Whoever took the under.......

4 field goals and a pick that should have been a touchdown. Seems lucky to me.

I agree with Moose on the scratchers...go try your luck rightdowntown

NFLJOE:

Some quick trends for ya:

• Over was 5-1 in the last 6 meetings
• Over was 4-1 in the last 5 meetings in Oakland
• Over was 4-0-1 in Raiders last 5 games
• Over was 4-1 in Raiders last 5 vs. a team with a winning record
• Over was 7-3 in Raiders last 10 home games
• Over was 7-3 in Broncos last 10 games on grass

Several others but got tired of listing them.

Here is my reasoning for taking this over

Don’t get me wrong…Oak sucks and I am not a fan. But Palmer is 8th in the league when looking at average passing yards per game. With a disgusting run game, an awful defense, and an entire nation making sure he knows that he sucks...I'm shocked he has done this well. McFadds is a good running back (cant stay healthy) and with him making a return for this game one would expect an increase in overall total offense ypg. As for Oak defense...what can I say.  One of the worst (if not the worst) in the NFL allowing something like 30 points per game. With one of the best offenses coming to town I was expecting Denver to score more than 26 (which they should have) along with an increased Oak offensive performance due to McFadds and playing at home. Denver does have an excellent defense but average 215 pass yards compared to Palmers 290 ypg. I think Palmers high turnovers help the over as well...just as we watched the turnover last night on the 1 where Denver gets a quick 6.  My opinion still says overs in this certain scenario. 

 McFadds back + Offensive/Defensive matchups = Over.  All this said, it doesn't matter because they went under. Just shedding some light on why I went the way I did.