All Forums | NFL Betting

The Packers are +165 to win NFC at Bovada

...
Participants:
Search model icon
Views: 1729
Posts: 78
 
Banned
Participation Meter
Joined: Nov, 2015
Posts: 7814
Posted: #26

Quote Originally Posted by Danny9999:

Quote Originally Posted by lordbettington: I agree there is no value on +165.  One could have got gb at 4 or 5-1 for months because of the rams hype.  Brady's presence is what is keeping the odds at +165.  If eagles were to somehow beat bucs watch what happens to the odds on gb.   bucs are decimated by injury though.  Rams qb is not a playoff winner, they already went into gb and lost. gb is getting healthy, rodgers will be rested.  packers already beat the cards and 49ers on the road.  You failed to mention Packers are 8-0 at home.  They may not be a great team, there are no great teams this year.  I could make a post and crap on all the teams in the nfc, they are all flawed.  maybe there is value on 49ers or cowboys, still think neither will take down gb. Who is a good bet right now to win the nfc in your opinion? Cowboys +800. Third hardest schedule in NFL, yet scored way more and gave up way less. Playing good ball at end of season.
 

Vs crappy teams though.

 

 
Banned
Participation Meter
Joined: Nov, 2015
Posts: 7814
Posted: #27

Quote Originally Posted by undermysac:

Chic Cardinals is such a great guy to argue with
 

Raiders, Pitt, SF. I was right about all of them winning. 3 of the most unrealistic finishes.

Apparently my theory works very well.

 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Apr, 2018
Posts: 4110
Posted: #28

+165 isn't as generous as you think. While top seeds have done well lately many years there is a lower seeded team that wins all their road games and gets in. The NFL is based on parity. Injuries and weird stuff happens all the time, +165 to win 2 games when one of those games is probably against Brady or the best offense in the NFL plus one of 3 good teams from the best division in the NFL (NFC West).

In saying that, my book had a special +400 on GB to win it all and I took that. Just feels like Rodgers year to me and yes GB is tough to play at.

 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Nov, 2016
Posts: 1732
Posted: #29

Quote Originally Posted by lordbettington:

I agree there is no value on +165.  One could have got gb at 4 or 5-1 for months because of the rams hype.  Brady's presence is what is keeping the odds at +165.  If eagles were to somehow beat bucs watch what happens to the odds on gb.   bucs are decimated by injury though.  Rams qb is not a playoff winner, they already went into gb and lost. gb is getting healthy, rodgers will be rested.  packers already beat the cards and 49ers on the road.  You failed to mention Packers are 8-0 at home.  They may not be a great team, there are no great teams this year.  I could make a post and crap on all the teams in the nfc, they are all flawed.  maybe there is value on 49ers or cowboys, still think neither will take down gb. Who is a good bet right now to win the nfc in your opinion?

This is exactly right. If Tom Brady was no longer in the league and you had the same teams in these playoffs the odds would not be the same. The books know that Tom Brady is capable of going into any stadium and winning a playoff game and of course winning a superbowl as well. The fact that the Bucs did this very thing last year is why the books will still pay plus money for the number 1seed packers if they advance to the superbowl. There is very little chance that this is not the NFC championship game again IMO. Hate to say it but Aaron Rodgers will single handedly beat any of the other NFC teams. Actually I don't hate to say it bc i will be betting on this very thing before the odds get worse as i did on the superbowl. Bet equal money on both the Bucs and Packers to win the NFC if you want to have a very good chance to make a profit. Do the same on the superbowl. These QBs are unbeatable and will only lose to each other.

 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Nov, 2016
Posts: 1732
Posted: #30

Quote Originally Posted by lordbettington:

I agree there is no value on +165.  One could have got gb at 4 or 5-1 for months because of the rams hype.  Brady's presence is what is keeping the odds at +165.  If eagles were to somehow beat bucs watch what happens to the odds on gb.   bucs are decimated by injury though.  Rams qb is not a playoff winner, they already went into gb and lost. gb is getting healthy, rodgers will be rested.  packers already beat the cards and 49ers on the road.  You failed to mention Packers are 8-0 at home.  They may not be a great team, there are no great teams this year.  I could make a post and crap on all the teams in the nfc, they are all flawed.  maybe there is value on 49ers or cowboys, still think neither will take down gb. Who is a good bet right now to win the nfc in your opinion?

This is exactly right. If Tom Brady was no longer in the league and you had the same teams in these playoffs the odds would not be the same. The books know that Tom Brady is capable of going into any stadium and winning a playoff game and of course winning a superbowl as well. The fact that the Bucs did this very thing last year is why the books will still pay plus money for the number seed if they advance to the superbowl. There is very little chance that this is not the NFC championship game again IMO. Hate to say it but Aaron Rodgers will single handedly beat any of the other NFC teams. Actually I don't hate to say it bc i will be betting on this very thing before the odds get worse as i did on the superbowl. Bet equal money on both the Bucs and Packers to win the NFC if you want to have a very good chance to make a profit. Do the same on the superbowl. These QBs are unbeatable and will only lose to each other.

 
Banned
Participation Meter
Joined: Nov, 2015
Posts: 7814
Posted: #31

Quote Originally Posted by lordbettington:

I agree there is no value on +165.  One could have got gb at 4 or 5-1 for months because of the rams hype.  Brady's presence is what is keeping the odds at +165.  If eagles were to somehow beat bucs watch what happens to the odds on gb.   bucs are decimated by injury though.  Rams qb is not a playoff winner, they already went into gb and lost. gb is getting healthy, rodgers will be rested.  packers already beat the cards and 49ers on the road.  You failed to mention Packers are 8-0 at home.  They may not be a great team, there are no great teams this year.  I could make a post and crap on all the teams in the nfc, they are all flawed.  maybe there is value on 49ers or cowboys, still think neither will take down gb. Who is a good bet right now to win the nfc in your opinion?
 

You said it better than I 

 
Banned
Participation Meter
Joined: Jul, 2020
Posts: 1413
Posted: #32

@Unclebenelli

Who's the Golden Horse Shoe?

 1. The Weasel (Rogers)
 2.  The Golden Horse Shoe (?)
 3. Tommy (Brady)

 
Rookie
Participation Meter
Joined: Sep, 2020
Posts: 573
Posted: #33

Mahomes? 

 
Banned
Participation Meter
Joined: Nov, 2015
Posts: 7814
Posted: #34

Quote Originally Posted by Unclebenelli:

@theclaw  The differential is the QB.  Notice the one-off is always a HOF QB, in this instance his name was Payton.
 

Who constantly makes playoffs and gets number one seeds? Hall of fame QBs mostly.

So it's not a good indicator. 

 

 
Captain
Participation Meter
Joined: Sep, 2015
Posts: 5722
Posted: #35

I think GB is overrated and will likely fade them next week.

 
Banned
Participation Meter
Joined: Nov, 2015
Posts: 7814
Posted: #36

Quote Originally Posted by Danny9999:

If we figure at least one NFC wildcard wins, then GB gets a WC otherwise the Rams in their first game. Either way that's at least GB -200 or even -300 ML. If you figure -200, the NFC Championship is pretty much a PK to make GB +165. -200 and -120 = +175 I watched just a few minutes of the GB Vikings game and all the announcers talked about how cold GB is and all the other teams are "warm weather" teams, blah blah blah. That didn't stop TB from winning in GB last year. Or all the other times they have lost at home in playoffs. During the Farve/Rodgers ERA they are about .500 at home in playoffs. Was it not cold all those days ? Cold doesn't mean shit. Think about this +165. It doesn't even make since. Not at all. That means the Packers aren't gonna be a very big favorite in either game or it wouldn't be +165 to win 2 home games. They are begging squares to jump on GB and I have heard the "it's cold" angle so much I'm ready to puke. Think about how the +165 makes no sense or don't. Instead just come in here talking about the fix when GB loses in the NFC playoffs --- AGAIN. Like they do every year.  And I know you say it's not hard to say a team won't get to SB. This isn't true at all. They have to win 2 home games and first likely against a wild card. The Seahawks have never lost in NFC playoffs as #1 seed. Never. Not once. I say its not hard to pick the team with best record.  This team is overrated and they are gonna lose either first game or second and I think the +165 shows it's really likely.
 

What's seattle got to do with anything?

They hardly ever made playoffs as much as Packers either. It's a meaningless compare contrast. Seattle is 1-2 in super bowls. The deeper the Packers go, the more successful they are historically. 

How many other teams get number one seeds? 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.si.com/nfl/titans/.amp/news/tennessee-titans-nfl-no-1-seed-playoff-history

 
Banned
Participation Meter
Joined: Sep, 2021
Posts: 2025
Posted: #37

@chic-cardinals

 I copied this from the link you posted above

 

Since the NFL expanded to 32 teams and realigned into eight divisions in 2002, more than half the No. 1 seeds from the AFC and NFC – 20 of 38 – eventually played for the Vince Lombardi Trophy

Aaron Rodgers is 0 for 3 

 
Banned
Participation Meter
Joined: Nov, 2015
Posts: 7814
Posted: #38

Quote Originally Posted by Danny9999:

@chic-cardinals  I copied this from the link you posted above   Since the NFL expanded to 32 teams and realigned into eight divisions in 2002, more than half the No. 1 seeds from the AFC and NFC – 20 of 38 – eventually played for the Vince Lombardi Trophy Aaron Rodgers is 0 for 3
 

I'm not trying to prove or disprove anything. I just found the article. 0-3, but still part if a whole that shows number one seeds aren't as successful as the OP is trying to say.

Now, 0-3. Have you noticed the number 13 is all over the place this season. 1-3 is very likely.

And  +165? What super bowl year is this? 56.

 

 

 

 
Banned
Participation Meter
Joined: Sep, 2021
Posts: 2025
Posted: #39

@chic-cardinals

 "They hardly ever made playoffs as much as Packers either. It's a meaningless compare contrast. "

Since Aaron Rodgers career started, The Seahawks have made the playoffs more often.( Aaron has missed 2 or 3 times, before this year, the Seahawks have missed once ) The Seahawks have beaten Rodgers 2 ouf of the 3 times they have played in the playoffs, and both Packers and Seahawks have been top seed 3 times.

The Seahawks went to the superbowl every time, the Packers got beat before the superbowl every time. Green Bay is not such a tough place to play. 

 
Banned
Participation Meter
Joined: Sep, 2021
Posts: 2025
Posted: #40

@chic-cardinals

 

Now, 0-3. Have you noticed the number 13 is all over the place this season. 1-3 is very likely.

And  +165? What super bowl year is this? 56.

 

Are you even being serious about this ? No, I have not noticed the number 13 is all over the place.

And you think the +165 is somehow because its superbowl 56 ?

The Chiefs are -700 this weekend.

Yet the Packers cannot, will not be higher than -225 in either game ( otherwise you cant get close to +165 ). The Linesmakers are Begging begging begging begging begging people to take the Packers. They aren't begging you to take a winner. 

+165 for a top seed that only has to win 2 home games and likely will get a WC in game 1. Thats nuts. The Seahawks have been top seed 3 times and have been - money every single time. -120, -140. Never +165. Thats nuts. 

Good luck chasing the public team, supposed great QB Aaron rodgers, top seed, home team that cant possibly lose because its "cold", and +165 to boot. What could possibly go wrong.

next weekend the whole packers crowd will be screaming--  ITS ALL FIXED

 
Banned
Participation Meter
Joined: Nov, 2015
Posts: 7814
Posted: #41

Quote Originally Posted by Danny9999:

@chic-cardinals   Now, 0-3. Have you noticed the number 13 is all over the place this season. 1-3 is very likely. And  +165? What super bowl year is this? 56.   Are you even being serious about this ? No, I have not noticed the number 13 is all over the place. And you think the +165 is somehow because its superbowl 56 ? The Chiefs are -700 this weekend. Yet the Packers cannot, will not be higher than -225 in either game ( otherwise you cant get close to +165 ). The Linesmakers are Begging begging begging begging begging people to take the Packers. They aren't begging you to take a winner.  +165 for a top seed that only has to win 2 home games and likely will get a WC in game 1. Thats nuts. The Seahawks have been top seed 3 times and have been - money every single time. -120, -140. Never +165. Thats nuts.  Good luck chasing the public team, supposed great QB Aaron rodgers, top seed, home team that cant possibly lose because its "cold", and +165 to boot. What could possibly go wrong. next weekend the whole packers crowd will be screaming--  ITS ALL FIXED
 

Yes, I  realize You have absolutely no understanding of what's really happening 

You can't see obvious numerology clues right in your face. 

Fixed? It's fixed regardless who wins. Doesn't matter what fan base is disappointed.

Lol you saw what happened in Baltimore, LA and LV. And Jags.

And you still try to claim it's all natural.? Really?

 

 

 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Oct, 2021
Posts: 3443
Posted: #42

I’ll never get that 5 minutes back. Why did I even keep reading after the opener?

Basically GB has no chance because they are +165??? If that’s how you pick these games you will never win money doing it. 

 
Legend
Participation Meter
Joined: Dec, 2014
Posts: 47775
Posted: #43

@Danny9999

 Stop using reasonable insights vs numerology, no one here can beat Chic in an argument. 

an_roll_laugh

 
Legend
Participation Meter
Joined: Dec, 2014
Posts: 47775
Posted: #44

The number 13 is every where this year...I'm sold

peace_5

 
Banned
Participation Meter
Joined: Nov, 2015
Posts: 7814
Posted: #45

Quote Originally Posted by undermysac:

@Danny9999  Stop using reasonable insights vs numerology, no one here can beat Chic in an argument.
 

Time and again,teams that move or build new stadiums end up in SBs or  multiple years of playoffs just before or after.

Time and again, the teams with more drama or media focus  end up in SB.

Raiders are swimming in both factors.

 How fast was Ruggs going? 156 mph.....

Las Vegas Raiders lead series vs Chargers 67-56-2.....56, after last game in season.

The LA Chargers host city has 56 wins all time vs the LV Raiders. 67 wins and 2 ties. The Raiders were in SB 2 ,after the 1967 season vs Packers

650,000=, amount of emails in the Gruden stuff lol.

 
Prospect
Participation Meter
Joined: Mar, 2019
Posts: 133
Posted: #46

What do you guys think of      " to win NFC    GB or TB    -150"   ......just need them to win their games next week  (assume TB wins this week ) and you win bet before NFC championship......or in worse case should have one of them at home for NFC championship....

 
Prospect
Participation Meter
Joined: Dec, 2020
Posts: 151
Posted: #47

Danny let me know it you have answers to my questions, you seemed to have ignored them. 

 
Banned
Participation Meter
Joined: Jan, 2012
Posts: 26914
Posted: #48

Quote Originally Posted by chic-cardinals:

Quote Originally Posted by undermysac: @Danny9999  Stop using reasonable insights vs numerology, no one here can beat Chic in an argument.  Time and again,teams that move or build new stadiums end up in SBs or  multiple years of playoffs just before or after. Time and again, the teams with more drama or media focus  end up in SB. Raiders are swimming in both factors.  How fast was Ruggs going? 156 mph..... Las Vegas Raiders lead series vs Chargers 67-56-2.....56, after last game in season. The LA Chargers host city has 56 wins all time vs the LV Raiders. 67 wins and 2 ties. The Raiders were in SB 2 ,after the 1967 season vs Packers 650,000=, amount of emails in the Gruden stuff lol.

 

im assuming all this bullsh you threw out here adds up to 13? an_roll_laugh

 
Banned
Participation Meter
Joined: Nov, 2015
Posts: 7814
Posted: #49

Quote Originally Posted by BIGDTITLE:

Quote Originally Posted by chic-cardinals: Quote Originally Posted by undermysac: @Danny9999  Stop using reasonable insights vs numerology, no one here can beat Chic in an argument.  Time and again,teams that move or build new stadiums end up in SBs or  multiple years of playoffs just before or after. Time and again, the teams with more drama or media focus  end up in SB. Raiders are swimming in both factors.  How fast was Ruggs going? 156 mph..... Las Vegas Raiders lead series vs Chargers 67-56-2.....56, after last game in season. The LA Chargers host city has 56 wins all time vs the LV Raiders. 67 wins and 2 ties. The Raiders were in SB 2 ,after the 1967 season vs Packers 650,000=, amount of emails in the Gruden stuff lol.   im assuming all this bullsh you threw out here adds up to 13?
 

You're an example of blissfully ignorant.

Yes, you assume... because you're an.... .

Pearls to swine

 

 

 

 

 

 
 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Nov, 2016
Posts: 1732
Posted: #50

Quote Originally Posted by Freddy66:

I’ll never get that 5 minutes back. Why did I even keep reading after the opener? Basically GB has no chance because they are +165??? If that’s how you pick these games you will never win money doing it.

an_roll_laughan_roll_laugh Haha was thinking the same thing. The number 13 oh no!! Bottom line is this. Green Bay has the best team they have had in years. Defense is playing well without 2 key players in Smith and Alexander. They will be back in the playoffs. Now they have a 2 headed monster at RB with one absolute powerback savage in Dillon and Jones as the shiftier get out in space guy. Lazard has come on to be a very good weapon for rodgers and MVS is always a threat to burn you on a deep play. Even the tight end filling in for Tonyan has been impressive lately. And obviously, Rodgers to Adams has proven to be unstoppable. The worst thing GB has going for them is an idiot coach and a washed up kicker. I'll take the square bet on the packers every week until they get to the SB and if they make it i'll bet them there too. All i know is that I have made very good money on GB and their overs all season. Why stop now? +165 could be a gift if you get in now. I took it at +750 on December 8. Or maybe they got knocked out in the first round by one of these other smoke and mirror NFC teams? Yeah, I'm not buying that for a second. GL all!

All Forums | NFL Betting
About Us
Contact Us
Careers
Our Team
Brand
Testimonials
Betting Guides
Sportsbook Reviews
Sports Betting News
Podcasts
Responsible Gaming
Sports Betting
US Betting Sites
Canada Betting Sites
Canada Casinos
Best Betting Apps
Contests
Streak Survivor
King of Covers
Ultimate Race
Office Pools
The Covers community has
618,670
lifetime members worldwide
Covers 25 Years Logo Established in 1995,
Covers is the world
leader in sports
betting information.
Site Map Help Privacy Terms of Service youtube logo facebook logo twitter logo instagram logo linkedin logo google news logo
Covers is verified safe by: Evalon Logo GPWA Logo GDPR Logo GeoTrust Logo Evalon Logo
Copyright © 1995 - 2024 CS Media Limited All Rights Reserved.

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.