I always struggle in the last 2 weeks of the NFL season because of the status of teams with playoffs and teams that are out.
There are basically 4 different matchup categories:
A. 2 teams out of the playoffs B. 1 fighting to get in and 1 out C. A game involving a team that has clinched playoffs, but doesnt need to win D. 2 teams fighting to get in
"D" is easy.
But how do you guys handle A, B, and C?
I often end up not betting them at all.
Curious to hear different approaches.
Support your local animal shelter. I am on twitter.
1
To remove first post, remove entire topic.
I always struggle in the last 2 weeks of the NFL season because of the status of teams with playoffs and teams that are out.
There are basically 4 different matchup categories:
A. 2 teams out of the playoffs B. 1 fighting to get in and 1 out C. A game involving a team that has clinched playoffs, but doesnt need to win D. 2 teams fighting to get in
To me it’s a little bit of a guessing game but generally there is a feeling of a team that wants to prove a point or get right. Like Dallas vs Wash. just have to find that one or two :)
Cowboy
0
@vanzack
To me it’s a little bit of a guessing game but generally there is a feeling of a team that wants to prove a point or get right. Like Dallas vs Wash. just have to find that one or two :)
I rarely bet A, B, C .... you lose more than win betting them. I some time bet them but very small mostly for entertainment purpose. Or sometime you found an angle such as the book begging you to take one side then I would go the house way (still small wager)
1
I rarely bet A, B, C .... you lose more than win betting them. I some time bet them but very small mostly for entertainment purpose. Or sometime you found an angle such as the book begging you to take one side then I would go the house way (still small wager)
Short answer….bet the QB in the last two weeks of the season……with the exception of teams resting players in the last week, to get ready for the playoffs. The best QBs seem to cover most of the time, in most scenarios.
It’s easy to see for yourself. look at the results from the last two weeks of any previous season. Figure out who your top 6 or 7 QBs are (that are still playing, not injured obviously). Rodgers Brady Lamar Mahomes Brees Allen etc. See how often their teams covered.
0
Short answer….bet the QB in the last two weeks of the season……with the exception of teams resting players in the last week, to get ready for the playoffs. The best QBs seem to cover most of the time, in most scenarios.
It’s easy to see for yourself. look at the results from the last two weeks of any previous season. Figure out who your top 6 or 7 QBs are (that are still playing, not injured obviously). Rodgers Brady Lamar Mahomes Brees Allen etc. See how often their teams covered.
I bet all 4 scenario's, simply because I'm a degenerate
B. 1 fighting to get in and 1 out
This is a scenario in which I look to bet the team that is out. The extra motivation for the team still trying to get in has been factored into the line, with a couple extra points added in to compensate for the general public's "inside info" that one team needs it and the other team doesn't.
The team that needs it gets more action more often than not.
The team that doesn't need it gets the cover more often than not.
I do not have stats to back this up, but have a gambling acct which suggests I'm right
bigreds daddy
3
I bet all 4 scenario's, simply because I'm a degenerate
B. 1 fighting to get in and 1 out
This is a scenario in which I look to bet the team that is out. The extra motivation for the team still trying to get in has been factored into the line, with a couple extra points added in to compensate for the general public's "inside info" that one team needs it and the other team doesn't.
The team that needs it gets more action more often than not.
The team that doesn't need it gets the cover more often than not.
I do not have stats to back this up, but have a gambling acct which suggests I'm right
I also like to look at teams versus the opponents. For this week for example I look at Minnesota vs Green Bay. Minnesota has beaten them the last 2 games played and generally plays them tough.. I'll take the points.. it's much tougher with the covid bs going on now, so don't put your bet in early.
0
I also like to look at teams versus the opponents. For this week for example I look at Minnesota vs Green Bay. Minnesota has beaten them the last 2 games played and generally plays them tough.. I'll take the points.. it's much tougher with the covid bs going on now, so don't put your bet in early.
Many years ago I always assumed B. (1 fighting to get in and 1 out) was a no-brainer. You bet on the team fighting to get in, of course.
Nope. It took awhile, but eventually I learned that itself is not enough. That's not nearly enough to properly handicap a game. Many times I was on the losing side of this. The team that "had nothing to play for" not only covered the spread, they won outright. Lots of players LOVE to play spoiler. They aren't in the playoffs and if they can knock someone else off, it justifies their otherwise disappointing season.
Regarding C. (A game involving a team that has clinched playoffs, but doesn't need to win) is also "easy on paper." That playoff bound team will simply rest many of its players, right? Well, yes... but that fact is often already adjusted and accounted for in the spread. Furthermore, some coaches/team don't rest players as much as others... they want that momentum of a win going into the playoffs.
Basically, you still have to take in all of the information you can, digest it, to determine your play.
2
Many years ago I always assumed B. (1 fighting to get in and 1 out) was a no-brainer. You bet on the team fighting to get in, of course.
Nope. It took awhile, but eventually I learned that itself is not enough. That's not nearly enough to properly handicap a game. Many times I was on the losing side of this. The team that "had nothing to play for" not only covered the spread, they won outright. Lots of players LOVE to play spoiler. They aren't in the playoffs and if they can knock someone else off, it justifies their otherwise disappointing season.
Regarding C. (A game involving a team that has clinched playoffs, but doesn't need to win) is also "easy on paper." That playoff bound team will simply rest many of its players, right? Well, yes... but that fact is often already adjusted and accounted for in the spread. Furthermore, some coaches/team don't rest players as much as others... they want that momentum of a win going into the playoffs.
Basically, you still have to take in all of the information you can, digest it, to determine your play.
I back good teams that have clinched a playoff spot but are playing for home field advantage and/or a bye. That has always been golden in the NFL, and more so this year because of the 17 game schedule and Covid. If you have to tease them then tease them. If you can take them ATS os SU, take them.
0
I back good teams that have clinched a playoff spot but are playing for home field advantage and/or a bye. That has always been golden in the NFL, and more so this year because of the 17 game schedule and Covid. If you have to tease them then tease them. If you can take them ATS os SU, take them.
I guess this would be a C Matchup of sorts...Cardinals @ Cowboys (both are in)...
Cowboys (11-4) have #2 seed right now, so they'll get the #7 Eagles if everything stays the same. (Rams #3 and Bucs #4 also 11-4 like Cowboys)
Cardinals (10-5) have #5 seed and if they beat Cowboys then DAL will get bumped from #2.
If TBAY beats the Jets and RAMS beat Balty then RAMS move up to #2 and BUCS move up to #3; DAL drops to #4.
So this is a VERY big game for Cowboys.
Rams and Bucs "control their own destiny" and in Week 18 if Bucs (at home) beat the Panthers again, they get #2 seed (if LA loses @ home to SF).
If Rams win out this week and next (like Bucs) then Rams #2 and Bucs #3 and Cowboys #4...so Dallas really needs a win vs Arizona to keep pace with Rams and Bucs.
Packers (vs Vikes, @ Lions) need to win out to keep that 1 game lead and the #1 seed (first round bye). If Green Bay splits last two games, they would tie with Rams and Bucs at 13-4. 3-Way Conference W-L tiebreaker would eliminate Bucs and then Packers and Rams...GB beat LA head-to-head, so GB would be #1 seed.
Interesting times in the NFL, huh lol
1
Hey vanzack,
I guess this would be a C Matchup of sorts...Cardinals @ Cowboys (both are in)...
Cowboys (11-4) have #2 seed right now, so they'll get the #7 Eagles if everything stays the same. (Rams #3 and Bucs #4 also 11-4 like Cowboys)
Cardinals (10-5) have #5 seed and if they beat Cowboys then DAL will get bumped from #2.
If TBAY beats the Jets and RAMS beat Balty then RAMS move up to #2 and BUCS move up to #3; DAL drops to #4.
So this is a VERY big game for Cowboys.
Rams and Bucs "control their own destiny" and in Week 18 if Bucs (at home) beat the Panthers again, they get #2 seed (if LA loses @ home to SF).
If Rams win out this week and next (like Bucs) then Rams #2 and Bucs #3 and Cowboys #4...so Dallas really needs a win vs Arizona to keep pace with Rams and Bucs.
Packers (vs Vikes, @ Lions) need to win out to keep that 1 game lead and the #1 seed (first round bye). If Green Bay splits last two games, they would tie with Rams and Bucs at 13-4. 3-Way Conference W-L tiebreaker would eliminate Bucs and then Packers and Rams...GB beat LA head-to-head, so GB would be #1 seed.
Hey vanzack, I guess this would be a C Matchup of sorts...Cardinals @ Cowboys (both are in)... Cowboys (11-4) have #2 seed right now, so they'll get the #7 Eagles if everything stays the same. (Rams #3 and Bucs #4 also 11-4 like Cowboys) Cardinals (10-5) have #5 seed and if they beat Cowboys then DAL will get bumped from #2. If TBAY beats the Jets and RAMS beat Balty then RAMS move up to #2 and BUCS move up to #3; DAL drops to #4. So this is a VERY big game for Cowboys. Rams and Bucs "control their own destiny" and in Week 18 if Bucs (at home) beat the Panthers again, they get #2 seed (if LA loses @ home to SF). If Rams win out this week and next (like Bucs) then Rams #2 and Bucs #3 and Cowboys #4...so Dallas really needs a win vs Arizona to keep pace with Rams and Bucs. Packers (vs Vikes, @ Lions) need to win out to keep that 1 game lead and the #1 seed (first round bye). If Green Bay splits last two games, they would tie with Rams and Bucs at 13-4. 3-Way Conference W-L tiebreaker would eliminate Bucs and then Packers and Rams...GB beat LA head-to-head, so GB would be #1 seed. Interesting times in the NFL, huh lol
Regarding GB,
You are saying they only need to win one of the last two games, not both?! That’s very interesting. If they go all out and beat the Vikes this week then they can mail in the Detroit game and let Rodgers heal his toe.
1
Quote Originally Posted by DB51daBEARS:
Hey vanzack, I guess this would be a C Matchup of sorts...Cardinals @ Cowboys (both are in)... Cowboys (11-4) have #2 seed right now, so they'll get the #7 Eagles if everything stays the same. (Rams #3 and Bucs #4 also 11-4 like Cowboys) Cardinals (10-5) have #5 seed and if they beat Cowboys then DAL will get bumped from #2. If TBAY beats the Jets and RAMS beat Balty then RAMS move up to #2 and BUCS move up to #3; DAL drops to #4. So this is a VERY big game for Cowboys. Rams and Bucs "control their own destiny" and in Week 18 if Bucs (at home) beat the Panthers again, they get #2 seed (if LA loses @ home to SF). If Rams win out this week and next (like Bucs) then Rams #2 and Bucs #3 and Cowboys #4...so Dallas really needs a win vs Arizona to keep pace with Rams and Bucs. Packers (vs Vikes, @ Lions) need to win out to keep that 1 game lead and the #1 seed (first round bye). If Green Bay splits last two games, they would tie with Rams and Bucs at 13-4. 3-Way Conference W-L tiebreaker would eliminate Bucs and then Packers and Rams...GB beat LA head-to-head, so GB would be #1 seed. Interesting times in the NFL, huh lol
Regarding GB,
You are saying they only need to win one of the last two games, not both?! That’s very interesting. If they go all out and beat the Vikes this week then they can mail in the Detroit game and let Rodgers heal his toe.
If the Packers lose a game (o the Vikings OR the Lions) the aren't guaranteed the #1 Seed. If Dallas wins both, and thus the Packer finish tied with Dallas, for example, Dallas wins the #1 Seed based upon a better conference record.
1
@begginerboy
If the Packers lose a game (o the Vikings OR the Lions) the aren't guaranteed the #1 Seed. If Dallas wins both, and thus the Packer finish tied with Dallas, for example, Dallas wins the #1 Seed based upon a better conference record.
@begginerboyIf the Packers lose a game (o the Vikings OR the Lions) the aren't guaranteed the #1 Seed. If Dallas wins both, and thus the Packer finish tied with Dallas, for example, Dallas wins the #1 Seed based upon a better conference record.
ok. So Dallas can beat them out. Then Dallas should be a play this week as well as Packers.
1
Quote Originally Posted by Ed-Collins:
@begginerboyIf the Packers lose a game (o the Vikings OR the Lions) the aren't guaranteed the #1 Seed. If Dallas wins both, and thus the Packer finish tied with Dallas, for example, Dallas wins the #1 Seed based upon a better conference record.
ok. So Dallas can beat them out. Then Dallas should be a play this week as well as Packers.
Quote Originally Posted by DB51daBEARS: Regarding GB, You are saying they only need to win one of the last two games, not both?! That’s very interesting. If they go all out and beat the Vikes this week then they can mail in the Detroit game and let Rodgers heal his toe.
Hey BB,
No not really...I said Packers need to win out to keep that 1 game lead and #1 seed
LAR likely and TB most likely look like they're gonna go 2-0 to finish the season, so GB has to win out to keep the #1 seed without the tiebreaker stuff. But if GB loses one (both are in Division) then it will come down to 3-way tiebreaker (if LAR and TB win out and DAL loses to ARIZ). That's why - just my opinion for VanZack's OP - the Cowboys AND the Cards both need a win though they're both in the playoffs. Dallas wants to face the Eagles; the easiest opponent in the playoffs (imho).
Cheers
1
Quote Originally Posted by begginerboy:
Quote Originally Posted by DB51daBEARS: Regarding GB, You are saying they only need to win one of the last two games, not both?! That’s very interesting. If they go all out and beat the Vikes this week then they can mail in the Detroit game and let Rodgers heal his toe.
Hey BB,
No not really...I said Packers need to win out to keep that 1 game lead and #1 seed
LAR likely and TB most likely look like they're gonna go 2-0 to finish the season, so GB has to win out to keep the #1 seed without the tiebreaker stuff. But if GB loses one (both are in Division) then it will come down to 3-way tiebreaker (if LAR and TB win out and DAL loses to ARIZ). That's why - just my opinion for VanZack's OP - the Cowboys AND the Cards both need a win though they're both in the playoffs. Dallas wants to face the Eagles; the easiest opponent in the playoffs (imho).
Quote Originally Posted by begginerboy: Quote Originally Posted by DB51daBEARS: Regarding GB, You are saying they only need to win one of the last two games, not both?! That’s very interesting. If they go all out and beat the Vikes this week then they can mail in the Detroit game and let Rodgers heal his toe. Hey BB, No not really...I said Packers need to win out to keep that 1 game lead and #1 seed LAR likely and TB most likely look like they're gonna go 2-0 to finish the season, so GB has to win out to keep the #1 seed without the tiebreaker stuff. But if GB loses one (both are in Division) then it will come down to 3-way tiebreaker (if LAR and TB win out and DAL loses to ARIZ). That's why - just my opinion for VanZack's OP - the Cowboys AND the Cards both need a win though they're both in the playoffs. Dallas wants to face the Eagles; the easiest opponent in the playoffs (imho). Cheers
Rams are in a bit of a look ahead spot playing a Niner team next that’s beaten them 5 straight times.
1
Quote Originally Posted by DB51daBEARS:
Quote Originally Posted by begginerboy: Quote Originally Posted by DB51daBEARS: Regarding GB, You are saying they only need to win one of the last two games, not both?! That’s very interesting. If they go all out and beat the Vikes this week then they can mail in the Detroit game and let Rodgers heal his toe. Hey BB, No not really...I said Packers need to win out to keep that 1 game lead and #1 seed LAR likely and TB most likely look like they're gonna go 2-0 to finish the season, so GB has to win out to keep the #1 seed without the tiebreaker stuff. But if GB loses one (both are in Division) then it will come down to 3-way tiebreaker (if LAR and TB win out and DAL loses to ARIZ). That's why - just my opinion for VanZack's OP - the Cowboys AND the Cards both need a win though they're both in the playoffs. Dallas wants to face the Eagles; the easiest opponent in the playoffs (imho). Cheers
Rams are in a bit of a look ahead spot playing a Niner team next that’s beaten them 5 straight times.
For A, I look at a few different things. Are there key players that are going to be free agents who are looking to show off to get a bigger contract? What about the HC - is he auditioning for a contract extension, new job, etc... I also like to look at the trajectory of the team and I tend to back the "up and comers' who just need more experience or who got killed by injuries, and fade the ones on the downhill side who are headed for a serious rebuild. I also throw division rivalry/revenge factors into my capping in these spots.
For B, I've found that some teams love to play spoiler. I usually fade the teams fighting for a spot and back the teams who may have nothing to lose, and who may have key players/coaches playing for contract extensions, new deals, etc...
For C, I typically stay away altogether.
And for D, you're right, it's much easier.
God is great, beer is good, and people are crazy.
0
For A, I look at a few different things. Are there key players that are going to be free agents who are looking to show off to get a bigger contract? What about the HC - is he auditioning for a contract extension, new job, etc... I also like to look at the trajectory of the team and I tend to back the "up and comers' who just need more experience or who got killed by injuries, and fade the ones on the downhill side who are headed for a serious rebuild. I also throw division rivalry/revenge factors into my capping in these spots.
For B, I've found that some teams love to play spoiler. I usually fade the teams fighting for a spot and back the teams who may have nothing to lose, and who may have key players/coaches playing for contract extensions, new deals, etc...
Quote Originally Posted by DB51daBEARS: Quote Originally Posted by begginerboy: Rams are in a bit of a look ahead spot playing a Niner team next that’s beaten them 5 straight times.
Hey BB,
Yeah I agree the Rams are thinking about SF, but at least LA is home. Can't see LA letting up in Balty (and Balty's got QB problems still).
If SF (vs Texans) and PHI (@ WFT) end up winning Sunday and both end up losing in Week 18 (LAR and DAL are the opponents) then they'd both be 9-8 and head-to-head the 49ers beat Philly so SF would have the #6 spot -- where they are now lol...but they could end up with Tampa Bay instead of the Rams. No idea who they'd prefer lol. Philly could end up playing LA instead of DAL if the Cowboys lose Sunday and get bumped outta #2. Gotta think Philly would rather Dallas b/c they know them better and b/c they're playing 'em Week 18. Gonna get crazy lol.
0
Quote Originally Posted by begginerboy:
Quote Originally Posted by DB51daBEARS: Quote Originally Posted by begginerboy: Rams are in a bit of a look ahead spot playing a Niner team next that’s beaten them 5 straight times.
Hey BB,
Yeah I agree the Rams are thinking about SF, but at least LA is home. Can't see LA letting up in Balty (and Balty's got QB problems still).
If SF (vs Texans) and PHI (@ WFT) end up winning Sunday and both end up losing in Week 18 (LAR and DAL are the opponents) then they'd both be 9-8 and head-to-head the 49ers beat Philly so SF would have the #6 spot -- where they are now lol...but they could end up with Tampa Bay instead of the Rams. No idea who they'd prefer lol. Philly could end up playing LA instead of DAL if the Cowboys lose Sunday and get bumped outta #2. Gotta think Philly would rather Dallas b/c they know them better and b/c they're playing 'em Week 18. Gonna get crazy lol.
packers are a ridiculously low +182 (Bookmaker) to win the NFC Bucs +295 Rams +420 Boys +444 Cards +1075 9ers +1700 As said, the Pack have the Vikings at home then at Lions. Not probable they lose either. Boys Cards at home, then at Eagles. No matter what imo the Packers are going to be minimum 7 point favorites for both games at home in the playoffs as the #1 seed. Now those are the facts, obviously we need to make our picks.Good stuff fellas.
Hey budweiser,
Yep...they are the odds-on fave to win, so that's the number. You would think Vegas would want to encourage more action on the longer odds teams (Boys and Rams) by giving Packers bettors just a little bit more at +200 to try and make the picture look more balanced. We saw the Rams couldn't beat the Packers last year in the freezing cold of Lambeau, but that was with Goff...with Stafford...a better shot for sure. Rodgers wants to atone for last year; you know he's hungry like a wolf in the Wisconsin woods.
0
Quote Originally Posted by budwiser:
packers are a ridiculously low +182 (Bookmaker) to win the NFC Bucs +295 Rams +420 Boys +444 Cards +1075 9ers +1700 As said, the Pack have the Vikings at home then at Lions. Not probable they lose either. Boys Cards at home, then at Eagles. No matter what imo the Packers are going to be minimum 7 point favorites for both games at home in the playoffs as the #1 seed. Now those are the facts, obviously we need to make our picks.Good stuff fellas.
Hey budweiser,
Yep...they are the odds-on fave to win, so that's the number. You would think Vegas would want to encourage more action on the longer odds teams (Boys and Rams) by giving Packers bettors just a little bit more at +200 to try and make the picture look more balanced. We saw the Rams couldn't beat the Packers last year in the freezing cold of Lambeau, but that was with Goff...with Stafford...a better shot for sure. Rodgers wants to atone for last year; you know he's hungry like a wolf in the Wisconsin woods.
Hot Forum Topics
