IT'S PLAYOFF TIME.......................................2020/2021

might be worth a shot.

of the 20 SB winners since 2000.......................5 won by 3 pts. Brady was in 4 of those 5. And a team from WC round was in 3 of the 5.

3 teams won by 4 pts................quess who was in 2 of those 3, yep Brady and 2 of the 3  teams came  from the WC round.

so teams won by 3 or 4 pts it was Brady in 6 of those 8 games and a team from WC round was in 5 of the 8 games.

7 of Brady's 9 SB's were won by 3 or 4 pts and remember another went to OT at the end of regulation , so that's 8 of 9 Brady SB games that at end of regulation was within 4 pts.

6 of 9 within a FG.

Wow, nice find. I wonder, how much of the time the score was tied, for those Brady 3 point wins.

@undermysac

 You might like this trend regarding SB games in which the spread falls between 3 and 3.5:

1974 - Steelers (-3) 16 vs. Vikings 6, Favorite-Under (33)
1978 - Steelers (-3.5) 35 vs. Cowboys 31, Favorite-Over(37)
1980 - Raiders (+3) 27 vs. Eagles 10, Underdog-Under (37.5)
1982 - Redskins (+3) 27 vs. Dolphins 17, Underdog-Over (36.5)
1983 - Raiders (+3) 38 vs. Redskins 9, Underdog-Under (48)
1984 - 49ers (-3) 38 vs. Dolphins 16, Favorite-Push (54)
1987 - Redskins (+3.5) 42 vs. Broncos 10, Underdog-Over (47)
2000 - Ravens (-3) 34 vs. Giants 7, Favorite-Over (34)
2002 - Buccaneers (+3.5) 48 vs. Raiders 23, Underdog-Over (44)
2010 - Packers (-3) 31 vs. Steelers 25, Favorite-Over (45)
2011 - Giants (+3) 21 vs. Patriots 17, Underdog-Under (53)
2016 - Patriots (-3) 34 vs. Falcons 28 (OT), Favorite-Over (57)

The point-spread result is split evenly at 6-6 ATS for https://www.vegasinsider.com/nfl/superbowl/history/ in those 12 previous Super Bowls, with favorites alternating wins and losses the last eight tries dating back all the way to the Raiders beating Washington 38-9 as underdogs in 1983.

Tom Brady was involved in each of the two most recent occurrences, beating the Falcons and covering as a favorite in that wild Super Bowl a few years ago thanks to a walk-off TD in OT, but prior to that was their loss to the Giants in 2012 as a -3 point favorite.

Should that eight-game pattern of favorites and underdogs flipping each opportunity continue, the pattern for this year calls for Brady and the Bucs to hoist that Lombardi Trophy as the underdog, but that remains to be seen because in the history of the Super Bowl, SB participants that are attempting to repeat like Kansas City is have been successful in eight of 12 tries

The Brady trends are interesting and all but WTH do they have to do with a Tampa Bay team coached by Bruce Arians 

@kcblitzkrieg

@begginerboy

I know you guys are leaning KC, as am I. You should look at those "Tom Brady" stats from a different angle perhaps, cause I think it favors KC honestly.

You guys are smart, I'll let both of you respond. Think about it, Brady has been in 8 SB's where the score was decided by 4 or less points.

For sure Sac   great point 

7 OF THOSE 12 GAMES WERE PLAYED IN A DIFFERENT ERA, there was no free agency, players did not change teams and most all SB's ended in a blowout.

5 of those games were played in free agency era and proves my point. 3 of the 5 were close games within 6 pts, 2 were within 4 pts and the only 2 blowouts were by histirically great defensive teams , which we don't have this year.

Did you know every team from the WC Round covered the spread going all the way back to 1997 Broncos who were the very first team to start the WC round SB teams.

Every single one, Titans did push on the closing line but were +7.5 for a good part of the week. I was in Vegas for the div round , stayed for championship games and stayed for SB which was only 1 week and wanted to back the Rams so I waited and waited to drop to 7. eventually found 6.5 just a few hours before game and bought .5 pt down to Rams -6.

12-0 ATS or 11-0-1 ATS...... 7 WON SU.

This seems almost indentical to 2011 Packers which was mentioned in article.

2009 Rodgers had a good team with a chance to make SB but lost to Zona. 2018 Mahomes had a good team with a chance to make SB but lost to Pats.

2010 Rodgers did break through and Win the SB. 2019 Mahomes did break through and win the SB.

BOTH MAHOMES AND RODGERS WERE ON TOP OF THE WORLD,  Rodgers GOING INTO 2011 and Mahomes 2020.

2011 Packers 15-1 NO. 1 SEED , 2020 KC  14-1 with starters NO. 1 SEED.

in 2011 sites like Advanced NFL stats were making excuses for the Packers weak defense , saying things like, well, they had big leads so giving up alot of yards does not matter, this time it is different. they were looking for ways to make Packers the best team.

2020 sites like FO is making up excuses for KC's weak showing in so many close games. Well, they had big leads so they just relax a bit, no biggie. This time all those close wins are different, they just don't matter. Again, looking for ways to back KC despite their weak showing .

How can these 2 situations be any more identical ?

Don't get caught making excuses for teams weaknesses.

If they just relax a bit and let off the gas , why did they trail by double digits to start so many games ? just relaxing, taking the foot off the gas TO START THE GAME ?

LET THE INFO GUIDE YOU TO THE RIGHT TEAM, DON'T BEND THE INFO TO FIT THE TEAM YOU ALREADY DECIDE TO BACK. 

That's strong. I wonder why teams from the wildcard round to make a SB have done so well?

its interesting that Buccaneers have the better SOS and point differential vs Chiefs. just like the 2010 Packers who had a better SOS and point differential than the Steelers. that was the last time one team had the edge in both categories. usually it has been split. i wonder if you have any comparisons to other past wildcard teams like the '85 Patriots and '05 Steelers. and maybe '07 Giants. 

That was a period in time where WC round teams got to the SB at a very high rate, much, much higher then other periods. For whatever reason they just kept getting there and covering.

That's when I looked into a playoff only PR, and it called almost everyone of those SB's because those teams elevated they're games in the postseason, they just got hot at the right time.

But the WC teams did not do well in SB's prior to this time, so who knows, maybe since this ONE  period in time  has passed they'll revert back to not doing well.

But then I looked at other WC teams like 85 Bears and Pats, and sure enough it was on the Bears, not the WC round team. For whatever reason those WC teams just got hot starting in 1997, but some of those WC teams were actually very good teams, not weak statistical teams, like The 97 Broncos who happen to play in the same div as KC who won div.

Or like 2010 Packers, or 2005 Steelers or 2000 Ravens were all strong teams that played in div with another very good team that won the div.

Look at the last WC team, 2012 Ravens, Flacco broke Montana's records in postseason , he had 0 INT's and many TD's. A crazy high QBPR.  tHIS IS fLACCO WE'RE TALKING ABOUT, JUST ELEVATED HIS GAME TO A WHOLE OTHER LEVEL.

I can show the playoff only PR for each team, might get around to doing that at some point. Best I remember it has something like only 3 or 4 losses since 97. Just backing the hottest team in playoffs ATS.

KC-.77 over Bucs.......................this is using only Mahomes QBPR and not Henne's VS Browns.

Basically they played about the same level in playoffs . 

HOW'S THE PUBLIC DOING ?? 

Currently on a 4-1 ATS Run.................wow........

better to fade the public off these good runs..............who is public on ???..........................Yepper KC.

Hey, I don't make the news up, I just report it.

• This Tampa Bay team is just the fourth team since expansion to field a top-5 ranked team in both offensive and defensive DVOA. Those previous three teams went 0-3 in the Super Bowl.
• The Chiefs are just the fifth team to have a top-5 offense paired with a defense ranked 20th or lower. The previous four teams went 1-3 in the Super Bowl.
• This is just the third matchup between two top-5 ranked offenses, joining 2016 and 2018. The team with the higher defensive DVOA won both of those matchups.
• Super Bowl teams ranked higher in offensive DVOA over this span have a 5-13 record.
• Teams with the higher-ranked offense had lost nine straight Super Bowls before the Chiefs win a year ago.
• Teams ranked higher in defensive DVOA have an 11-7 record.
• Top-5 ranked offenses have a 2-5 record when facing a top-5 defense.
• Teams with a defense outside of the top-10 have a 4-5 record in the Super Bowl when no

Just reporting?! The neutral observer. Yeah, right. I have no idea where you are getting this info from but I highly, highly doubt it. I spend about 20-30 hours a week reading, listening and watching football related content, and I can tell you that what you are putting out there simply can’t be true. 

last week public was on GB and Buffalo, both of which lost. How can I say this with confidence: because 1) every tout and their mother was giving out those picks at a higher rate than Tampa or KC, and that’s before 2) looking at the dubious numbers that sites like action network and Vegas insider put out (numbers that you cannot trust). Then, if you say the touts and numbers are not a great measure, let’s go to 3) the media prognosticators. 90% were on GB and 40% were in Buffalo (and 40%is very high for a dog in a championship game). And if you still don’t accept all that, just go back and 4) look at the history of this forum and see just how many were on the Packers and Bills last week and how quiet this forum got when both those teams lost. Everything I’m putting out is verifiable. You can do searches and see what touts and prognosticators were saying and what people on this forum were saying. So according to my book, the public was 0-2 last week. 

Now please do tell us where you are getting your information from and let us decide how accurate it is! 

On vegas insider web site. Anyone can look it up........................................

Very interesting, basically about the same result as my PR's comparing off and def.

Very good offense's with weaker defense don't win SB's. I am not sure that would be KC though.

Be interesting to see the 3 teams top 5 DVOA on both off and def lost SB.  sounds like maybe they lost to surprise teams from the WC round. or maybe fluke like plays like Seahawks throwing a stupid pick play on the 1 or 9ers losing after a 96% probability of winning the game.

Yes, because Vegas insider said so. Laughing my a s s off! 

books cleaned up on the WC round....  public won the divisional round....... public did NOT win the Conference Champ round as the BILLS and PACKERS were the popular picks across the board.  Yes VI had KC with the higher % but the ML % was the opposite.  You can cherry pick % numbers off whatever site you'd like but I would use a site that comprises those % from multiple books and not just one. 

The above summary looks accurate to me based on everything I saw and read. Overall, when you add it all up, I think it’s pretty close to 50/50 for the public these playoffs. This looks like a 50/50 play on paper, but I just love the talent and coaching on the Chiefs. When all things look equal, I usually go with the better Coach and QB. That didn’t work out too well when the Eagles beat the Patriots. But I think if you look at the history of the SB, rarely did the better QB/Coach combo lose. 

Here's the thing about the KC defense. They follow the lead of their offense and often played down to the level of their competition. When those guys want to tighten the screws they're more than capable of doing just that. They make plays, they just MAKE PLAYS. I've seen it over and over again in big moments. I think a great bet would be to take game decided by 1-6 pts at +275.

That also crossed my mind.  Good luck.

Nope, I use those numbers all the time, even ran threads using those numbers and never once finished with a losing ATS record by fading the public off periods of success and backing the public off periods of failure. Talked about that many, many times on the site.

Public got crushed in WC round then bounced back STRONG.

And I have years of data to back that up, using 1 book actually works better, I have years of data to back that up. Done the same thing using line movements and using 1 book works well, years of data backing that up.

When the public info fits my info does pretty well.