The third string
QB is not as bad as you think. He is underrated, and his game style is going be
good to score at least 2 touchdowns against the phili coming from the biggest Michael
Vick fan ever. Joe Webb is an underground project they been trying to polish
up. Trust me big upset!
Take Viking plus
14
and if you ask me my thoughts on the game its going be over.
Good luck
0
To remove first post, remove entire topic.
The third string
QB is not as bad as you think. He is underrated, and his game style is going be
good to score at least 2 touchdowns against the phili coming from the biggest Michael
Vick fan ever. Joe Webb is an underground project they been trying to polish
up. Trust me big upset!
Take Viking plus
14
and if you ask me my thoughts on the game its going be over.
Yeah trust me if he proves himself these last few games he might actually start so im sure hes going play his heart out. He did terrific against the bears defense so imagine what he would do against the shitty phili defense. High Scoring Game touchdown for touchdown take MINNESOTA!
0
Yeah trust me if he proves himself these last few games he might actually start so im sure hes going play his heart out. He did terrific against the bears defense so imagine what he would do against the shitty phili defense. High Scoring Game touchdown for touchdown take MINNESOTA!
For some strange reason i really think Minnesota will cover this number. After reading some info posted by andarmac99 regarding this match up, i think the trend will continue. Here's what he wrote:
Minnesota +14.5
So I was reading tuttleberry's thread about bouncing back after a 10 point ATS loss and another ATS loss. So it got me thinking, how do teams perform after they have lost two straight ATS by at least 10 points? Losing two straight by at least 10 points SU is one thing but actually failing miserably by 10 points ATS b2b is tough to do and you usually get a massively inflated spread (or cheap if a fav) for that 3rd game.
Now thinking that you are usually going to still be paying a bit if a premium for favorites in these situations because they are expected to "bounce back", I got thinking again, what are teams in these spots that look so awful that theymust be the play? The answer was road underdogs, even better big ones (i.e double digits). Why? because you likely have a home team that has just watched those big road dogs get beat up twice in a row and they get complacent thinking they have an easy win. You also have that big road dog that still has professionals and will be looking to somewhat redeem themselves in that 3rd game after two big failures. The big road dog also usually means that the team got blown out the previous two games. One more parameter I used was after the bye week (basically second half of the year) when big dogs tend to cover more, likely due to the fact that by this point in the year teams are beat up and big favs are just looking to get out with a win and not play at a level needed to cover double digits spreads.
I went back and looked at this year and the previous 5 full seasons before that to find out how double digit road dogs have fared after losing their previous two games by at least 10 points ATS if they have already had their bye week. Here are the results:
December 2006: The 5-8 San Francisco 49ers are +10 at the 8-5 Seattle Seahawks. Not only do the Niners cover but they win outright 24-14.
November 2007: The 4-5 Chiefs ravaged by injuries and starting backup QB Brodie Croyle roll into Indy to face the 7-2 Colts who are 14.5 point favs. Not only do the Chiefs cover with ease but they only lose 13-10 on a last second Indy field goal.
October 2008: The 1-4 Seattle Seahawks starting backup QB Seneca Wallace fly all the way to Tampa Bay to battle the 4-2 Bucs on SNF. It wasn't pretty but as 10.5 dogs the Seahawks managed to cover losing 20-10.
October 2008: The 1-5 Kansas City Chiefs catching +14 head to New York the battle the 3-3 overhyped Jets. The Cheifs once again go with their backup QB, this time it is Tyler Thigpen making his first career NFL start. The Chiefs lose the game 28-24 on a Jets TD pass with exactly one minute to go. But they cover easily.
December 2009: This is the only bad game when the Seahawks traveled to Green Bay as +13.5 dogs and got crushed 48-10.
November 2010: The 1-7 Dallas Cowboys head to New York to battle the first place Giants as +11.5 dogs (opened +14). Not only do the Boys cover but they win outright 33-20.
December 2010: The Oakland Raiders as +13 dogs limp into San Diego to take on the Chargers who looked unbeatable coming off some impressive wins. Well the Chargers did not give a shit and lost 28-13.
So there you have it, those putrid looking, shitty, double digit underdogs have gone 6-1 ATS and 3-4 SU in this situation the past 5+ years. Not only is the 3-4 SU impressive you also have to consider two of those losses were when teams blew leads with a minute to go!
My theory is 1. We get severe line inflation based off putrid showings by the underdogs the last two weeks. 2. The underdog shows a bit of pride after embarrassing themselves the last two games. 3. The favorite thinks they have an easy win so they hit the snooze button.
All of those factors are in play with Minnesota/Philly. The Vikings are double digit road dogs after losing two straight by at least 10 points ATS including an embarrassing loss last game at home on national TV. And we have a huge favorite that will more than likely take them lightly. The Eagles are coming off two wild high scoring road wins over division opponents including that epic comeback in New York. No doubt they are a bit tired and "fat and happy" this week. They know they are going to beat the Vikings, they just came back from 31-10 down in the 4th quarter on the road @ the Giants for god sakes! I have a strong feeling the Eagles mail this one in and come in complacent thinking that even if it is close late that their savour, Micheal Vick, will pull something out. After all these are the sad sack Vikings, right?
Good luck on the play, i will be putting some money on Minnesota as well. Call us crazy, but strange shit happens in the NFL in the final weeks of the season. Phi doesn't have to blow out the Vikings, all they need is a win. Leaves the possibility of a back door cover by the Vikings..
0
For some strange reason i really think Minnesota will cover this number. After reading some info posted by andarmac99 regarding this match up, i think the trend will continue. Here's what he wrote:
Minnesota +14.5
So I was reading tuttleberry's thread about bouncing back after a 10 point ATS loss and another ATS loss. So it got me thinking, how do teams perform after they have lost two straight ATS by at least 10 points? Losing two straight by at least 10 points SU is one thing but actually failing miserably by 10 points ATS b2b is tough to do and you usually get a massively inflated spread (or cheap if a fav) for that 3rd game.
Now thinking that you are usually going to still be paying a bit if a premium for favorites in these situations because they are expected to "bounce back", I got thinking again, what are teams in these spots that look so awful that theymust be the play? The answer was road underdogs, even better big ones (i.e double digits). Why? because you likely have a home team that has just watched those big road dogs get beat up twice in a row and they get complacent thinking they have an easy win. You also have that big road dog that still has professionals and will be looking to somewhat redeem themselves in that 3rd game after two big failures. The big road dog also usually means that the team got blown out the previous two games. One more parameter I used was after the bye week (basically second half of the year) when big dogs tend to cover more, likely due to the fact that by this point in the year teams are beat up and big favs are just looking to get out with a win and not play at a level needed to cover double digits spreads.
I went back and looked at this year and the previous 5 full seasons before that to find out how double digit road dogs have fared after losing their previous two games by at least 10 points ATS if they have already had their bye week. Here are the results:
December 2006: The 5-8 San Francisco 49ers are +10 at the 8-5 Seattle Seahawks. Not only do the Niners cover but they win outright 24-14.
November 2007: The 4-5 Chiefs ravaged by injuries and starting backup QB Brodie Croyle roll into Indy to face the 7-2 Colts who are 14.5 point favs. Not only do the Chiefs cover with ease but they only lose 13-10 on a last second Indy field goal.
October 2008: The 1-4 Seattle Seahawks starting backup QB Seneca Wallace fly all the way to Tampa Bay to battle the 4-2 Bucs on SNF. It wasn't pretty but as 10.5 dogs the Seahawks managed to cover losing 20-10.
October 2008: The 1-5 Kansas City Chiefs catching +14 head to New York the battle the 3-3 overhyped Jets. The Cheifs once again go with their backup QB, this time it is Tyler Thigpen making his first career NFL start. The Chiefs lose the game 28-24 on a Jets TD pass with exactly one minute to go. But they cover easily.
December 2009: This is the only bad game when the Seahawks traveled to Green Bay as +13.5 dogs and got crushed 48-10.
November 2010: The 1-7 Dallas Cowboys head to New York to battle the first place Giants as +11.5 dogs (opened +14). Not only do the Boys cover but they win outright 33-20.
December 2010: The Oakland Raiders as +13 dogs limp into San Diego to take on the Chargers who looked unbeatable coming off some impressive wins. Well the Chargers did not give a shit and lost 28-13.
So there you have it, those putrid looking, shitty, double digit underdogs have gone 6-1 ATS and 3-4 SU in this situation the past 5+ years. Not only is the 3-4 SU impressive you also have to consider two of those losses were when teams blew leads with a minute to go!
My theory is 1. We get severe line inflation based off putrid showings by the underdogs the last two weeks. 2. The underdog shows a bit of pride after embarrassing themselves the last two games. 3. The favorite thinks they have an easy win so they hit the snooze button.
All of those factors are in play with Minnesota/Philly. The Vikings are double digit road dogs after losing two straight by at least 10 points ATS including an embarrassing loss last game at home on national TV. And we have a huge favorite that will more than likely take them lightly. The Eagles are coming off two wild high scoring road wins over division opponents including that epic comeback in New York. No doubt they are a bit tired and "fat and happy" this week. They know they are going to beat the Vikings, they just came back from 31-10 down in the 4th quarter on the road @ the Giants for god sakes! I have a strong feeling the Eagles mail this one in and come in complacent thinking that even if it is close late that their savour, Micheal Vick, will pull something out. After all these are the sad sack Vikings, right?
Good luck on the play, i will be putting some money on Minnesota as well. Call us crazy, but strange shit happens in the NFL in the final weeks of the season. Phi doesn't have to blow out the Vikings, all they need is a win. Leaves the possibility of a back door cover by the Vikings..
i remember NO losing to both AZ and Cleveland as road and home favs and New England losing at Cleveland so I see your point. Eagles don't really need this game you are right but how motivated are the Vikings? Maybe they have packed their bags for the winter!
0
i remember NO losing to both AZ and Cleveland as road and home favs and New England losing at Cleveland so I see your point. Eagles don't really need this game you are right but how motivated are the Vikings? Maybe they have packed their bags for the winter!
im not touching this game unless i get viking plus 21.5 in a tease.. only way i will touch this game, and even then , for like 1 unit. too many variables
0
im not touching this game unless i get viking plus 21.5 in a tease.. only way i will touch this game, and even then , for like 1 unit. too many variables
For some strange reason i really think Minnesota will cover this number. After reading some info posted by andarmac99 regarding this match up, i think the trend will continue. Here's what he wrote:
Minnesota +14.5
So I was reading tuttleberry's thread about bouncing back after a 10 point ATS loss and another ATS loss. So it got me thinking, how do teams perform after they have lost two straight ATS by at least 10 points? Losing two straight by at least 10 points SU is one thing but actually failing miserably by 10 points ATS b2b is tough to do and you usually get a massively inflated spread (or cheap if a fav) for that 3rd game.
Now thinking that you are usually going to still be paying a bit if a premium for favorites in these situations because they are expected to "bounce back", I got thinking again, what are teams in these spots that look so awful that theymust be the play? The answer was road underdogs, even better big ones (i.e double digits). Why? because you likely have a home team that has just watched those big road dogs get beat up twice in a row and they get complacent thinking they have an easy win. You also have that big road dog that still has professionals and will be looking to somewhat redeem themselves in that 3rd game after two big failures. The big road dog also usually means that the team got blown out the previous two games. One more parameter I used was after the bye week (basically second half of the year) when big dogs tend to cover more, likely due to the fact that by this point in the year teams are beat up and big favs are just looking to get out with a win and not play at a level needed to cover double digits spreads.
I went back and looked at this year and the previous 5 full seasons before that to find out how double digit road dogs have fared after losing their previous two games by at least 10 points ATS if they have already had their bye week. Here are the results:
December 2006: The 5-8 San Francisco 49ers are +10 at the 8-5 Seattle Seahawks. Not only do the Niners cover but they win outright 24-14.
November 2007: The 4-5 Chiefs ravaged by injuries and starting backup QB Brodie Croyle roll into Indy to face the 7-2 Colts who are 14.5 point favs. Not only do the Chiefs cover with ease but they only lose 13-10 on a last second Indy field goal.
October 2008: The 1-4 Seattle Seahawks starting backup QB Seneca Wallace fly all the way to Tampa Bay to battle the 4-2 Bucs on SNF. It wasn't pretty but as 10.5 dogs the Seahawks managed to cover losing 20-10.
October 2008: The 1-5 Kansas City Chiefs catching +14 head to New York the battle the 3-3 overhyped Jets. The Cheifs once again go with their backup QB, this time it is Tyler Thigpen making his first career NFL start. The Chiefs lose the game 28-24 on a Jets TD pass with exactly one minute to go. But they cover easily.
December 2009: This is the only bad game when the Seahawks traveled to Green Bay as +13.5 dogs and got crushed 48-10.
November 2010: The 1-7 Dallas Cowboys head to New York to battle the first place Giants as +11.5 dogs (opened +14). Not only do the Boys cover but they win outright 33-20.
December 2010: The Oakland Raiders as +13 dogs limp into San Diego to take on the Chargers who looked unbeatable coming off some impressive wins. Well the Chargers did not give a shit and lost 28-13.
So there you have it, those putrid looking, shitty, double digit underdogs have gone 6-1 ATS and 3-4 SU in this situation the past 5+ years. Not only is the 3-4 SU impressive you also have to consider two of those losses were when teams blew leads with a minute to go!
My theory is 1. We get severe line inflation based off putrid showings by the underdogs the last two weeks. 2. The underdog shows a bit of pride after embarrassing themselves the last two games. 3. The favorite thinks they have an easy win so they hit the snooze button.
All of those factors are in play with Minnesota/Philly. The Vikings are double digit road dogs after losing two straight by at least 10 points ATS including an embarrassing loss last game at home on national TV. And we have a huge favorite that will more than likely take them lightly. The Eagles are coming off two wild high scoring road wins over division opponents including that epic comeback in New York. No doubt they are a bit tired and "fat and happy" this week. They know they are going to beat the Vikings, they just came back from 31-10 down in the 4th quarter on the road @ the Giants for god sakes! I have a strong feeling the Eagles mail this one in and come in complacent thinking that even if it is close late that their savour, Micheal Vick, will pull something out. After all these are the sad sack Vikings, right?
Good luck on the play, i will be putting some money on Minnesota as well. Call us crazy, but strange shit happens in the NFL in the final weeks of the season. Phi doesn't have to blow out the Vikings, all they need is a win. Leaves the possibility of a back door cover by the Vikings..
i appreciate this big write up makes me want bang more tommerow gl.
0
Quote Originally Posted by bm3power:
For some strange reason i really think Minnesota will cover this number. After reading some info posted by andarmac99 regarding this match up, i think the trend will continue. Here's what he wrote:
Minnesota +14.5
So I was reading tuttleberry's thread about bouncing back after a 10 point ATS loss and another ATS loss. So it got me thinking, how do teams perform after they have lost two straight ATS by at least 10 points? Losing two straight by at least 10 points SU is one thing but actually failing miserably by 10 points ATS b2b is tough to do and you usually get a massively inflated spread (or cheap if a fav) for that 3rd game.
Now thinking that you are usually going to still be paying a bit if a premium for favorites in these situations because they are expected to "bounce back", I got thinking again, what are teams in these spots that look so awful that theymust be the play? The answer was road underdogs, even better big ones (i.e double digits). Why? because you likely have a home team that has just watched those big road dogs get beat up twice in a row and they get complacent thinking they have an easy win. You also have that big road dog that still has professionals and will be looking to somewhat redeem themselves in that 3rd game after two big failures. The big road dog also usually means that the team got blown out the previous two games. One more parameter I used was after the bye week (basically second half of the year) when big dogs tend to cover more, likely due to the fact that by this point in the year teams are beat up and big favs are just looking to get out with a win and not play at a level needed to cover double digits spreads.
I went back and looked at this year and the previous 5 full seasons before that to find out how double digit road dogs have fared after losing their previous two games by at least 10 points ATS if they have already had their bye week. Here are the results:
December 2006: The 5-8 San Francisco 49ers are +10 at the 8-5 Seattle Seahawks. Not only do the Niners cover but they win outright 24-14.
November 2007: The 4-5 Chiefs ravaged by injuries and starting backup QB Brodie Croyle roll into Indy to face the 7-2 Colts who are 14.5 point favs. Not only do the Chiefs cover with ease but they only lose 13-10 on a last second Indy field goal.
October 2008: The 1-4 Seattle Seahawks starting backup QB Seneca Wallace fly all the way to Tampa Bay to battle the 4-2 Bucs on SNF. It wasn't pretty but as 10.5 dogs the Seahawks managed to cover losing 20-10.
October 2008: The 1-5 Kansas City Chiefs catching +14 head to New York the battle the 3-3 overhyped Jets. The Cheifs once again go with their backup QB, this time it is Tyler Thigpen making his first career NFL start. The Chiefs lose the game 28-24 on a Jets TD pass with exactly one minute to go. But they cover easily.
December 2009: This is the only bad game when the Seahawks traveled to Green Bay as +13.5 dogs and got crushed 48-10.
November 2010: The 1-7 Dallas Cowboys head to New York to battle the first place Giants as +11.5 dogs (opened +14). Not only do the Boys cover but they win outright 33-20.
December 2010: The Oakland Raiders as +13 dogs limp into San Diego to take on the Chargers who looked unbeatable coming off some impressive wins. Well the Chargers did not give a shit and lost 28-13.
So there you have it, those putrid looking, shitty, double digit underdogs have gone 6-1 ATS and 3-4 SU in this situation the past 5+ years. Not only is the 3-4 SU impressive you also have to consider two of those losses were when teams blew leads with a minute to go!
My theory is 1. We get severe line inflation based off putrid showings by the underdogs the last two weeks. 2. The underdog shows a bit of pride after embarrassing themselves the last two games. 3. The favorite thinks they have an easy win so they hit the snooze button.
All of those factors are in play with Minnesota/Philly. The Vikings are double digit road dogs after losing two straight by at least 10 points ATS including an embarrassing loss last game at home on national TV. And we have a huge favorite that will more than likely take them lightly. The Eagles are coming off two wild high scoring road wins over division opponents including that epic comeback in New York. No doubt they are a bit tired and "fat and happy" this week. They know they are going to beat the Vikings, they just came back from 31-10 down in the 4th quarter on the road @ the Giants for god sakes! I have a strong feeling the Eagles mail this one in and come in complacent thinking that even if it is close late that their savour, Micheal Vick, will pull something out. After all these are the sad sack Vikings, right?
Good luck on the play, i will be putting some money on Minnesota as well. Call us crazy, but strange shit happens in the NFL in the final weeks of the season. Phi doesn't have to blow out the Vikings, all they need is a win. Leaves the possibility of a back door cover by the Vikings..
i appreciate this big write up makes me want bang more tommerow gl.
For some strange reason i really think Minnesota will cover this number. After reading some info posted by andarmac99 regarding this match up, i think the trend will continue. Here's what he wrote:
Minnesota +14.5
So I was reading tuttleberry's thread about bouncing back after a 10 point ATS loss and another ATS loss. So it got me thinking, how do teams perform after they have lost two straight ATS by at least 10 points? Losing two straight by at least 10 points SU is one thing but actually failing miserably by 10 points ATS b2b is tough to do and you usually get a massively inflated spread (or cheap if a fav) for that 3rd game.
Now thinking that you are usually going to still be paying a bit if a premium for favorites in these situations because they are expected to "bounce back", I got thinking again, what are teams in these spots that look so awful that theymust be the play? The answer was road underdogs, even better big ones (i.e double digits). Why? because you likely have a home team that has just watched those big road dogs get beat up twice in a row and they get complacent thinking they have an easy win. You also have that big road dog that still has professionals and will be looking to somewhat redeem themselves in that 3rd game after two big failures. The big road dog also usually means that the team got blown out the previous two games. One more parameter I used was after the bye week (basically second half of the year) when big dogs tend to cover more, likely due to the fact that by this point in the year teams are beat up and big favs are just looking to get out with a win and not play at a level needed to cover double digits spreads.
I went back and looked at this year and the previous 5 full seasons before that to find out how double digit road dogs have fared after losing their previous two games by at least 10 points ATS if they have already had their bye week. Here are the results:
December 2006: The 5-8 San Francisco 49ers are +10 at the 8-5 Seattle Seahawks. Not only do the Niners cover but they win outright 24-14.
November 2007: The 4-5 Chiefs ravaged by injuries and starting backup QB Brodie Croyle roll into Indy to face the 7-2 Colts who are 14.5 point favs. Not only do the Chiefs cover with ease but they only lose 13-10 on a last second Indy field goal.
October 2008: The 1-4 Seattle Seahawks starting backup QB Seneca Wallace fly all the way to Tampa Bay to battle the 4-2 Bucs on SNF. It wasn't pretty but as 10.5 dogs the Seahawks managed to cover losing 20-10.
October 2008: The 1-5 Kansas City Chiefs catching +14 head to New York the battle the 3-3 overhyped Jets. The Cheifs once again go with their backup QB, this time it is Tyler Thigpen making his first career NFL start. The Chiefs lose the game 28-24 on a Jets TD pass with exactly one minute to go. But they cover easily.
December 2009: This is the only bad game when the Seahawks traveled to Green Bay as +13.5 dogs and got crushed 48-10.
November 2010: The 1-7 Dallas Cowboys head to New York to battle the first place Giants as +11.5 dogs (opened +14). Not only do the Boys cover but they win outright 33-20.
December 2010: The Oakland Raiders as +13 dogs limp into San Diego to take on the Chargers who looked unbeatable coming off some impressive wins. Well the Chargers did not give a shit and lost 28-13.
So there you have it, those putrid looking, shitty, double digit underdogs have gone 6-1 ATS and 3-4 SU in this situation the past 5+ years. Not only is the 3-4 SU impressive you also have to consider two of those losses were when teams blew leads with a minute to go!
My theory is 1. We get severe line inflation based off putrid showings by the underdogs the last two weeks. 2. The underdog shows a bit of pride after embarrassing themselves the last two games. 3. The favorite thinks they have an easy win so they hit the snooze button.
All of those factors are in play with Minnesota/Philly. The Vikings are double digit road dogs after losing two straight by at least 10 points ATS including an embarrassing loss last game at home on national TV. And we have a huge favorite that will more than likely take them lightly. The Eagles are coming off two wild high scoring road wins over division opponents including that epic comeback in New York. No doubt they are a bit tired and "fat and happy" this week. They know they are going to beat the Vikings, they just came back from 31-10 down in the 4th quarter on the road @ the Giants for god sakes! I have a strong feeling the Eagles mail this one in and come in complacent thinking that even if it is close late that their savour, Micheal Vick, will pull something out. After all these are the sad sack Vikings, right?
Good luck on the play, i will be putting some money on Minnesota as well. Call us crazy, but strange shit happens in the NFL in the final weeks of the season. Phi doesn't have to blow out the Vikings, all they need is a win. Leaves the possibility of a back door cover by the Vikings..
HERE IT IS THANK YOU BM POWER
0
Quote Originally Posted by bm3power:
For some strange reason i really think Minnesota will cover this number. After reading some info posted by andarmac99 regarding this match up, i think the trend will continue. Here's what he wrote:
Minnesota +14.5
So I was reading tuttleberry's thread about bouncing back after a 10 point ATS loss and another ATS loss. So it got me thinking, how do teams perform after they have lost two straight ATS by at least 10 points? Losing two straight by at least 10 points SU is one thing but actually failing miserably by 10 points ATS b2b is tough to do and you usually get a massively inflated spread (or cheap if a fav) for that 3rd game.
Now thinking that you are usually going to still be paying a bit if a premium for favorites in these situations because they are expected to "bounce back", I got thinking again, what are teams in these spots that look so awful that theymust be the play? The answer was road underdogs, even better big ones (i.e double digits). Why? because you likely have a home team that has just watched those big road dogs get beat up twice in a row and they get complacent thinking they have an easy win. You also have that big road dog that still has professionals and will be looking to somewhat redeem themselves in that 3rd game after two big failures. The big road dog also usually means that the team got blown out the previous two games. One more parameter I used was after the bye week (basically second half of the year) when big dogs tend to cover more, likely due to the fact that by this point in the year teams are beat up and big favs are just looking to get out with a win and not play at a level needed to cover double digits spreads.
I went back and looked at this year and the previous 5 full seasons before that to find out how double digit road dogs have fared after losing their previous two games by at least 10 points ATS if they have already had their bye week. Here are the results:
December 2006: The 5-8 San Francisco 49ers are +10 at the 8-5 Seattle Seahawks. Not only do the Niners cover but they win outright 24-14.
November 2007: The 4-5 Chiefs ravaged by injuries and starting backup QB Brodie Croyle roll into Indy to face the 7-2 Colts who are 14.5 point favs. Not only do the Chiefs cover with ease but they only lose 13-10 on a last second Indy field goal.
October 2008: The 1-4 Seattle Seahawks starting backup QB Seneca Wallace fly all the way to Tampa Bay to battle the 4-2 Bucs on SNF. It wasn't pretty but as 10.5 dogs the Seahawks managed to cover losing 20-10.
October 2008: The 1-5 Kansas City Chiefs catching +14 head to New York the battle the 3-3 overhyped Jets. The Cheifs once again go with their backup QB, this time it is Tyler Thigpen making his first career NFL start. The Chiefs lose the game 28-24 on a Jets TD pass with exactly one minute to go. But they cover easily.
December 2009: This is the only bad game when the Seahawks traveled to Green Bay as +13.5 dogs and got crushed 48-10.
November 2010: The 1-7 Dallas Cowboys head to New York to battle the first place Giants as +11.5 dogs (opened +14). Not only do the Boys cover but they win outright 33-20.
December 2010: The Oakland Raiders as +13 dogs limp into San Diego to take on the Chargers who looked unbeatable coming off some impressive wins. Well the Chargers did not give a shit and lost 28-13.
So there you have it, those putrid looking, shitty, double digit underdogs have gone 6-1 ATS and 3-4 SU in this situation the past 5+ years. Not only is the 3-4 SU impressive you also have to consider two of those losses were when teams blew leads with a minute to go!
My theory is 1. We get severe line inflation based off putrid showings by the underdogs the last two weeks. 2. The underdog shows a bit of pride after embarrassing themselves the last two games. 3. The favorite thinks they have an easy win so they hit the snooze button.
All of those factors are in play with Minnesota/Philly. The Vikings are double digit road dogs after losing two straight by at least 10 points ATS including an embarrassing loss last game at home on national TV. And we have a huge favorite that will more than likely take them lightly. The Eagles are coming off two wild high scoring road wins over division opponents including that epic comeback in New York. No doubt they are a bit tired and "fat and happy" this week. They know they are going to beat the Vikings, they just came back from 31-10 down in the 4th quarter on the road @ the Giants for god sakes! I have a strong feeling the Eagles mail this one in and come in complacent thinking that even if it is close late that their savour, Micheal Vick, will pull something out. After all these are the sad sack Vikings, right?
Good luck on the play, i will be putting some money on Minnesota as well. Call us crazy, but strange shit happens in the NFL in the final weeks of the season. Phi doesn't have to blow out the Vikings, all they need is a win. Leaves the possibility of a back door cover by the Vikings..
The third string QB is not as bad as you think. He is underrated, and his game style is going be good to score at least 2 touchdowns against the phili coming from the biggest Michael Vick fan ever. Joe Webb is an underground project they been trying to polish up. Trust me big upset!
Take Viking plus 14
and if you ask me my thoughts on the game its going be over.
Good luck
It is rightfully assumed that Eagles Head Coach Andy Reid has a defensive approach in place for Webb that will feature many different blitz packages and fluid formations to confuse the rookie QB. So when combining the intangibles of tonight’s matchup with Webb’s inexperience, there’s not much that we should expect out of him tonight
all over Philly 2nite
0
[Quote: Originally Posted by TheFortuneTelle]
The third string QB is not as bad as you think. He is underrated, and his game style is going be good to score at least 2 touchdowns against the phili coming from the biggest Michael Vick fan ever. Joe Webb is an underground project they been trying to polish up. Trust me big upset!
Take Viking plus 14
and if you ask me my thoughts on the game its going be over.
Good luck
It is rightfully assumed that Eagles Head Coach Andy Reid has a defensive approach in place for Webb that will feature many different blitz packages and fluid formations to confuse the rookie QB. So when combining the intangibles of tonight’s matchup with Webb’s inexperience, there’s not much that we should expect out of him tonight
It is rightfully assumed that Eagles Head Coach Andy Reid has a defensive approach in place for Webb that will feature many different blitz packages and fluid formations to confuse the rookie QB. So when combining the intangibles of tonight’s matchup with Webb’s inexperience, there’s not much that we should expect out of him tonight
0
It is rightfully assumed that Eagles Head Coach Andy Reid has a defensive approach in place for Webb that will feature many different blitz packages and fluid formations to confuse the rookie QB. So when combining the intangibles of tonight’s matchup with Webb’s inexperience, there’s not much that we should expect out of him tonight
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.