Vikings nearly beat Dallas. The Eagles obliterated the Raiders in Oakland.
If any of those things happened during a prime time game you would be thinking it's strange too, but they seem less significant to you because they happened during a grouping of games taking your focus off them a bit.
It is the viewer that over analyzes the prime time game because it stands on it's own.
Well said ...... couldn't agree more
What do you call an Eternal Optimist? An accordion with a beeper!
0
Quote Originally Posted by Polar_Bear:
Last Sunday the Jets beat the Saints, the Browns beat the Ravens for the first time in a long time, and they did it with Jason Campbell getting hurt and coming back in during the game. The Bucs took Seattle to Overtime. The Vikings nearly beat Dallas. The Eagles obliterated the Raiders in Oakland.
If any of those things happened during a prime time game you would be thinking it's strange too, but they seem less significant to you because they happened during a grouping of games taking your focus off them a bit.
It is the viewer that over analyzes the prime time game because it stands on it's own.
There were tons of people on the Saints...tons....on this forum and on others I looked at. Both the saints losing and seahawks not covering wiped out every teaser and parlay going, especially the saints, many of the more intelligent and more popualr posters were on the jets so it seemed like many were on them but there are hundreds of threads that barely get seen with only a few posts that barely get seen and tons of saints love and plays. I was one of only a few people on the browns, again the forum was littered with ravens plays, whether you were shocked or not is irrelevant to your point. Everyone was on the Raiders and you not caring just makes my point for me. If that game was on a Monday or Thursday you would have focused on it and seen everyone get killed and there would have been a page full of threads with thick skulls wondering in amazement how the Raiders could beat up Pitt, and the Eagles who suck so bad, with Foles at QB, who everyone was laughing at heading into the game, could possibly beat the Raiders so badly. All that would have appeared very strange if they were the only game focused on.
Dolphins beat the Bengals....Zero shock there, Bengals suck on the road.
Indy beats the Texans, and again so? Houston blows and have a rookie qb, public cashed in big with Indy so that was a mega square win.
Bears upset their hated division rival with a QB who I personally feel makes them more dangerous than Cutler. There were many posters including myself that posted and played the Bears. Ya Rodgers got hurt. Players get hurt every Sunday, it's football, there is nothing weird about that. People that bet the dog Texans to upset the Chiefs a couple of sundays ago got screwed because the Texans lost their star running back right at the star of the game they otherwise probably would have won and so public got lucky and got to cash in barely. But it was not a prime time game so not blown up like the Rodgers injury.
\
What do you call an Eternal Optimist? An accordion with a beeper!
0
Quote Originally Posted by Polar_Bear:
There were tons of people on the Saints...tons....on this forum and on others I looked at. Both the saints losing and seahawks not covering wiped out every teaser and parlay going, especially the saints, many of the more intelligent and more popualr posters were on the jets so it seemed like many were on them but there are hundreds of threads that barely get seen with only a few posts that barely get seen and tons of saints love and plays. I was one of only a few people on the browns, again the forum was littered with ravens plays, whether you were shocked or not is irrelevant to your point. Everyone was on the Raiders and you not caring just makes my point for me. If that game was on a Monday or Thursday you would have focused on it and seen everyone get killed and there would have been a page full of threads with thick skulls wondering in amazement how the Raiders could beat up Pitt, and the Eagles who suck so bad, with Foles at QB, who everyone was laughing at heading into the game, could possibly beat the Raiders so badly. All that would have appeared very strange if they were the only game focused on.
Dolphins beat the Bengals....Zero shock there, Bengals suck on the road.
Indy beats the Texans, and again so? Houston blows and have a rookie qb, public cashed in big with Indy so that was a mega square win.
Bears upset their hated division rival with a QB who I personally feel makes them more dangerous than Cutler. There were many posters including myself that posted and played the Bears. Ya Rodgers got hurt. Players get hurt every Sunday, it's football, there is nothing weird about that. People that bet the dog Texans to upset the Chiefs a couple of sundays ago got screwed because the Texans lost their star running back right at the star of the game they otherwise probably would have won and so public got lucky and got to cash in barely. But it was not a prime time game so not blown up like the Rodgers injury.
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.
Hot Forum Topics
