getting a late start. got thrown off by the shrimp debacle. shrimp, get your alias together and get on back here. i'm the worst at figuring out aliases, but we all know how you'll be identified.
one important point before we move forward. a losing week is coming. now would not be a great time to jump on this train because this record is obviously not sustainable. this, of course, does not apply to HJS.com as he doesn't seem to have losing weeks. but trust me when i tell you, i do.
getting a late start. got thrown off by the shrimp debacle. shrimp, get your alias together and get on back here. i'm the worst at figuring out aliases, but we all know how you'll be identified.
one important point before we move forward. a losing week is coming. now would not be a great time to jump on this train because this record is obviously not sustainable. this, of course, does not apply to HJS.com as he doesn't seem to have losing weeks. but trust me when i tell you, i do.
Minn @ GB -7.5 no play here as usual. unlike other alleged big time offenses, GB reverted back to form last week and took advantage of a bad chicago defense. when Rodgers is on, i don't think there is anyone better. no reason to think the GB offense won't roll in this one as well. i'd say the short week favors GB coming home after a pretty rough stretch of road games and tough games. minnesota changed QB's last week and that looked fine at home against a bad Atl defense but now they aren't even sure if bridegwater is playing and go on the road where the offense will have to keep up with GB. that's a lot more pressure for this minn offense. if bridegwater plays, it's a tougher test than last week and i'm not sure he's practicing right now on a short week. if he doesn't play, minn is starting its 3rd QB already this season on a short week. oh, and he sucks like cassel does. GB coming off a strong but not unpredictable offensive performance and minn with QB issues on a short week. looks like a bad combination for minnesota.
Chicago @ Carolina -3 looks like carolina may get a little healthier this week with stewart practicing. no way do i bet carolina with no RB's. newton and that offense is not good enough to bet on without a legitimate RB on the field. but, if stewart does play, i like their chances. have to monitor that.
Chicago comes in with a pretty bad defense so this is a team carolina can score against. notwithstanding giving up so many points to the shrimps (can we still call them that?) and Pitt, carolina does have a good defense. or at least i think they do. being able to run, at home, strong defense, those are games carolina should win.
chicago is 2-0 on the road and 0-2 at home. i think that turns around. teams with bad defenses and QB's that tend to take too many chances aren't the best road teams. if carolina can get back to playing solid defense and get a decent RB on the field, this looks like a pretty good matchup for them. not sure why they can't do what they did against detroit to chicago, at least on defense. only, chicago shouldn't be able to stop the run as well as detroit can and did in that game.
Clev @ Tenn -1 times have certainly changed for Tenn. if i was predicting this line in week 5 before the season, i would have thought it closer to 6. of course, i've been wildly wrong about tenn most weeks, so there's that. i may try one more time. i just don't see why Tenn is so bad. statistically, their defense is pretty good and the offense really should be better.
one thing i'll say for Tenn s they've had a very tough schedule, possibly the toughest in the league niow that we know dallas is good (do i know that?). 3 road games against and all 4 games were against playoff looking teams. so, this is their first easy game and it's at home. in other words, if Tenn is even a halfway decent team, they win this one. and, if they are, we are certainly getting line value since Tenn comes into this one off three straight losses. tenn may prove me wrong again, but it could be that tenn is a pretty good team, just not in the class of the teams they've played so far which, again, would make this -1 spread a bargain.
Clev is the first week 4 bye team we've come across. i mentioned this in last week's newsletter. the week 4 bye is not good for teams, especially teams that have started the season well or better than expected. Clev is one of those teams beating NO and hanging tough with Pitt and Blt. i can't see any reason they would have welcomed the week 4 bye. Clev definiutely looks like a good team to bet on as decent sized dogs but expecting them to win this on the road off a bye doesn't look like a good bet to me.
Minn @ GB -7.5 no play here as usual. unlike other alleged big time offenses, GB reverted back to form last week and took advantage of a bad chicago defense. when Rodgers is on, i don't think there is anyone better. no reason to think the GB offense won't roll in this one as well. i'd say the short week favors GB coming home after a pretty rough stretch of road games and tough games. minnesota changed QB's last week and that looked fine at home against a bad Atl defense but now they aren't even sure if bridegwater is playing and go on the road where the offense will have to keep up with GB. that's a lot more pressure for this minn offense. if bridegwater plays, it's a tougher test than last week and i'm not sure he's practicing right now on a short week. if he doesn't play, minn is starting its 3rd QB already this season on a short week. oh, and he sucks like cassel does. GB coming off a strong but not unpredictable offensive performance and minn with QB issues on a short week. looks like a bad combination for minnesota.
Chicago @ Carolina -3 looks like carolina may get a little healthier this week with stewart practicing. no way do i bet carolina with no RB's. newton and that offense is not good enough to bet on without a legitimate RB on the field. but, if stewart does play, i like their chances. have to monitor that.
Chicago comes in with a pretty bad defense so this is a team carolina can score against. notwithstanding giving up so many points to the shrimps (can we still call them that?) and Pitt, carolina does have a good defense. or at least i think they do. being able to run, at home, strong defense, those are games carolina should win.
chicago is 2-0 on the road and 0-2 at home. i think that turns around. teams with bad defenses and QB's that tend to take too many chances aren't the best road teams. if carolina can get back to playing solid defense and get a decent RB on the field, this looks like a pretty good matchup for them. not sure why they can't do what they did against detroit to chicago, at least on defense. only, chicago shouldn't be able to stop the run as well as detroit can and did in that game.
Clev @ Tenn -1 times have certainly changed for Tenn. if i was predicting this line in week 5 before the season, i would have thought it closer to 6. of course, i've been wildly wrong about tenn most weeks, so there's that. i may try one more time. i just don't see why Tenn is so bad. statistically, their defense is pretty good and the offense really should be better.
one thing i'll say for Tenn s they've had a very tough schedule, possibly the toughest in the league niow that we know dallas is good (do i know that?). 3 road games against and all 4 games were against playoff looking teams. so, this is their first easy game and it's at home. in other words, if Tenn is even a halfway decent team, they win this one. and, if they are, we are certainly getting line value since Tenn comes into this one off three straight losses. tenn may prove me wrong again, but it could be that tenn is a pretty good team, just not in the class of the teams they've played so far which, again, would make this -1 spread a bargain.
Clev is the first week 4 bye team we've come across. i mentioned this in last week's newsletter. the week 4 bye is not good for teams, especially teams that have started the season well or better than expected. Clev is one of those teams beating NO and hanging tough with Pitt and Blt. i can't see any reason they would have welcomed the week 4 bye. Clev definiutely looks like a good team to bet on as decent sized dogs but expecting them to win this on the road off a bye doesn't look like a good bet to me.
Stl @ Philly -7 hard to read philly these days. no shame in almost beating SF on the road. nice win @ Indy but losing (ATS) to Washington and that Jax game are both pretty bad. and the defense is giving up a lot of points. and the OL is in bad shape although they get one back this week. all that to say, i'm not buying them as big favorites until i see their defense do something and/or the running game make some progress.
so, can we take Stl here? Stl is a team we always look to. they got the week 4 bye but might be the only team helped by it since they didn't get a good start and they probably need to get more practice with their new QB. Stl's pass defense ranks high but that could be because the run defense has been so bad. why pass when the Stl defense is giving up 155 rushing yards/game. so, it's weakness against weakness in terms of philly running game against Stl's rushing defense.
ultimately, i think it's too many points for a team that has a bad defense and running game and Stl coming off a bye that might help them.
Atl @ NYG -4.5 big turnaround for the Giants. isn't this the team that looked like garbage in their first two games and were only -3 or so at home to the Fitpatricks? now they are 4.5 to the team that surprised many and beat NO in wee one? we know what this is about. people are confusing Atl with NO and assume they can't win on the road despite going 6-2 on the road just 2 seasons ago.
we didn't get betting the falsons on the road last week as a 3-4 point favorite against a decent team but this is an 8.5 difference between their closing line @ Minn and this line @ NYG. the giants are not worth 8.5 points more than minnesota in one week. they're just not. i like the giants and stuck with them but beating houston at home and washington anywhere is not that impressive. the value is with the falcons. not much more to say.
TB @ NO -10 i saw a post in the NFL last week as the saints were getting demolished by dallas predicting this line to be 7. no way, we said, it had to be at least 10 and it is. as subscribers know, we love the angle where you bet on teams that get destroyed the prior week on prime time so that everyone just assumes they are horrible and will never play NFL level football again. TB was the obvious example last week against Pitt. and while NO certainly got destroyed last week, they don't qualify for this angle. why? because unlike TB, people still believe in the saints. we knew this would be an inflated bounce back line. people just aren't ready to come to terms with the idea that the saints might not be very good. there is no other reason for this line to be so high. remove the names from the jersey and this line is probably 7, a line TB would have covered 3 out of 4 games so far this season.
so does that mean we take TB? maybe. i'm ready to say the saints aren't very good. it's been 4 games and that's enough for me. they may turn out fine. they've only played one home game and that's where they are their best. but, that defense is a mess and that looks like more than a home and away problem.
i watched a lot of that TB game. they are terrible. the run defense was ok with mccoy but the secondary was horrible. not good when going to NO. and the coaching had to be among the worst in the league. i kind of like what their offense did in the second half last week and if the saints keep playing defense like they have, 10 will be a lot to cover. i'm just having a hard time playing a bad coach and a bad secondary at NO. the old rule was you just don't bet against NO at home. not sure this is a good time to break that rule.
Stl @ Philly -7 hard to read philly these days. no shame in almost beating SF on the road. nice win @ Indy but losing (ATS) to Washington and that Jax game are both pretty bad. and the defense is giving up a lot of points. and the OL is in bad shape although they get one back this week. all that to say, i'm not buying them as big favorites until i see their defense do something and/or the running game make some progress.
so, can we take Stl here? Stl is a team we always look to. they got the week 4 bye but might be the only team helped by it since they didn't get a good start and they probably need to get more practice with their new QB. Stl's pass defense ranks high but that could be because the run defense has been so bad. why pass when the Stl defense is giving up 155 rushing yards/game. so, it's weakness against weakness in terms of philly running game against Stl's rushing defense.
ultimately, i think it's too many points for a team that has a bad defense and running game and Stl coming off a bye that might help them.
Atl @ NYG -4.5 big turnaround for the Giants. isn't this the team that looked like garbage in their first two games and were only -3 or so at home to the Fitpatricks? now they are 4.5 to the team that surprised many and beat NO in wee one? we know what this is about. people are confusing Atl with NO and assume they can't win on the road despite going 6-2 on the road just 2 seasons ago.
we didn't get betting the falsons on the road last week as a 3-4 point favorite against a decent team but this is an 8.5 difference between their closing line @ Minn and this line @ NYG. the giants are not worth 8.5 points more than minnesota in one week. they're just not. i like the giants and stuck with them but beating houston at home and washington anywhere is not that impressive. the value is with the falcons. not much more to say.
TB @ NO -10 i saw a post in the NFL last week as the saints were getting demolished by dallas predicting this line to be 7. no way, we said, it had to be at least 10 and it is. as subscribers know, we love the angle where you bet on teams that get destroyed the prior week on prime time so that everyone just assumes they are horrible and will never play NFL level football again. TB was the obvious example last week against Pitt. and while NO certainly got destroyed last week, they don't qualify for this angle. why? because unlike TB, people still believe in the saints. we knew this would be an inflated bounce back line. people just aren't ready to come to terms with the idea that the saints might not be very good. there is no other reason for this line to be so high. remove the names from the jersey and this line is probably 7, a line TB would have covered 3 out of 4 games so far this season.
so does that mean we take TB? maybe. i'm ready to say the saints aren't very good. it's been 4 games and that's enough for me. they may turn out fine. they've only played one home game and that's where they are their best. but, that defense is a mess and that looks like more than a home and away problem.
i watched a lot of that TB game. they are terrible. the run defense was ok with mccoy but the secondary was horrible. not good when going to NO. and the coaching had to be among the worst in the league. i kind of like what their offense did in the second half last week and if the saints keep playing defense like they have, 10 will be a lot to cover. i'm just having a hard time playing a bad coach and a bad secondary at NO. the old rule was you just don't bet against NO at home. not sure this is a good time to break that rule.
Stl @ Philly -7 hard to read philly these days. no shame in almost beating SF on the road. nice win @ Indy but losing (ATS) to Washington and that Jax game are both pretty bad. and the defense is giving up a lot of points. and the OL is in bad shape although they get one back this week. all that to say, i'm not buying them as big favorites until i see their defense do something and/or the running game make some progress.
so, can we take Stl here? Stl is a team we always look to. they got the week 4 bye but might be the only team helped by it since they didn't get a good start and they probably need to get more practice with their new QB. Stl's pass defense ranks high but that could be because the run defense has been so bad. why pass when the Stl defense is giving up 155 rushing yards/game. so, it's weakness against weakness in terms of philly running game against Stl's rushing defense.
ultimately, i think it's too many points for a team that has a bad defense and running game and Stl coming off a bye that might help them.
Atl @ NYG -4.5 big turnaround for the Giants. isn't this the team that looked like garbage in their first two games and were only -3 or so at home to the Fitpatricks? now they are 4.5 to the team that surprised many and beat NO in wee one? we know what this is about. people are confusing Atl with NO and assume they can't win on the road despite going 6-2 on the road just 2 seasons ago.
we didn't get betting the falsons on the road last week as a 3-4 point favorite against a decent team but this is an 8.5 difference between their closing line @ Minn and this line @ NYG. the giants are not worth 8.5 points more than minnesota in one week. they're just not. i like the giants and stuck with them but beating houston at home and washington anywhere is not that impressive. the value is with the falcons. not much more to say.
TB @ NO -10 i saw a post in the NFL last week as the saints were getting demolished by dallas predicting this line to be 7. no way, we said, it had to be at least 10 and it is. as subscribers know, we love the angle where you bet on teams that get destroyed the prior week on prime time so that everyone just assumes they are horrible and will never play NFL level football again. TB was the obvious example last week against Pitt. and while NO certainly got destroyed last week, they don't qualify for this angle. why? because unlike TB, people still believe in the saints. we knew this would be an inflated bounce back line. people just aren't ready to come to terms with the idea that the saints might not be very good. there is no other reason for this line to be so high. remove the names from the jersey and this line is probably 7, a line TB would have covered 3 out of 4 games so far this season.
so does that mean we take TB? maybe. i'm ready to say the saints aren't very good. it's been 4 games and that's enough for me. they may turn out fine. they've only played one home game and that's where they are their best. but, that defense is a mess and that looks like more than a home and away problem.
i watched a lot of that TB game. they are terrible. the run defense was ok with mccoy but the secondary was horrible. not good when going to NO. and the coaching had to be among the worst in the league. i kind of like what their offense did in the second half last week and if the saints keep playing defense like they have, 10 will be a lot to cover. i'm just having a hard time playing a bad coach and a bad secondary at NO. the old rule was you just don't bet against NO at home. not sure this is a good time to break that rule.
Philly reminds me of one of those lucky teams you see every year that gets a lot of breaks. Their luck finally ran out at SF in the end. For a team that was totally dominated in the game, they were two yards away from a win. You would have to think they might be a little fatiqued after playing a physical team, then flying across the country, having a rested Jeff Fisher team off of a bye week. They also have the Giants next week, which could be a slight look ahead.
Stl @ Philly -7 hard to read philly these days. no shame in almost beating SF on the road. nice win @ Indy but losing (ATS) to Washington and that Jax game are both pretty bad. and the defense is giving up a lot of points. and the OL is in bad shape although they get one back this week. all that to say, i'm not buying them as big favorites until i see their defense do something and/or the running game make some progress.
so, can we take Stl here? Stl is a team we always look to. they got the week 4 bye but might be the only team helped by it since they didn't get a good start and they probably need to get more practice with their new QB. Stl's pass defense ranks high but that could be because the run defense has been so bad. why pass when the Stl defense is giving up 155 rushing yards/game. so, it's weakness against weakness in terms of philly running game against Stl's rushing defense.
ultimately, i think it's too many points for a team that has a bad defense and running game and Stl coming off a bye that might help them.
Atl @ NYG -4.5 big turnaround for the Giants. isn't this the team that looked like garbage in their first two games and were only -3 or so at home to the Fitpatricks? now they are 4.5 to the team that surprised many and beat NO in wee one? we know what this is about. people are confusing Atl with NO and assume they can't win on the road despite going 6-2 on the road just 2 seasons ago.
we didn't get betting the falsons on the road last week as a 3-4 point favorite against a decent team but this is an 8.5 difference between their closing line @ Minn and this line @ NYG. the giants are not worth 8.5 points more than minnesota in one week. they're just not. i like the giants and stuck with them but beating houston at home and washington anywhere is not that impressive. the value is with the falcons. not much more to say.
TB @ NO -10 i saw a post in the NFL last week as the saints were getting demolished by dallas predicting this line to be 7. no way, we said, it had to be at least 10 and it is. as subscribers know, we love the angle where you bet on teams that get destroyed the prior week on prime time so that everyone just assumes they are horrible and will never play NFL level football again. TB was the obvious example last week against Pitt. and while NO certainly got destroyed last week, they don't qualify for this angle. why? because unlike TB, people still believe in the saints. we knew this would be an inflated bounce back line. people just aren't ready to come to terms with the idea that the saints might not be very good. there is no other reason for this line to be so high. remove the names from the jersey and this line is probably 7, a line TB would have covered 3 out of 4 games so far this season.
so does that mean we take TB? maybe. i'm ready to say the saints aren't very good. it's been 4 games and that's enough for me. they may turn out fine. they've only played one home game and that's where they are their best. but, that defense is a mess and that looks like more than a home and away problem.
i watched a lot of that TB game. they are terrible. the run defense was ok with mccoy but the secondary was horrible. not good when going to NO. and the coaching had to be among the worst in the league. i kind of like what their offense did in the second half last week and if the saints keep playing defense like they have, 10 will be a lot to cover. i'm just having a hard time playing a bad coach and a bad secondary at NO. the old rule was you just don't bet against NO at home. not sure this is a good time to break that rule.
Philly reminds me of one of those lucky teams you see every year that gets a lot of breaks. Their luck finally ran out at SF in the end. For a team that was totally dominated in the game, they were two yards away from a win. You would have to think they might be a little fatiqued after playing a physical team, then flying across the country, having a rested Jeff Fisher team off of a bye week. They also have the Giants next week, which could be a slight look ahead.
Houston @ Dallas -6 first, i'm going to paste what i wrote after the houston/buffalo game last week
how in the f*ck did houston win when their running backs had 18 carries
for 23 yards today? because manueal threw a TD pass to watt, i supposed
and we thought manuel would struggle on the road against a good
defense, but there is no way in hell houston plays with good teams or
just about anyone on the road with that happening with their running
game and fitzpatrick at QB.
we escaped that bet last week because houston's defense saved us and manuel on the road was worse than fitzpatrick and no running game at home.
but now they play on the road against a dallas team that looks pretty good now. we're supposed to think dallas can't play defense but it hasn't looked that way. dallas's game has been rpetty simple so far. The OL and murray dominate in the run game and wear down the defense, romo has very little pressure and is very good under those circumstances and the defense plays with a lead or knowing their offense is in great form and will keep them in the game.
not sure how that changes against a team that can't run the ball and has a garbage QB. houston's run defense stats aren't great. they are 3-1 but look who they've beaten. if dallas is truly for real, they should win easy. based on what we've seen so far, dallas looks like a pretty good bet.
Buffalo @ Detroit -7.5 here we go, finally one that comes across as too many points from the first look. i'm supposed to say that at least 4 times each week. we liked betting buffalo early in the season but they lost value quickly coupled with manuel showing that he sucks got us off them sooner than we expected. now they are back to the big underdog role where we like them again. obviously the big news here is that they didn't waste time ditching manuel who isn't any good. fortunately for them, they have orton who is a good backup and hould be a nice fit for a team that has great offensive players and won't need him to do too much. Buffalo has been able to run the ball and stop the run and they don't have the huge hole at QB they've had assuming orton has something left and doesn;t get hurt. that's pretty attractive as a big underdog.
detroit is a good team but not a big favorite team against a decent team like buffalo. people assume detroit brings that big offense, and they are capable but they've only really scored in one game so far. and again, buffalo can stop the run so that's more pressure on detroit's passing game which is prone to make mistakes. i just think people are overreacting to buffalo and maybe not recognizing detroit is a little bit more of a defensive team than they've been.
Houston @ Dallas -6 first, i'm going to paste what i wrote after the houston/buffalo game last week
how in the f*ck did houston win when their running backs had 18 carries
for 23 yards today? because manueal threw a TD pass to watt, i supposed
and we thought manuel would struggle on the road against a good
defense, but there is no way in hell houston plays with good teams or
just about anyone on the road with that happening with their running
game and fitzpatrick at QB.
we escaped that bet last week because houston's defense saved us and manuel on the road was worse than fitzpatrick and no running game at home.
but now they play on the road against a dallas team that looks pretty good now. we're supposed to think dallas can't play defense but it hasn't looked that way. dallas's game has been rpetty simple so far. The OL and murray dominate in the run game and wear down the defense, romo has very little pressure and is very good under those circumstances and the defense plays with a lead or knowing their offense is in great form and will keep them in the game.
not sure how that changes against a team that can't run the ball and has a garbage QB. houston's run defense stats aren't great. they are 3-1 but look who they've beaten. if dallas is truly for real, they should win easy. based on what we've seen so far, dallas looks like a pretty good bet.
Buffalo @ Detroit -7.5 here we go, finally one that comes across as too many points from the first look. i'm supposed to say that at least 4 times each week. we liked betting buffalo early in the season but they lost value quickly coupled with manuel showing that he sucks got us off them sooner than we expected. now they are back to the big underdog role where we like them again. obviously the big news here is that they didn't waste time ditching manuel who isn't any good. fortunately for them, they have orton who is a good backup and hould be a nice fit for a team that has great offensive players and won't need him to do too much. Buffalo has been able to run the ball and stop the run and they don't have the huge hole at QB they've had assuming orton has something left and doesn;t get hurt. that's pretty attractive as a big underdog.
detroit is a good team but not a big favorite team against a decent team like buffalo. people assume detroit brings that big offense, and they are capable but they've only really scored in one game so far. and again, buffalo can stop the run so that's more pressure on detroit's passing game which is prone to make mistakes. i just think people are overreacting to buffalo and maybe not recognizing detroit is a little bit more of a defensive team than they've been.
Seattle really intrigues me. It is a very rare occurence for a West Coast team to play in the eastern time zone on Monday night Football. I found only 5 or 6 going back to around 1998 with the team from out west absoluelty destroying the east coast team. I once read somewhere it's because of the time difference and it feels like a more normal game to them because it's still a pretty early start for them in their minds.
Seattle really intrigues me. It is a very rare occurence for a West Coast team to play in the eastern time zone on Monday night Football. I found only 5 or 6 going back to around 1998 with the team from out west absoluelty destroying the east coast team. I once read somewhere it's because of the time difference and it feels like a more normal game to them because it's still a pretty early start for them in their minds.
Shrimps @ Colts -3.5 damn, we missed that easy shrimps play last week. we did, however, get our usual play in against indy and that went how it usually does. i think this is too many points but i don't have a good feel for indy. let's see what shrimp's alias has to say. i'll look into it some more. i look to bet against indy every week but i also realize that's not that smart. either Blt or nothing most likely.
Pitt @ Jax +6 must be an error at pinnacle. how does Jax have a single digit spread? we've said all along Pitt is no good. we weren't sure anyone believed us. they are 2-2 with a nice win over carolina. but this line shows people know pitt isn't very good. however, this line clerly is tempting people to bet pitt at under 7. Pitt does look good on offense. bell is very good, roethlisberger is his usual self, some bad, can be very good, brown is very good. pitt is going to score against Jax. Jax doesn't play defense. i guess they are assuming with bortles having a game and a half under his belt, this is where he shows what he can do. i think he probably will, especially against a bad pitt defense. if it's 2014 and james harrison is on your defense, your defense sucks. was L. C. Greenwood unavailable?
anyway, is this the one Jac actually covers. at home, bortles with some more experience, against a bad defense? maybe. but you know the rules. no betting Jax. a simple enough rule. tough to follow though.
AZ @ Denver -7.5 hate betting denver although they really impressed us against seattle two weeks ago. both teams off a bye but i'd guess that early bye hurts AZ more than denver. denver at 2-1 isn't anything special for them and you know manning is angry at losing a close one to seattle, never getting on the field in OT. on the other hand, no one expected AZ to be 3-0, especially given who they've played. the week 4 bye couldn't come at a worse time. i see denver fired up and a huge letdown for AZ if my week 4 bye angle has any legitimacy.
ca denver cover the 7.5? of course, they have the offense to do it and the defense hasn't been too bad. AZ has played very good defense, better than i thought it would be. but a momentum breaker and then at an angry denver offense may be too much for any defense. might have to break from form and go with the fairly big favorite. maybe.
Shrimps @ Colts -3.5 damn, we missed that easy shrimps play last week. we did, however, get our usual play in against indy and that went how it usually does. i think this is too many points but i don't have a good feel for indy. let's see what shrimp's alias has to say. i'll look into it some more. i look to bet against indy every week but i also realize that's not that smart. either Blt or nothing most likely.
Pitt @ Jax +6 must be an error at pinnacle. how does Jax have a single digit spread? we've said all along Pitt is no good. we weren't sure anyone believed us. they are 2-2 with a nice win over carolina. but this line shows people know pitt isn't very good. however, this line clerly is tempting people to bet pitt at under 7. Pitt does look good on offense. bell is very good, roethlisberger is his usual self, some bad, can be very good, brown is very good. pitt is going to score against Jax. Jax doesn't play defense. i guess they are assuming with bortles having a game and a half under his belt, this is where he shows what he can do. i think he probably will, especially against a bad pitt defense. if it's 2014 and james harrison is on your defense, your defense sucks. was L. C. Greenwood unavailable?
anyway, is this the one Jac actually covers. at home, bortles with some more experience, against a bad defense? maybe. but you know the rules. no betting Jax. a simple enough rule. tough to follow though.
AZ @ Denver -7.5 hate betting denver although they really impressed us against seattle two weeks ago. both teams off a bye but i'd guess that early bye hurts AZ more than denver. denver at 2-1 isn't anything special for them and you know manning is angry at losing a close one to seattle, never getting on the field in OT. on the other hand, no one expected AZ to be 3-0, especially given who they've played. the week 4 bye couldn't come at a worse time. i see denver fired up and a huge letdown for AZ if my week 4 bye angle has any legitimacy.
ca denver cover the 7.5? of course, they have the offense to do it and the defense hasn't been too bad. AZ has played very good defense, better than i thought it would be. but a momentum breaker and then at an angry denver offense may be too much for any defense. might have to break from form and go with the fairly big favorite. maybe.
Tampon Bay might have shot their wad and i'm a little surprised that the Saints are not favored by a couple more.I would not go against the Saints here.
Tampon Bay might have shot their wad and i'm a little surprised that the Saints are not favored by a couple more.I would not go against the Saints here.
KC @ SF -6 inetresting matchup. i said last week as we bet SF that the philly game would tell us what we needed to know about SF, assuming that if they won it would mean SF is for real. well, it didn't. terrible mistakes and easily could have lost the game. i can't tell if SF's defense was good or Philly has issues with their OL and RB. plus, getting those uncommon TD's often disrupts the flow of their gameplan. offensively, SF was erratic. made some great plays and some terrible plays. so, we still don't know much about this team.
KC was great though adn i don't think it was a fluke. we did expect their defense to suffer with early season injuries but it really hasn;t with two good performances in a row. the running game has been great. good defense, good running game and you can win, or at least cover, any game. so, based on what we've seen, this line is too high. i can see KC coming back down to earth a little but i don;t trust SF with a 6 point spread against a team that has some pretty clear strengths. looks like KC or no play here.
Jets @ SD -6.5 looks like a fair line. SD played like a team in a letdown spot last week but still did enough to win easily. SD should be better this week.
but, here's what we wrote about them in the newsletter after their game last week:
same thing for SD. they have major injuries at RB and today their two
RB's have 19 carries for 42 yards against a terrible defense. i'm not
sure this gets much better for SD and they'll probably be given higher
numbers each week now that people know they are good. but how good are
they with no running game playing good teams? they don't exactly have
fitzpatrick at QB but this team isn't good enough to cover big spreads
or regularly win tough games with no running game.
i can't bet on a team giving 6.5 to a decent team if SD can't run the ball. and the jets have a great run defense. so, we can assume the chargers aren't running for garbage this week. it'll all be rivers. not a good situation. sure rivers is great but you never want to bet a favorite that you know is going to be one dimesnional. at least we don't.
so, can we bet the jets? this does look lioke a pretty good spot. getting decent points, SD is banged up, the jet can focus entirely on the SD passing game, the jets can run the ball. if the jets can force some mistakes and get the run going, they could keep it close or possibly win, as long as geno doesn't darn this up (50/50). possible play on the jets.
KC @ SF -6 inetresting matchup. i said last week as we bet SF that the philly game would tell us what we needed to know about SF, assuming that if they won it would mean SF is for real. well, it didn't. terrible mistakes and easily could have lost the game. i can't tell if SF's defense was good or Philly has issues with their OL and RB. plus, getting those uncommon TD's often disrupts the flow of their gameplan. offensively, SF was erratic. made some great plays and some terrible plays. so, we still don't know much about this team.
KC was great though adn i don't think it was a fluke. we did expect their defense to suffer with early season injuries but it really hasn;t with two good performances in a row. the running game has been great. good defense, good running game and you can win, or at least cover, any game. so, based on what we've seen, this line is too high. i can see KC coming back down to earth a little but i don;t trust SF with a 6 point spread against a team that has some pretty clear strengths. looks like KC or no play here.
Jets @ SD -6.5 looks like a fair line. SD played like a team in a letdown spot last week but still did enough to win easily. SD should be better this week.
but, here's what we wrote about them in the newsletter after their game last week:
same thing for SD. they have major injuries at RB and today their two
RB's have 19 carries for 42 yards against a terrible defense. i'm not
sure this gets much better for SD and they'll probably be given higher
numbers each week now that people know they are good. but how good are
they with no running game playing good teams? they don't exactly have
fitzpatrick at QB but this team isn't good enough to cover big spreads
or regularly win tough games with no running game.
i can't bet on a team giving 6.5 to a decent team if SD can't run the ball. and the jets have a great run defense. so, we can assume the chargers aren't running for garbage this week. it'll all be rivers. not a good situation. sure rivers is great but you never want to bet a favorite that you know is going to be one dimesnional. at least we don't.
so, can we bet the jets? this does look lioke a pretty good spot. getting decent points, SD is banged up, the jet can focus entirely on the SD passing game, the jets can run the ball. if the jets can force some mistakes and get the run going, they could keep it close or possibly win, as long as geno doesn't darn this up (50/50). possible play on the jets.
Cincy @ NE even not much of a bounceback spread here. unlike No, maybe people think NE sucks now. maybe they do. that one was ugly against KC. maybe this falls into our prime time angle like TB last week. belichick off a terrible loss at home against marvin lewis off 3 wins and an early bye. NE is tempting. needs further study.
Seattle @ Wash -7.5 now that was the cousins we were expecting. he's actually not terrible, but people needed to settle down about him a little. although, if he did that against the giants, you have to worry a little with seattle coming to town. however, you know the NFL doesn't work that way. look terrible one week and turn it around the next, IF he's a real QB and i think he could be.
we never liked Wash but it's hard to tell for sure. they beat Jax but that doesn't mean much. coming close @ philly is their best result. can they hang with Seattle? i tend to doubt it. you might want to say that seattle isn't a great road team but the last season and a half has dispelled that. if you get great seattle, which you get most weeks, they could easily win by double digits. if you get average road seattle, then those 7.5 points very well could be good enough for Wash. hard to say which you get with seattle after a bye and with wash still being an undetermined team, we'll probably leave this one alone.
Cincy @ NE even not much of a bounceback spread here. unlike No, maybe people think NE sucks now. maybe they do. that one was ugly against KC. maybe this falls into our prime time angle like TB last week. belichick off a terrible loss at home against marvin lewis off 3 wins and an early bye. NE is tempting. needs further study.
Seattle @ Wash -7.5 now that was the cousins we were expecting. he's actually not terrible, but people needed to settle down about him a little. although, if he did that against the giants, you have to worry a little with seattle coming to town. however, you know the NFL doesn't work that way. look terrible one week and turn it around the next, IF he's a real QB and i think he could be.
we never liked Wash but it's hard to tell for sure. they beat Jax but that doesn't mean much. coming close @ philly is their best result. can they hang with Seattle? i tend to doubt it. you might want to say that seattle isn't a great road team but the last season and a half has dispelled that. if you get great seattle, which you get most weeks, they could easily win by double digits. if you get average road seattle, then those 7.5 points very well could be good enough for Wash. hard to say which you get with seattle after a bye and with wash still being an undetermined team, we'll probably leave this one alone.
Philly: without them getting much much more help from McCoy are just an injury to Maclin away from being mediocre. I do believe that before the season is over that they will infact put 2 halves of offense together. Liking Falcons 4'
Philly: without them getting much much more help from McCoy are just an injury to Maclin away from being mediocre. I do believe that before the season is over that they will infact put 2 halves of offense together. Liking Falcons 4'
re: Bolts/Jets while the Jets do have a decent ground game,Bolts run D is formidable,but with the Bolts lack off a run game i'll take the team with a little more well rounded offense and wished i would have nabbed it at 7'.
re: Bolts/Jets while the Jets do have a decent ground game,Bolts run D is formidable,but with the Bolts lack off a run game i'll take the team with a little more well rounded offense and wished i would have nabbed it at 7'.
Minn @ GB -7.5 no play here as usual. unlike other alleged big time offenses, GB reverted back to form last week and took advantage of a bad chicago defense. when Rodgers is on, i don't think there is anyone better. no reason to think the GB offense won't roll in this one as well. i'd say the short week favors GB coming home after a pretty rough stretch of road games and tough games. minnesota changed QB's last week and that looked fine at home against a bad Atl defense but now they aren't even sure if bridegwater is playing and go on the road where the offense will have to keep up with GB. that's a lot more pressure for this minn offense. if bridegwater plays, it's a tougher test than last week and i'm not sure he's practicing right now on a short week. if he doesn't play, minn is starting its 3rd QB already this season on a short week. oh, and he sucks like cassel does. GB coming off a strong but not unpredictable offensive performance and minn with QB issues on a short week. looks like a bad combination for minnesota.
Don't see how you can bet anyone but the Packers here, although I rarely (maybe never) lay more than a TD in an NFL game. So I will tease it down.
Minn @ GB -7.5 no play here as usual. unlike other alleged big time offenses, GB reverted back to form last week and took advantage of a bad chicago defense. when Rodgers is on, i don't think there is anyone better. no reason to think the GB offense won't roll in this one as well. i'd say the short week favors GB coming home after a pretty rough stretch of road games and tough games. minnesota changed QB's last week and that looked fine at home against a bad Atl defense but now they aren't even sure if bridegwater is playing and go on the road where the offense will have to keep up with GB. that's a lot more pressure for this minn offense. if bridegwater plays, it's a tougher test than last week and i'm not sure he's practicing right now on a short week. if he doesn't play, minn is starting its 3rd QB already this season on a short week. oh, and he sucks like cassel does. GB coming off a strong but not unpredictable offensive performance and minn with QB issues on a short week. looks like a bad combination for minnesota.
Don't see how you can bet anyone but the Packers here, although I rarely (maybe never) lay more than a TD in an NFL game. So I will tease it down.
Philly reminds me of one of those lucky teams you see every year that gets a lot of breaks. Their luck finally ran out at SF in the end. For a team that was totally dominated in the game, they were two yards away from a win. You would have to think they might be a little fatiqued after playing a physical team, then flying across the country, having a rested Jeff Fisher team off of a bye week. They also have the Giants next week, which could be a slight look ahead.
and I counter with this :
Your coach: Generic Southern coaching prototype Jeff Fisher, who hasn't ever posted a winning record with this team, but is a steadying influence, or something. Jeff Fisher could go 4-12 but it would be a quiet 4-12, and his bosses would be like, "Well, no one died. GOOD JOB, FISH!" No one's better at projecting the illusion of competence. Fisher has molded the Rams in the Titans' image: unfathomably boring and built to pull off a lucky 10+-win season once every five years or so.
Philly reminds me of one of those lucky teams you see every year that gets a lot of breaks. Their luck finally ran out at SF in the end. For a team that was totally dominated in the game, they were two yards away from a win. You would have to think they might be a little fatiqued after playing a physical team, then flying across the country, having a rested Jeff Fisher team off of a bye week. They also have the Giants next week, which could be a slight look ahead.
and I counter with this :
Your coach: Generic Southern coaching prototype Jeff Fisher, who hasn't ever posted a winning record with this team, but is a steadying influence, or something. Jeff Fisher could go 4-12 but it would be a quiet 4-12, and his bosses would be like, "Well, no one died. GOOD JOB, FISH!" No one's better at projecting the illusion of competence. Fisher has molded the Rams in the Titans' image: unfathomably boring and built to pull off a lucky 10+-win season once every five years or so.
Don't see how you can bet anyone but the Packers here, although I rarely (maybe never) lay more than a TD in an NFL game. So I will tease it down.
Packers -2.5
Cowboys P
GL tonight, fella's
As long as the Packers D is ready to make a lot of tackles on Minny's persistent running game, they should make quick work of the Vikings. Good Luck, Hugh.
Don't see how you can bet anyone but the Packers here, although I rarely (maybe never) lay more than a TD in an NFL game. So I will tease it down.
Packers -2.5
Cowboys P
GL tonight, fella's
As long as the Packers D is ready to make a lot of tackles on Minny's persistent running game, they should make quick work of the Vikings. Good Luck, Hugh.
Your coach: Generic Southern coaching prototype Jeff Fisher, who hasn't ever posted a winning record with this team, but is a steadying influence, or something. Jeff Fisher could go 4-12 but it would be a quiet 4-12, and his bosses would be like, "Well, no one died. GOOD JOB, FISH!" No one's better at projecting the illusion of competence. Fisher has molded the Rams in the Titans' image: unfathomably boring and built to pull off a lucky 10+-win season once every five years or so.
I agree 100%. I always thought he was overrated as a head coach. Steve McNair was the reason for all of his success. I was speaking more of the bye week, and I'm too lazy at the moment to see if Fisher is even respectable with extra time.
Your coach: Generic Southern coaching prototype Jeff Fisher, who hasn't ever posted a winning record with this team, but is a steadying influence, or something. Jeff Fisher could go 4-12 but it would be a quiet 4-12, and his bosses would be like, "Well, no one died. GOOD JOB, FISH!" No one's better at projecting the illusion of competence. Fisher has molded the Rams in the Titans' image: unfathomably boring and built to pull off a lucky 10+-win season once every five years or so.
I agree 100%. I always thought he was overrated as a head coach. Steve McNair was the reason for all of his success. I was speaking more of the bye week, and I'm too lazy at the moment to see if Fisher is even respectable with extra time.
Chicago @ Carolina -3 looks like carolina may get a little healthier this week with stewart practicing. no way do i bet carolina with no RB's. newton and that offense is not good enough to bet on without a legitimate RB on the field. but, if stewart does play, i like their chances. have to monitor that.
Chicago comes in with a pretty bad defense so this is a team carolina can score against. notwithstanding giving up so many points to the shrimps (can we still call them that?) and Pitt, carolina does have a good defense. or at least i think they do. being able to run, at home, strong defense, those are games carolina should win.
chicago is 2-0 on the road and 0-2 at home. i think that turns around. teams with bad defenses and QB's that tend to take too many chances aren't the best road teams. if carolina can get back to playing solid defense and get a decent RB on the field, this looks like a pretty good matchup for them. not sure why they can't do what they did against detroit to chicago, at least on defense. only, chicago shouldn't be able to stop the run as well as detroit can and did in that game.
Stewart is doubtful for the Panthers, so it appears they will be starting a "guy-off-the-street" at RB again this week. I'm high on Carolina going into the season, and my hopes have not been dashed by their less than stellar defense ... yet!
They are still on my "play-on" list in the right spot
Chicago @ Carolina -3 looks like carolina may get a little healthier this week with stewart practicing. no way do i bet carolina with no RB's. newton and that offense is not good enough to bet on without a legitimate RB on the field. but, if stewart does play, i like their chances. have to monitor that.
Chicago comes in with a pretty bad defense so this is a team carolina can score against. notwithstanding giving up so many points to the shrimps (can we still call them that?) and Pitt, carolina does have a good defense. or at least i think they do. being able to run, at home, strong defense, those are games carolina should win.
chicago is 2-0 on the road and 0-2 at home. i think that turns around. teams with bad defenses and QB's that tend to take too many chances aren't the best road teams. if carolina can get back to playing solid defense and get a decent RB on the field, this looks like a pretty good matchup for them. not sure why they can't do what they did against detroit to chicago, at least on defense. only, chicago shouldn't be able to stop the run as well as detroit can and did in that game.
Stewart is doubtful for the Panthers, so it appears they will be starting a "guy-off-the-street" at RB again this week. I'm high on Carolina going into the season, and my hopes have not been dashed by their less than stellar defense ... yet!
They are still on my "play-on" list in the right spot
Clev @ Tenn -1 times have certainly changed for Tenn. if i was predicting this line in week 5 before the season, i would have thought it closer to 6. of course, i've been wildly wrong about tenn most weeks, so there's that. i may try one more time. i just don't see why Tenn is so bad. statistically, their defense is pretty good and the offense really should be better.
one thing i'll say for Tenn s they've had a very tough schedule, possibly the toughest in the league niow that we know dallas is good (do i know that?). 3 road games against and all 4 games were against playoff looking teams. so, this is their first easy game and it's at home. in other words, if Tenn is even a halfway decent team, they win this one. and, if they are, we are certainly getting line value since Tenn comes into this one off three straight losses. tenn may prove me wrong again, but it could be that tenn is a pretty good team, just not in the class of the teams they've played so far which, again, would make this -1 spread a bargain.
Clev is the first week 4 bye team we've come across. i mentioned this in last week's newsletter. the week 4 bye is not good for teams, especially teams that have started the season well or better than expected. Clev is one of those teams beating NO and hanging tough with Pitt and Blt. i can't see any reason they would have welcomed the week 4 bye. Clev definiutely looks like a good team to bet on as decent sized dogs but expecting them to win this on the road off a bye doesn't look like a good bet to me.
I can't tell you why ... maybe it's just a hunch ... but I'm leaning Clev right now
Clev @ Tenn -1 times have certainly changed for Tenn. if i was predicting this line in week 5 before the season, i would have thought it closer to 6. of course, i've been wildly wrong about tenn most weeks, so there's that. i may try one more time. i just don't see why Tenn is so bad. statistically, their defense is pretty good and the offense really should be better.
one thing i'll say for Tenn s they've had a very tough schedule, possibly the toughest in the league niow that we know dallas is good (do i know that?). 3 road games against and all 4 games were against playoff looking teams. so, this is their first easy game and it's at home. in other words, if Tenn is even a halfway decent team, they win this one. and, if they are, we are certainly getting line value since Tenn comes into this one off three straight losses. tenn may prove me wrong again, but it could be that tenn is a pretty good team, just not in the class of the teams they've played so far which, again, would make this -1 spread a bargain.
Clev is the first week 4 bye team we've come across. i mentioned this in last week's newsletter. the week 4 bye is not good for teams, especially teams that have started the season well or better than expected. Clev is one of those teams beating NO and hanging tough with Pitt and Blt. i can't see any reason they would have welcomed the week 4 bye. Clev definiutely looks like a good team to bet on as decent sized dogs but expecting them to win this on the road off a bye doesn't look like a good bet to me.
I can't tell you why ... maybe it's just a hunch ... but I'm leaning Clev right now
Pitt @ Jax +6 must be an error at pinnacle. how does Jax have a single digit spread? we've said all along Pitt is no good. we weren't sure anyone believed us. they are 2-2 with a nice win over carolina. but this line shows people know pitt isn't very good. however, this line clerly is tempting people to bet pitt at under 7. Pitt does look good on offense. bell is very good, roethlisberger is his usual self, some bad, can be very good, brown is very good. pitt is going to score against Jax. Jax doesn't play defense. i guess they are assuming with bortles having a game and a half under his belt, this is where he shows what he can do. i think he probably will, especially against a bad pitt defense. if it's 2014 and james harrison is on your defense, your defense sucks. was L. C. Greenwood unavailable?
anyway, is this the one Jac actually covers. at home, bortles with some more experience, against a bad defense? maybe. but you know the rules. no betting Jax. a simple enough rule. tough to follow though.
I wanted to chime in here BEFORE Getty and CD got delirious and bet the Jags.
Pitt @ Jax +6 must be an error at pinnacle. how does Jax have a single digit spread? we've said all along Pitt is no good. we weren't sure anyone believed us. they are 2-2 with a nice win over carolina. but this line shows people know pitt isn't very good. however, this line clerly is tempting people to bet pitt at under 7. Pitt does look good on offense. bell is very good, roethlisberger is his usual self, some bad, can be very good, brown is very good. pitt is going to score against Jax. Jax doesn't play defense. i guess they are assuming with bortles having a game and a half under his belt, this is where he shows what he can do. i think he probably will, especially against a bad pitt defense. if it's 2014 and james harrison is on your defense, your defense sucks. was L. C. Greenwood unavailable?
anyway, is this the one Jac actually covers. at home, bortles with some more experience, against a bad defense? maybe. but you know the rules. no betting Jax. a simple enough rule. tough to follow though.
I wanted to chime in here BEFORE Getty and CD got delirious and bet the Jags.
I wanted to chime in here BEFORE Getty and CD got delirious and bet the Jags.
Sometimes you take the gift and don't look back.
Pitt is the play here. E.O.M.
Well, I agree. The Steelers are the same team as the Colts, and they just came in and waxed the Jags in this stadium 2 weeks ago. Lest we forget Jax lost their 1st 8 games last year by double digits before finally breaking through with a win against the equally inept Titans. Speaking of Tennessee, Pete Prisco said of them, "When the worst player on the offense is the guy behind center, the whole group of 11 guys will look bad." Amen.
I wanted to chime in here BEFORE Getty and CD got delirious and bet the Jags.
Sometimes you take the gift and don't look back.
Pitt is the play here. E.O.M.
Well, I agree. The Steelers are the same team as the Colts, and they just came in and waxed the Jags in this stadium 2 weeks ago. Lest we forget Jax lost their 1st 8 games last year by double digits before finally breaking through with a win against the equally inept Titans. Speaking of Tennessee, Pete Prisco said of them, "When the worst player on the offense is the guy behind center, the whole group of 11 guys will look bad." Amen.
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.