What momentum? Wins against 3rd string and waiver wire QB's?
That's about the weakest momentum I can think of.
Why didn't you list who Dallas has beat? I am aware they beat Giants in week 1, everyone else is kife. Also you can say Kiffen will have them playing better this week but there is nothing to suggest it. Win or lose your threads achieve nothing other then getting Covers hits.
The danger is if we hear enough lies then we no longer recognize the truth
0
Quote Originally Posted by scalabrine:
What momentum? Wins against 3rd string and waiver wire QB's?
That's about the weakest momentum I can think of.
Why didn't you list who Dallas has beat? I am aware they beat Giants in week 1, everyone else is kife. Also you can say Kiffen will have them playing better this week but there is nothing to suggest it. Win or lose your threads achieve nothing other then getting Covers hits.
Why didn't you list who Dallas has beat? I am aware they beat Giants in week 1, everyone else is kife. Also you can say Kiffen will have them playing better this week but there is nothing to suggest it. Win or lose your threads achieve nothing other then getting Covers hits.
Lol.
So the guy who posts
Cowboys +2.5 and nothing else is doing more for the site!?!?
Delusional...
0
Quote Originally Posted by benhogan76:
Why didn't you list who Dallas has beat? I am aware they beat Giants in week 1, everyone else is kife. Also you can say Kiffen will have them playing better this week but there is nothing to suggest it. Win or lose your threads achieve nothing other then getting Covers hits.
Lol.
So the guy who posts
Cowboys +2.5 and nothing else is doing more for the site!?!?
Are PPL going to fade a play because a person explains in his thread his way is that how you all are going to gamble on a game Plz?
Remember the game is played by the players on the field not by how you think either way Scalabrine feels who is going to win the game.
Whether Scalabrine creates a thread Aggressively in the way he does is his prerogative and you can Agree or Disagree but I do believe it's the right side.
I'm just saying!
GL scalabrine
What do you call an Eternal Optimist? An accordion player with a beeper!
0
Let me play Devils advocate here
Are PPL going to fade a play because a person explains in his thread his way is that how you all are going to gamble on a game Plz?
Remember the game is played by the players on the field not by how you think either way Scalabrine feels who is going to win the game.
Whether Scalabrine creates a thread Aggressively in the way he does is his prerogative and you can Agree or Disagree but I do believe it's the right side.
Are PPL going to fade a play because a person explains in his thread his way is that how you all are going to gamble on a game Plz?
Remember the game is played by the players on the field not by how you think either way Scalabrine feels who is going to win the game.
Whether Scalabrine creates a thread Aggressively in the way he does is his prerogative and you can Agree or Disagree but I do believe it's the right side.
I'm just saying!
GL scalabrine
Exactly macwestie. Well said.
And to your point, YES, as you can see in this thread people DO care someone they will never meet or see in person and who will never play a snap if football will improve their odds of winning if I am on the other side!
They really believe that! That is the type of mindset you are dealing with! It's almost unfair when I have to come back at them to put them in their place.
0
Quote Originally Posted by Macwestie1:
Let me play Devils advocate here
Are PPL going to fade a play because a person explains in his thread his way is that how you all are going to gamble on a game Plz?
Remember the game is played by the players on the field not by how you think either way Scalabrine feels who is going to win the game.
Whether Scalabrine creates a thread Aggressively in the way he does is his prerogative and you can Agree or Disagree but I do believe it's the right side.
I'm just saying!
GL scalabrine
Exactly macwestie. Well said.
And to your point, YES, as you can see in this thread people DO care someone they will never meet or see in person and who will never play a snap if football will improve their odds of winning if I am on the other side!
They really believe that! That is the type of mindset you are dealing with! It's almost unfair when I have to come back at them to put them in their place.
Not gonna provide a long write-up here because some of the slimeballs on this site will find a way to it.
I am rolling with the Boys here?
Is it dangerous? Yes.
I think 2.5 is enough against a 4-6 team that has not proven enough.
The Giants have won 4 games in one of the most favorable 4 game stretches I have ever seen.
Let's look at the 4 game winning streak.
They beat:
The Vikings - No Ponder so Josh Freeman, fresh off the waiver wire, gets plugged in looking absolutely pathetic and Adrian Peterson is distracted with the worst of all family tragedies
The Eagles - Nick Foles? Mike Vick? No. Matt Barkley, a third stringer lost that game.
The Raiders - Played against a banged up Terrelle Pryor and no Darren McFadden. Also needed a 60 yard pick late to set up the winning score.
The Packers - Scott Tolzien boys and girls.
Think about that. In the 4 victories it was against, a waiver wire QB, a 3rd stringer, an injured QB without a starting RB, and a backup QB that the team has so little confidence in that Matt Flynn was signed to the team. Matt Flynn...Wow.
There's not enough there for me to lay 2.5 to the Boys.
There's not enough there for me to lay 2.5 with a team that has been chirping all week about how they will VOW TO WIN this game and how 'blood will be spilled.'
There's not enough there for me to lay 2.5 to a team that has had two weeks to quietly stew in anger with one of the worst losses in the history of Cowboys football after giving up FORTY first down and 623 yards in prime time and are looking to rebound to take back control of the division.
Yes taking the Boys are dangerous. They are famous for failing in these big spots.
But remember, take Denver as a litmus test. Both these teams played the Broncos this year. Which team hung with them till the last second and which team was annihilated by them?
There's too much here to take the rested Boys off a bye instead of the alleged 'surging' Giants (disproven above).
The pick: Cowboys +2.5 over Giants
The witness: god
u done picked this one good .please let it go over baby,..1x
bigFnPOO
0
Quote Originally Posted by scalabrine:
Not gonna provide a long write-up here because some of the slimeballs on this site will find a way to it.
I am rolling with the Boys here?
Is it dangerous? Yes.
I think 2.5 is enough against a 4-6 team that has not proven enough.
The Giants have won 4 games in one of the most favorable 4 game stretches I have ever seen.
Let's look at the 4 game winning streak.
They beat:
The Vikings - No Ponder so Josh Freeman, fresh off the waiver wire, gets plugged in looking absolutely pathetic and Adrian Peterson is distracted with the worst of all family tragedies
The Eagles - Nick Foles? Mike Vick? No. Matt Barkley, a third stringer lost that game.
The Raiders - Played against a banged up Terrelle Pryor and no Darren McFadden. Also needed a 60 yard pick late to set up the winning score.
The Packers - Scott Tolzien boys and girls.
Think about that. In the 4 victories it was against, a waiver wire QB, a 3rd stringer, an injured QB without a starting RB, and a backup QB that the team has so little confidence in that Matt Flynn was signed to the team. Matt Flynn...Wow.
There's not enough there for me to lay 2.5 to the Boys.
There's not enough there for me to lay 2.5 with a team that has been chirping all week about how they will VOW TO WIN this game and how 'blood will be spilled.'
There's not enough there for me to lay 2.5 to a team that has had two weeks to quietly stew in anger with one of the worst losses in the history of Cowboys football after giving up FORTY first down and 623 yards in prime time and are looking to rebound to take back control of the division.
Yes taking the Boys are dangerous. They are famous for failing in these big spots.
But remember, take Denver as a litmus test. Both these teams played the Broncos this year. Which team hung with them till the last second and which team was annihilated by them?
There's too much here to take the rested Boys off a bye instead of the alleged 'surging' Giants (disproven above).
The pick: Cowboys +2.5 over Giants
The witness: god
u done picked this one good .please let it go over baby,..1x
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.
Wish I knew how to do that!
Hot Forum Topics
