Recent Posts

Thread Author Meatsicle Post Entries
ChickMagnut
ChickMagnut
Quote Originally Posted by ChickMagnut:

Packers was a straight up Squares play. The right bet is the winning bet.

So you're telling me that you knew that Bradford was going to come out and play like he's been in that system for years? That's the only reason the Vikings won that game. The defense played great, but without Bradford surprising everyone that's an easy Packers win.
ChickMagnut
ChickMagnut
Anyone who bet on the Vikings did so hoping that Bradford wouldn't be horrendous. Anyone who bet on the Packers did so because Bradford likely wouldn't play well due to only being in that system for 2 weeks. No one could have predicted he'd play as well as he did. Packers were the right bet considering the circumstances, but the right bet doesn't always win.
Philly0
Philly0
Quote Originally Posted by DrJohn3719:

Quote Originally Posted by BarneysDad:

reason #3 the Lions are better then their record and the Pack is close to packing it up for the season    They will be lucky to finish 10-6 
Packing it up is an overstatement. However, when a team is in a "must win" situation, it is often prudent to reflect on how they ended up there in the first place. Unless there are some extenuating circumstances, it may be unreasonable to think they're going to magically pull out a win when they've been able to do so (when it counts) all season.This spot sets up pretty nicely for the lions; the value in this line undoubtedly rests with the home team. Betting short road favorites is not a good long-term strategy in the NFL.

Except both teams played last Thursday so it isn't a short week.
itzthisguy
itzthisguy
Quote Originally Posted by mikeru3:

Denver rolls. I bought it down to - 3 though.

They roll, but you bought 1.5 points. That makes sense.
itzthisguy
itzthisguy
Quote Originally Posted by mikeru3:

Denver rolls. I bought it down to - 3 though.

They roll, but you bought 1.5 points. That makes sense.
NHcoverking
NHcoverking
Assuming this is an online book, would you have even seen that full $200k? How the darn do you even begin to withdraw and deposit that kind of money?

Just curious.
Meatsicle
Meatsicle
Thanks, guys. Had a bad run on football last week, so this feels good.
BooBunny
BooBunny
Quote Originally Posted by LeRinkRat:



most EXCELLENT call tonight, Meatsicle. my OVER went down in flames. Nabby in the shootout was what I was expecting during regulation play

Thanks, man. Yeah Nabby actually made some pretty nice saves tonight, but thankfully he couldn't do it in the shootout. Now I need the Flames to win in regulation for an even better night.
BooBunny
BooBunny
Sabres win! WOOOOOOOOO
Meatsicle
Meatsicle
hahaha!


BooBunny
BooBunny
Come onnnn Sabres, take this one in OT!!
BooBunny
BooBunny
Let's go Sabres!
jackal4422
jackal4422
Honestly this only makes me feel better about my Flames in regulation bet.
Meatsicle
Meatsicle
Quote Originally Posted by pprimetime:

My friend the sun shines on a dogs behind once in awhile!!! Tampa Bay is a beast and don't get fooled by Buffalo...save your units!


You're right and it just may shine brightly tonight. Letting this garbage ride.
Meatsicle
Meatsicle
Quote Originally Posted by 98ITR:

at first glance I liked Sabres too with Nabakov being in net.. But after sweeping Montreal they must be sky high now.. 

Nabakov may let in 3 or 4 but Tampa's scoring will match it..

How is them being sky high a bad thing? Confidence often leads to victory.

Quote Originally Posted by LeRinkRat:

allowed at least 4 GA's his last 4 a typo actually it's Nabby's last 3 games allowed at least 4 GA's, all on the road. he was in goal the Bugs last B2B a 2-5 loss @ Islanders. the last 3 Bugs B2B's have gone OVER a 5 1/2 total


I considered the over as well and it's probably a great play, but the Sabres have been very good about keeping the puck out of their own net and you don't know what kind of performance you're going to get out of a team on a back-to-back, especially on the road. I just think with Nabokov in net and the way the Sabres have looked, it's a good spot to take them on the ML as big underdogs.
Meatsicle
Meatsicle
Quote Originally Posted by 98ITR:

at first glance I liked Sabres too with Nabakov being in net.. But after sweeping Montreal they must be sky high now.. 

Nabakov may let in 3 or 4 but Tampa's scoring will match it..

How is them being sky high a bad thing? Confidence often leads to victory.

Quote Originally Posted by LeRinkRat:

allowed at least 4 GA's his last 4 a typo actually it's Nabby's last 3 games allowed at least 4 GA's, all on the road. he was in goal the Bugs last B2B a 2-5 loss @ Islanders. the last 3 Bugs B2B's have gone OVER a 5 1/2 total

I considered the over as well and it's probably a great play, but the Sabres have been very good about keeping the puck out of their own net and you don't know what kind of performance you're going to get out of a team on a back-to-back, especially on the road. I just think with Nabokov in net and the way the Sabres have looked, it's a good spot to take them on the ML as big underdogs.
Meatsicle
Meatsicle
The worst team in the east beats the best team in the east tonight. The Sabres have - dare I say it - looked pretty good their past few games, winning 5 of their last 6 with some spectacular goaltending and highlight reel scoring by some kid named Tyler Ennis. With Nabokov almost definitely starting in net for the Lightning on a back-to-back road game, I think this is a great spot to take the Sabres at a juicy +185.

BUF ML 2U +185
xpertnbapicks
xpertnbapicks
Have broncos ML and -6.5 @ +225. Manning owns the Chiefs.
themaceo
themaceo
Because they've covered most games this year. Had a feeling this one would be a blowout though.
Dangerbay
Dangerbay
NHL Betting / Friday Picks / View Post
Quote Originally Posted by pinballwizard:

Fvck they mentioned recently on one of the Senator telecast how many times opponents have started their backup against Ottawa this season. Wtf, does this mean teams that play Ottawa are taking them lightly?
Luongo is injured