Perhaps you people do not realize just how good Green Bay is. We're talking the caliber of the likes of Stanford vs Colorado... Oklahoma vs Ball State... SEC vs a Div-2 school.
Green Bay shattered all the stats on the road going to Atlanta last week as a 6-point favored. Atlanta is a hard enough place to play, let alone cover a 6-point spread on the road, on a night game, after trailing 14-3 at the half. You cannot incorporate mid-game stats.
I can say I had a 13-point favorite as a bet and they were up by 14 after the 1st quarter, what are the odds of losing it? I mean if they are a 13-point favorite, they must be really really good right? And being up by 14 in the first means all they have to do is at least tie for 3 quarters. But I bet the pregame odds of the underdog winning at least one quarter of play were pretty darn higher than winning the game outright.
Green Bay was already up 17-0 midway through the 2nd and 24-3 at Halftime. Regardless of what St.Louis does in the game in terms of yardage or the pregame and historic stats, at that point covering the spread of 14.5, or the spread of -7 in the second half for a huge underdog like that on the road becomes next to impossible.
As I said before, I had slept in Sunday morning after hitting a $13K parlay in college on Saturday. Green Bay was my play of the week along with N.E. Over, parlayed. I was not able to bet on Green Bay on time so I was actually routing for the Rams, until I saw this post that is. Then I really wanted the Pack to cover and make this fucking clown lose.
Perhaps you people do not realize just how good Green Bay is. We're talking the caliber of the likes of Stanford vs Colorado... Oklahoma vs Ball State... SEC vs a Div-2 school.
Green Bay shattered all the stats on the road going to Atlanta last week as a 6-point favored. Atlanta is a hard enough place to play, let alone cover a 6-point spread on the road, on a night game, after trailing 14-3 at the half. You cannot incorporate mid-game stats.
I can say I had a 13-point favorite as a bet and they were up by 14 after the 1st quarter, what are the odds of losing it? I mean if they are a 13-point favorite, they must be really really good right? And being up by 14 in the first means all they have to do is at least tie for 3 quarters. But I bet the pregame odds of the underdog winning at least one quarter of play were pretty darn higher than winning the game outright.
Green Bay was already up 17-0 midway through the 2nd and 24-3 at Halftime. Regardless of what St.Louis does in the game in terms of yardage or the pregame and historic stats, at that point covering the spread of 14.5, or the spread of -7 in the second half for a huge underdog like that on the road becomes next to impossible.
As I said before, I had slept in Sunday morning after hitting a $13K parlay in college on Saturday. Green Bay was my play of the week along with N.E. Over, parlayed. I was not able to bet on Green Bay on time so I was actually routing for the Rams, until I saw this post that is. Then I really wanted the Pack to cover and make this fucking clown lose.
Perhaps you people do not realize just how good Green Bay is. We're talking the caliber of the likes of Stanford vs Colorado... Oklahoma vs Ball State... SEC vs a Div-2 school.
Green Bay shattered all the stats on the road going to Atlanta last week as a 6-point favored. Atlanta is a hard enough place to play, let alone cover a 6-point spread on the road, on a night game, after trailing 14-3 at the half. You cannot incorporate mid-game stats.
I can say I had a 13-point favorite as a bet and they were up by 14 after the 1st quarter, what are the odds of losing it? I mean if they are a 13-point favorite, they must be really really good right? And being up by 14 in the first means all they have to do is at least tie for 3 quarters. But I bet the pregame odds of the underdog winning at least one quarter of play were pretty darn higher than winning the game outright.
Green Bay was already up 17-0 midway through the 2nd and 24-3 at Halftime. Regardless of what St.Louis does in the game in terms of yardage or the pregame and historic stats, at that point covering the spread of 14.5, or the spread of -7 in the second half for a huge underdog like that on the road becomes next to impossible.
As I said before, I had slept in Sunday morning after hitting a $13K parlay in college on Saturday. Green Bay was my play of the week along with N.E. Over, parlayed. I was not able to bet on Green Bay on time so I was actually routing for the Rams, until I saw this post that is. Then I really wanted the Pack to cover and make this fucking clown lose.
Only 24 of 3468 teams that have outgained their opponents and were even or better have ever lost by more than 14 points. That's 0.7%. In other words if that game played out the same way again St. Louis historically covers 99.3% of the time.
Congrats on probably the luckiest cover in history.
Perhaps you people do not realize just how good Green Bay is. We're talking the caliber of the likes of Stanford vs Colorado... Oklahoma vs Ball State... SEC vs a Div-2 school.
Green Bay shattered all the stats on the road going to Atlanta last week as a 6-point favored. Atlanta is a hard enough place to play, let alone cover a 6-point spread on the road, on a night game, after trailing 14-3 at the half. You cannot incorporate mid-game stats.
I can say I had a 13-point favorite as a bet and they were up by 14 after the 1st quarter, what are the odds of losing it? I mean if they are a 13-point favorite, they must be really really good right? And being up by 14 in the first means all they have to do is at least tie for 3 quarters. But I bet the pregame odds of the underdog winning at least one quarter of play were pretty darn higher than winning the game outright.
Green Bay was already up 17-0 midway through the 2nd and 24-3 at Halftime. Regardless of what St.Louis does in the game in terms of yardage or the pregame and historic stats, at that point covering the spread of 14.5, or the spread of -7 in the second half for a huge underdog like that on the road becomes next to impossible.
As I said before, I had slept in Sunday morning after hitting a $13K parlay in college on Saturday. Green Bay was my play of the week along with N.E. Over, parlayed. I was not able to bet on Green Bay on time so I was actually routing for the Rams, until I saw this post that is. Then I really wanted the Pack to cover and make this fucking clown lose.
Only 24 of 3468 teams that have outgained their opponents and were even or better have ever lost by more than 14 points. That's 0.7%. In other words if that game played out the same way again St. Louis historically covers 99.3% of the time.
Congrats on probably the luckiest cover in history.
Only 24 of 3468 teams that have outgained their opponents and were even or better have ever lost by more than 14 points. That's 0.7%. In other words if that game played out the same way again St. Louis historically covers 99.3% of the time.
Congrats on probably the luckiest cover in history.
You mean if Green Bay takes a 17-0 lead in the second quarter and 24-3 at the Half, putting StLouis on panic mode and forcing them to go for it in the red zone on 4th downs?
Only 24 of 3468 teams that have outgained their opponents and were even or better have ever lost by more than 14 points. That's 0.7%. In other words if that game played out the same way again St. Louis historically covers 99.3% of the time.
Congrats on probably the luckiest cover in history.
You mean if Green Bay takes a 17-0 lead in the second quarter and 24-3 at the Half, putting StLouis on panic mode and forcing them to go for it in the red zone on 4th downs?
big49ers needs to come back for an exit speech before this thread is done for.
I have not seen a thread that buried the masses in a long while.
I also have my own thread and since there is hardly anyone on it, I did not bury the masses by being a fade material.
From now on, I'm betting with them sharps. If they lose, I too will lose. If they win, I still would lose due to my coin having the same faces on them. ha ha ha ha ha ha ha
big49ers needs to come back for an exit speech before this thread is done for.
I have not seen a thread that buried the masses in a long while.
I also have my own thread and since there is hardly anyone on it, I did not bury the masses by being a fade material.
From now on, I'm betting with them sharps. If they lose, I too will lose. If they win, I still would lose due to my coin having the same faces on them. ha ha ha ha ha ha ha
Only 24 of 3468 teams that have outgained their opponents and were even or better have ever lost by more than 14 points. That's 0.7%. In other words if that game played out the same way again St. Louis historically covers 99.3% of the time.
Congrats on probably the luckiest cover in history.
holy shit.
it's aaron rodgers dude. take your 99% and flush it down the toilet along with your money.
Only 24 of 3468 teams that have outgained their opponents and were even or better have ever lost by more than 14 points. That's 0.7%. In other words if that game played out the same way again St. Louis historically covers 99.3% of the time.
Congrats on probably the luckiest cover in history.
holy shit.
it's aaron rodgers dude. take your 99% and flush it down the toilet along with your money.
i love how everyone can act tough behind a computer screen
i don't see why the bashers didn't starting their own thread stating that the rams wouldn't cover before the game happened, i guess it is easier to predict the past then the future
i love how everyone can act tough behind a computer screen
i don't see why the bashers didn't starting their own thread stating that the rams wouldn't cover before the game happened, i guess it is easier to predict the past then the future
OP sorry for all the bashing your getting on here. To be honest this trend is great but this year forward it wont be as effective with the new CBA rules it looks like. 4 days off after a bye is actually gonna make teams coming off a bye way more sluggish then before.
Not!!Still have 2 weeks to rest,heal,refreshed and 10 days to prepare!!This is a proven advantage the good teams or top half but also has been proven that the bye really doesnt help bad teams!!
OP sorry for all the bashing your getting on here. To be honest this trend is great but this year forward it wont be as effective with the new CBA rules it looks like. 4 days off after a bye is actually gonna make teams coming off a bye way more sluggish then before.
Not!!Still have 2 weeks to rest,heal,refreshed and 10 days to prepare!!This is a proven advantage the good teams or top half but also has been proven that the bye really doesnt help bad teams!!
IMO the only trends that are solid and good are the ones thatcan be explained and why the trend is working.This is why the i have been betting a favorite off a bye fior the last few years and won every year because its expalinable.Give any good team 2 weeks to rest and prepare and get refreshed xtra spring in their step so to speak!!ITS AN ADVANTAGE!!Next with alot of good teams on byes theres prolly gonna be like 5-6 plays
IMO the only trends that are solid and good are the ones thatcan be explained and why the trend is working.This is why the i have been betting a favorite off a bye fior the last few years and won every year because its expalinable.Give any good team 2 weeks to rest and prepare and get refreshed xtra spring in their step so to speak!!ITS AN ADVANTAGE!!Next with alot of good teams on byes theres prolly gonna be like 5-6 plays
IMO the only trends that are solid and good are the ones thatcan be explained and why the trend is working.This is why the i have been betting a favorite off a bye fior the last few years and won every year because its expalinable.Give any good team 2 weeks to rest and prepare and get refreshed xtra spring in their step so to speak!!ITS AN ADVANTAGE!!Next with alot of good teams on byes theres prolly gonna be like 5-6 plays
First: I can't believe this thread is still going
Secondly, to answer your post, there is clear logic embedded within this thread as to why the trend is so successful, DESPITE the results of this particular weekend.
IMO the only trends that are solid and good are the ones thatcan be explained and why the trend is working.This is why the i have been betting a favorite off a bye fior the last few years and won every year because its expalinable.Give any good team 2 weeks to rest and prepare and get refreshed xtra spring in their step so to speak!!ITS AN ADVANTAGE!!Next with alot of good teams on byes theres prolly gonna be like 5-6 plays
First: I can't believe this thread is still going
Secondly, to answer your post, there is clear logic embedded within this thread as to why the trend is so successful, DESPITE the results of this particular weekend.
That is all you need to know about how rare it is for a 14 point underdog to not cover when that happens.
Wow. Such incredible stubbornness!
Trends are great to be aware of. That being said, the trends aren't out there on the field playing the game. No, the two respective teams are. In this case, make the one GB (playing like the reigning Super Bowl Champions they are) sporting a 5-0 record AND playing at home. Make the other team the hapless Rams 0-4. Rams getting outscored by 17 points a game and GB outscoring their opponents by 13 points a game. Now consider also that GB has a +8 TO differential in this matchup. Now consider your own knowledge that the Rams have a serious problem with Red Zone Production which has been a consistent factor in each and every single game they have played. They can't score in the Red Zone! If you apply reasonable common sense, you can only make one reasonable conclusion. The pick is GB or pass if you think it's too many points. Jumping on a horrible pick because of a trend when it defies the logic of the situation is not very good betting at all.
How can any one who seriously considered the actual match up possibly say that SL was the right pick? That is absolute insanity, or sheer and blind faith in trends come what may, or maybe even stupidity.
Every game must be examined in and of itself. If trends line up with logic and reason and all available knowledge, fine and dandy. If the match up is SCREAMING that the trend is suspect in light of the specific situation at hand, then the trend has to go out the window!
Maybe you should consider this: I would like to know HOW MANY OF THOSE 21 ATS WINS IN THAT 21-2 ATS TREND THE DOG WAS PLAYING THE REIGNING SB CHAMPS, AND HOW MANY OF THOSE TIMES ONE TEAM WAS UNDEFEATED AND THE OTHER TEAM WINLESS, SCORING MISMATCH, TURNOVER DIFF. MISMATCH, MISMATCH IN THE PASS OFFENSE VS PASS DEFENSE, OH...AND THE BETTER TEAM GOT TO PLAY AT HOME!And I am not saying that only one single condition was met...NO! All the conditions I just specified all into play at the same time... I have no idea, and without bothering to research, I'll bet you I know the answer. ZERO, NADA, ZILCH So much for the relevancy of that trend!
That is all you need to know about how rare it is for a 14 point underdog to not cover when that happens.
Wow. Such incredible stubbornness!
Trends are great to be aware of. That being said, the trends aren't out there on the field playing the game. No, the two respective teams are. In this case, make the one GB (playing like the reigning Super Bowl Champions they are) sporting a 5-0 record AND playing at home. Make the other team the hapless Rams 0-4. Rams getting outscored by 17 points a game and GB outscoring their opponents by 13 points a game. Now consider also that GB has a +8 TO differential in this matchup. Now consider your own knowledge that the Rams have a serious problem with Red Zone Production which has been a consistent factor in each and every single game they have played. They can't score in the Red Zone! If you apply reasonable common sense, you can only make one reasonable conclusion. The pick is GB or pass if you think it's too many points. Jumping on a horrible pick because of a trend when it defies the logic of the situation is not very good betting at all.
How can any one who seriously considered the actual match up possibly say that SL was the right pick? That is absolute insanity, or sheer and blind faith in trends come what may, or maybe even stupidity.
Every game must be examined in and of itself. If trends line up with logic and reason and all available knowledge, fine and dandy. If the match up is SCREAMING that the trend is suspect in light of the specific situation at hand, then the trend has to go out the window!
Maybe you should consider this: I would like to know HOW MANY OF THOSE 21 ATS WINS IN THAT 21-2 ATS TREND THE DOG WAS PLAYING THE REIGNING SB CHAMPS, AND HOW MANY OF THOSE TIMES ONE TEAM WAS UNDEFEATED AND THE OTHER TEAM WINLESS, SCORING MISMATCH, TURNOVER DIFF. MISMATCH, MISMATCH IN THE PASS OFFENSE VS PASS DEFENSE, OH...AND THE BETTER TEAM GOT TO PLAY AT HOME!And I am not saying that only one single condition was met...NO! All the conditions I just specified all into play at the same time... I have no idea, and without bothering to research, I'll bet you I know the answer. ZERO, NADA, ZILCH So much for the relevancy of that trend!
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.