Solid writeups as always Mac. I wouldn't expect anything less from you. My initial lean is to also grab Pittsburgh with those points, but there is that little voice in the back of my head that still has me thinking about Green Bay. You've listed a lot of those reasons already (Pouncey is a big X factor, GB should have the advantage in a dome, GB's receiving core is better imo, etc.). But what really freaks me out more than anything about GB is once again, points you've already stated: the young GB team against a super seasoned Pitt team, and the coaching edge. I think about all the vets on GB who are on the IR, and the young players who have stepped in. Although they've done an amazing job at adjusting this season, the big game has to present some nerve problems for these guys.
With the coaching-We have one head coach who has 1 ring, and a defensive coordinator who wears 2 rings, against a head coach who has never been to the big game. I like you think McCarthy is a great coach, but he has me scratching my head sometimes. I wonder how he'll react to big pressure spots in the final game?
I have to say though, Green Bay has had a much tougher year imo than the Steelers. Regular season aside, the Packers have had a hella tough playoff run. Playing on the road every game and performing every time. They seem to adjust well from week to week, no matter who is standing in their way. Rodgers didn't have a great game against Chicago, so it makes me wonder what will happen if he has a blow up game come February 6? It's hard for me to compare defenses in the last game because both became very lax and conservative in the 2nd half. GB was playing soft against Todd Collins and Caleb Hanie. Even though Cutler is interception prone, I'm not convinced we would have seen the final two ints from Raji and Shields. The pick to Raji was an awful throw and although Shields made a great play on the ball to end the game, that throw seemed pretty desperate to me. Steelers on the other hand just became overly conservative. Lots of prevent and some man to man that became exploited by Sanchez. I don't think we'll see defense like that in two weeks though.
I'm going to quit rambling bc I'm just going back and forth. I would immediately pound Pitt at +3.5, but since that's been "guaranteed" not to happen I'm going to hold off and look at this game a little more. Like you said Mac, this one is about so much more than stats. Good stuff everyone
0
Solid writeups as always Mac. I wouldn't expect anything less from you. My initial lean is to also grab Pittsburgh with those points, but there is that little voice in the back of my head that still has me thinking about Green Bay. You've listed a lot of those reasons already (Pouncey is a big X factor, GB should have the advantage in a dome, GB's receiving core is better imo, etc.). But what really freaks me out more than anything about GB is once again, points you've already stated: the young GB team against a super seasoned Pitt team, and the coaching edge. I think about all the vets on GB who are on the IR, and the young players who have stepped in. Although they've done an amazing job at adjusting this season, the big game has to present some nerve problems for these guys.
With the coaching-We have one head coach who has 1 ring, and a defensive coordinator who wears 2 rings, against a head coach who has never been to the big game. I like you think McCarthy is a great coach, but he has me scratching my head sometimes. I wonder how he'll react to big pressure spots in the final game?
I have to say though, Green Bay has had a much tougher year imo than the Steelers. Regular season aside, the Packers have had a hella tough playoff run. Playing on the road every game and performing every time. They seem to adjust well from week to week, no matter who is standing in their way. Rodgers didn't have a great game against Chicago, so it makes me wonder what will happen if he has a blow up game come February 6? It's hard for me to compare defenses in the last game because both became very lax and conservative in the 2nd half. GB was playing soft against Todd Collins and Caleb Hanie. Even though Cutler is interception prone, I'm not convinced we would have seen the final two ints from Raji and Shields. The pick to Raji was an awful throw and although Shields made a great play on the ball to end the game, that throw seemed pretty desperate to me. Steelers on the other hand just became overly conservative. Lots of prevent and some man to man that became exploited by Sanchez. I don't think we'll see defense like that in two weeks though.
I'm going to quit rambling bc I'm just going back and forth. I would immediately pound Pitt at +3.5, but since that's been "guaranteed" not to happen I'm going to hold off and look at this game a little more. Like you said Mac, this one is about so much more than stats. Good stuff everyone
Solid writeups as always Mac. I wouldn't expect anything less from you. My initial lean is to also grab Pittsburgh with those points, but there is that little voice in the back of my head that still has me thinking about Green Bay. You've listed a lot of those reasons already (Pouncey is a big X factor, GB should have the advantage in a dome, GB's receiving core is better imo, etc.). But what really freaks me out more than anything about GB is once again, points you've already stated: the young GB team against a super seasoned Pitt team, and the coaching edge. I think about all the vets on GB who are on the IR, and the young players who have stepped in. Although they've done an amazing job at adjusting this season, the big game has to present some nerve problems for these guys.
With the coaching-We have one head coach who has 1 ring, and a defensive coordinator who wears 2 rings, against a head coach who has never been to the big game. I like you think McCarthy is a great coach, but he has me scratching my head sometimes. I wonder how he'll react to big pressure spots in the final game?
I have to say though, Green Bay has had a much tougher year imo than the Steelers. Regular season aside, the Packers have had a hella tough playoff run. Playing on the road every game and performing every time. They seem to adjust well from week to week, no matter who is standing in their way. Rodgers didn't have a great game against Chicago, so it makes me wonder what will happen if he has a blow up game come February 6? It's hard for me to compare defenses in the last game because both became very lax and conservative in the 2nd half. GB was playing soft against Todd Collins and Caleb Hanie. Even though Cutler is interception prone, I'm not convinced we would have seen the final two ints from Raji and Shields. The pick to Raji was an awful throw and although Shields made a great play on the ball to end the game, that throw seemed pretty desperate to me. Steelers on the other hand just became overly conservative. Lots of prevent and some man to man that became exploited by Sanchez. I don't think we'll see defense like that in two weeks though.
I'm going to quit rambling bc I'm just going back and forth. I would immediately pound Pitt at +3.5, but since that's been "guaranteed" not to happen I'm going to hold off and look at this game a little more. Like you said Mac, this one is about so much more than stats. Good stuff everyone
Solid points about the Packers and the road they've taken. I have said for several weeks that I have admired the resiliency they have shown all season after the injuries when they could have packed it up. I also agree about going on the road. No doubt these things have made them a better team. But let's not forget the Steelers have had to deal with adversity as well but it mostly came earlier in the year when they were without Roethlisberger. Everyone sucked it up in that situation and the Steelers came out 3-1. They've also had a ton of injuries on the offensive line and it has seemed like they've been bringing guys in off the street to play on that unit all season but they have managed to battle through it and persevere (so far).
I really don't see this line hitting 3.5 though. It has already dropped a ton from the numbers I got. Every time I looked at the line today and saw it dropped a pinch more I love my tickets even more.
0
Quote Originally Posted by JohnAlz:
Solid writeups as always Mac. I wouldn't expect anything less from you. My initial lean is to also grab Pittsburgh with those points, but there is that little voice in the back of my head that still has me thinking about Green Bay. You've listed a lot of those reasons already (Pouncey is a big X factor, GB should have the advantage in a dome, GB's receiving core is better imo, etc.). But what really freaks me out more than anything about GB is once again, points you've already stated: the young GB team against a super seasoned Pitt team, and the coaching edge. I think about all the vets on GB who are on the IR, and the young players who have stepped in. Although they've done an amazing job at adjusting this season, the big game has to present some nerve problems for these guys.
With the coaching-We have one head coach who has 1 ring, and a defensive coordinator who wears 2 rings, against a head coach who has never been to the big game. I like you think McCarthy is a great coach, but he has me scratching my head sometimes. I wonder how he'll react to big pressure spots in the final game?
I have to say though, Green Bay has had a much tougher year imo than the Steelers. Regular season aside, the Packers have had a hella tough playoff run. Playing on the road every game and performing every time. They seem to adjust well from week to week, no matter who is standing in their way. Rodgers didn't have a great game against Chicago, so it makes me wonder what will happen if he has a blow up game come February 6? It's hard for me to compare defenses in the last game because both became very lax and conservative in the 2nd half. GB was playing soft against Todd Collins and Caleb Hanie. Even though Cutler is interception prone, I'm not convinced we would have seen the final two ints from Raji and Shields. The pick to Raji was an awful throw and although Shields made a great play on the ball to end the game, that throw seemed pretty desperate to me. Steelers on the other hand just became overly conservative. Lots of prevent and some man to man that became exploited by Sanchez. I don't think we'll see defense like that in two weeks though.
I'm going to quit rambling bc I'm just going back and forth. I would immediately pound Pitt at +3.5, but since that's been "guaranteed" not to happen I'm going to hold off and look at this game a little more. Like you said Mac, this one is about so much more than stats. Good stuff everyone
Solid points about the Packers and the road they've taken. I have said for several weeks that I have admired the resiliency they have shown all season after the injuries when they could have packed it up. I also agree about going on the road. No doubt these things have made them a better team. But let's not forget the Steelers have had to deal with adversity as well but it mostly came earlier in the year when they were without Roethlisberger. Everyone sucked it up in that situation and the Steelers came out 3-1. They've also had a ton of injuries on the offensive line and it has seemed like they've been bringing guys in off the street to play on that unit all season but they have managed to battle through it and persevere (so far).
I really don't see this line hitting 3.5 though. It has already dropped a ton from the numbers I got. Every time I looked at the line today and saw it dropped a pinch more I love my tickets even more.
I watched a snippet of a news conference with one veteran Steeler today (Chris Hoke, no star but still a vet on the team) and he was asked about being an underdog in this game and I'm paraphrasing but his response was:
"That's fine with us, we love being the underdogs when no one gives us a chance."
Most of the time when players say this it is BS so I looked it up and he's right, the Steelers really do love being underdogs.
Over the last 10 seasons including postseason Pittsburgh is 32-14-1 ATS as an underdog and are 26-21 straight up in those games.
Now those numbers go back a few years but if you look at the last three seasons in which the coaching staff and core of this team has remained almost the same they are 8-2 ATS and 7-3 SU as underdogs.
0
I watched a snippet of a news conference with one veteran Steeler today (Chris Hoke, no star but still a vet on the team) and he was asked about being an underdog in this game and I'm paraphrasing but his response was:
"That's fine with us, we love being the underdogs when no one gives us a chance."
Most of the time when players say this it is BS so I looked it up and he's right, the Steelers really do love being underdogs.
Over the last 10 seasons including postseason Pittsburgh is 32-14-1 ATS as an underdog and are 26-21 straight up in those games.
Now those numbers go back a few years but if you look at the last three seasons in which the coaching staff and core of this team has remained almost the same they are 8-2 ATS and 7-3 SU as underdogs.
I'm kind of just talking out loud here (and maybe optimistically) but does anyone else think the "Green Bay on turf" argument is a topic that will be beaten to death over the next two weeks and will ultimately mean nothing as so often is the case when the mainstream starts yapping about these types of angles?
I've heard and read about the Packers on turf more times already than I think I have about any team on any surface all year.
0
I'm kind of just talking out loud here (and maybe optimistically) but does anyone else think the "Green Bay on turf" argument is a topic that will be beaten to death over the next two weeks and will ultimately mean nothing as so often is the case when the mainstream starts yapping about these types of angles?
I've heard and read about the Packers on turf more times already than I think I have about any team on any surface all year.
Unfortunately I'll be against you in the SB for two main reasons...
1) Rodgers ability to spread the wealth. I don't think the Packers are going to try to run the ball much in this game and the best way to beat the Steelers is to spread them out and pass the ball. NE and NO both used a similar game plan to this and both had success. While the Steelers will be able to get pressure on Rodgers from time to time his ability to make plays and spread the wealth against a beatable secondary will be key. Personally I think he will be successful moving the ball for the most part as the weakness of the defense is against the pass which is the strength of the Packer O.
2) Packer Defense. They are playing lights out right now and the likes of Raji, Jenkins, Matthews, etc. should be able to hound Big Ben all day against a further beaten up O-line. Now I realize Big Ben is a stud and will make some plays both with his arms and legs but the Packer D tend to come up with big plays week in and week out and I expect them to be up for the challenge. The Steeler O is also inconsistent on a week to week basis (this week a prime example) and with no real weaknesses on this Defense I don't expect much to change in terms of their consistency. They will get their points but it might not be enough.
BOL on the play should be a good one
0
Andy always a pleasure reading your threads
Unfortunately I'll be against you in the SB for two main reasons...
1) Rodgers ability to spread the wealth. I don't think the Packers are going to try to run the ball much in this game and the best way to beat the Steelers is to spread them out and pass the ball. NE and NO both used a similar game plan to this and both had success. While the Steelers will be able to get pressure on Rodgers from time to time his ability to make plays and spread the wealth against a beatable secondary will be key. Personally I think he will be successful moving the ball for the most part as the weakness of the defense is against the pass which is the strength of the Packer O.
2) Packer Defense. They are playing lights out right now and the likes of Raji, Jenkins, Matthews, etc. should be able to hound Big Ben all day against a further beaten up O-line. Now I realize Big Ben is a stud and will make some plays both with his arms and legs but the Packer D tend to come up with big plays week in and week out and I expect them to be up for the challenge. The Steeler O is also inconsistent on a week to week basis (this week a prime example) and with no real weaknesses on this Defense I don't expect much to change in terms of their consistency. They will get their points but it might not be enough.
Solid points about the Packers and the road they've taken. I have said for several weeks that I have admired the resiliency they have shown all season after the injuries when they could have packed it up. I also agree about going on the road. No doubt these things have made them a better team. But let's not forget the Steelers have had to deal with adversity as well but it mostly came earlier in the year when they were without Roethlisberger. Everyone sucked it up in that situation and the Steelers came out 3-1. They've also had a ton of injuries on the offensive line and it has seemed like they've been bringing guys in off the street to play on that unit all season but they have managed to battle through it and persevere (so far).
I really don't see this line hitting 3.5 though. It has already dropped a ton from the numbers I got. Every time I looked at the line today and saw it dropped a pinch more I love my tickets even more.
This cracked me up. Love your description, and you're absolutely right man!
As for the 3.5....I doubt it too buddy, but I hate the word "guarantee" when it comes to sports.
I have a feeling the turf factor will be beaten to death also. I have read a lot about is as well. Guess we'll have to wait till gametime.
No pick from me yet, but wish I could have grabbed the Over while it was still at 44
0
Quote Originally Posted by andarmac99:
Solid points about the Packers and the road they've taken. I have said for several weeks that I have admired the resiliency they have shown all season after the injuries when they could have packed it up. I also agree about going on the road. No doubt these things have made them a better team. But let's not forget the Steelers have had to deal with adversity as well but it mostly came earlier in the year when they were without Roethlisberger. Everyone sucked it up in that situation and the Steelers came out 3-1. They've also had a ton of injuries on the offensive line and it has seemed like they've been bringing guys in off the street to play on that unit all season but they have managed to battle through it and persevere (so far).
I really don't see this line hitting 3.5 though. It has already dropped a ton from the numbers I got. Every time I looked at the line today and saw it dropped a pinch more I love my tickets even more.
This cracked me up. Love your description, and you're absolutely right man!
As for the 3.5....I doubt it too buddy, but I hate the word "guarantee" when it comes to sports.
I have a feeling the turf factor will be beaten to death also. I have read a lot about is as well. Guess we'll have to wait till gametime.
No pick from me yet, but wish I could have grabbed the Over while it was still at 44
I'm kind of just talking out loud here (and maybe optimistically) but does anyone else think the "Green Bay on turf" argument is a topic that will be beaten to death over the next two weeks and will ultimately mean nothing as so often is the case when the mainstream starts yapping about these types of angles?
I've heard and read about the Packers on turf more times already than I think I have about any team on any surface all year.
Well never mind as it appears they may be installing a grass field for the Super Bowl.
I believe they did this for some of the soccer games they held in this stadium as well.
Link.
0
Quote Originally Posted by andarmac99:
I'm kind of just talking out loud here (and maybe optimistically) but does anyone else think the "Green Bay on turf" argument is a topic that will be beaten to death over the next two weeks and will ultimately mean nothing as so often is the case when the mainstream starts yapping about these types of angles?
I've heard and read about the Packers on turf more times already than I think I have about any team on any surface all year.
Well never mind as it appears they may be installing a grass field for the Super Bowl.
I believe they did this for some of the soccer games they held in this stadium as well.
I watched a snippet of a news conference with one veteran Steeler today (Chris Hoke, no star but still a vet on the team) and he was asked about being an underdog in this game and I'm paraphrasing but his response was:
"That's fine with us, we love being the underdogs when no one gives us a chance."
Most of the time when players say this it is BS so I looked it up and he's right, the Steelers really do love being underdogs.
Over the last 10 seasons including postseason Pittsburgh is 32-14-1 ATS as an underdog and are 26-21 straight up in those games.
Now those numbers go back a few years but if you look at the last three seasons in which the coaching staff and core of this team has remained almost the same they are 8-2 ATS and 7-3 SU as underdogs.
Great stuff, Mac.
Fantastic research.
0
Quote Originally Posted by andarmac99:
I watched a snippet of a news conference with one veteran Steeler today (Chris Hoke, no star but still a vet on the team) and he was asked about being an underdog in this game and I'm paraphrasing but his response was:
"That's fine with us, we love being the underdogs when no one gives us a chance."
Most of the time when players say this it is BS so I looked it up and he's right, the Steelers really do love being underdogs.
Over the last 10 seasons including postseason Pittsburgh is 32-14-1 ATS as an underdog and are 26-21 straight up in those games.
Now those numbers go back a few years but if you look at the last three seasons in which the coaching staff and core of this team has remained almost the same they are 8-2 ATS and 7-3 SU as underdogs.
I'm kind of just talking out loud here (and maybe optimistically) but does anyone else think the "Green Bay on turf" argument is a topic that will be beaten to death over the next two weeks and will ultimately mean nothing as so often is the case when the mainstream starts yapping about these types of angles?
I've heard and read about the Packers on turf more times already than I think I have about any team on any surface all year.
When my grandmother starts talking about things, I know its gone mainstream.
0
Quote Originally Posted by andarmac99:
I'm kind of just talking out loud here (and maybe optimistically) but does anyone else think the "Green Bay on turf" argument is a topic that will be beaten to death over the next two weeks and will ultimately mean nothing as so often is the case when the mainstream starts yapping about these types of angles?
I've heard and read about the Packers on turf more times already than I think I have about any team on any surface all year.
When my grandmother starts talking about things, I know its gone mainstream.
A lot of people were saying that last week saying no way GB hits -3.5 in Chicago but that line opened at -2.5 and jumped to -3.5.. and Pitts line went from -3 to -4... Nothing is a guarantee RJ...
RJ N HIS GUARANTEE'S! LAST WEEK HE HAD THE BEARS, LOOK HOW THAT TURNED OUT!
0
Quote Originally Posted by MoneyShot:
A lot of people were saying that last week saying no way GB hits -3.5 in Chicago but that line opened at -2.5 and jumped to -3.5.. and Pitts line went from -3 to -4... Nothing is a guarantee RJ...
RJ N HIS GUARANTEE'S! LAST WEEK HE HAD THE BEARS, LOOK HOW THAT TURNED OUT!
RJ N HIS GUARANTEE'S! LAST WEEK HE HAD THE BEARS, LOOK HOW THAT TURNED OUT!
I'm not doubting him when he said the line won't hit 3.5 because I don't think it will either (although it would be nice). But "guaranteeing" anything in sports leaves way too much room for you to make an ass out of yourself. Not taking a shot at you RJ bc it applies to everyone. Just saying
0
Quote Originally Posted by d33jay86:
RJ N HIS GUARANTEE'S! LAST WEEK HE HAD THE BEARS, LOOK HOW THAT TURNED OUT!
I'm not doubting him when he said the line won't hit 3.5 because I don't think it will either (although it would be nice). But "guaranteeing" anything in sports leaves way too much room for you to make an ass out of yourself. Not taking a shot at you RJ bc it applies to everyone. Just saying
I'm not doubting him when he said the line won't hit 3.5 because I don't think it will either (although it would be nice). But "guaranteeing" anything in sports leaves way too much room for you to make an ass out of yourself. Not taking a shot at you RJ bc it applies to everyone. Just saying
Its all good, John.
Your bolded post above is why I would never guarantee something that would happen or has the chance to happen.
This literally doesnt have the chance to hit 3.5. There are going to be large bettors that will prevent it.
Again, I would never guarantee anything that is not 100%. If this line had the inkling of going north, I wouldnt have said anything. But this line may hit 3, 3.5 is just not going to happen.
0
Quote Originally Posted by JohnAlz:
I'm not doubting him when he said the line won't hit 3.5 because I don't think it will either (although it would be nice). But "guaranteeing" anything in sports leaves way too much room for you to make an ass out of yourself. Not taking a shot at you RJ bc it applies to everyone. Just saying
Its all good, John.
Your bolded post above is why I would never guarantee something that would happen or has the chance to happen.
This literally doesnt have the chance to hit 3.5. There are going to be large bettors that will prevent it.
Again, I would never guarantee anything that is not 100%. If this line had the inkling of going north, I wouldnt have said anything. But this line may hit 3, 3.5 is just not going to happen.
Unfortunately I'll be against you in the SB for two main reasons...
1) Rodgers ability to spread the wealth. I don't think the Packers are going to try to run the ball much in this game and the best way to beat the Steelers is to spread them out and pass the ball. NE and NO both used a similar game plan to this and both had success. While the Steelers will be able to get pressure on Rodgers from time to time his ability to make plays and spread the wealth against a beatable secondary will be key. Personally I think he will be successful moving the ball for the most part as the weakness of the defense is against the pass which is the strength of the Packer O.
2) Packer Defense. They are playing lights out right now and the likes of Raji, Jenkins, Matthews, etc. should be able to hound Big Ben all day against a further beaten up O-line. Now I realize Big Ben is a stud and will make some plays both with his arms and legs but the Packer D tend to come up with big plays week in and week out and I expect them to be up for the challenge. The Steeler O is also inconsistent on a week to week basis (this week a prime example) and with no real weaknesses on this Defense I don't expect much to change in terms of their consistency. They will get their points but it might not be enough.
BOL on the play should be a good one
I have seen this numerous times mentioned about Pitt when they played New Orleans having their way ala the Pats.. Not really NO kicked a 50 yd FG at the gun at half to score 3 points in the first half.. They had 13 points with 6 minutes left and Pitt had the ball after a catch on the NO side of the field with a 1st down if Miller just does not fumble. If that happens they probably put up 13 at home.. None the less the gave up a late TD to give up 20 which aint bad at NO.. Take 20 all day .. Yep now the Pats torched them (2nd half it was 10-3 at half) but Brady has always torched Pitt and Pats were on a roll.. Rogers is very good but he aint Brady especially in his first SB.. Rogers more like Brees and will take 20 again at the drop of a hat.. That being said loved Pitt the last two games but the Pack is a Pitt clone and for real probably will just watch this one .. Common myth Pitts pass defense sucks but bottom line the gave up the 3rd fewest TD's(15) in the NFL ..(1st in points allowed)...despite nobody running on them (only gave up 5 rushing TD's) They give up the yds its their scheme .. Make them dump it off till we sack ..pick..or force FG's..
Be careful with the axe Eugene.
0
Quote Originally Posted by bigslickk:
Andy always a pleasure reading your threads
Unfortunately I'll be against you in the SB for two main reasons...
1) Rodgers ability to spread the wealth. I don't think the Packers are going to try to run the ball much in this game and the best way to beat the Steelers is to spread them out and pass the ball. NE and NO both used a similar game plan to this and both had success. While the Steelers will be able to get pressure on Rodgers from time to time his ability to make plays and spread the wealth against a beatable secondary will be key. Personally I think he will be successful moving the ball for the most part as the weakness of the defense is against the pass which is the strength of the Packer O.
2) Packer Defense. They are playing lights out right now and the likes of Raji, Jenkins, Matthews, etc. should be able to hound Big Ben all day against a further beaten up O-line. Now I realize Big Ben is a stud and will make some plays both with his arms and legs but the Packer D tend to come up with big plays week in and week out and I expect them to be up for the challenge. The Steeler O is also inconsistent on a week to week basis (this week a prime example) and with no real weaknesses on this Defense I don't expect much to change in terms of their consistency. They will get their points but it might not be enough.
BOL on the play should be a good one
I have seen this numerous times mentioned about Pitt when they played New Orleans having their way ala the Pats.. Not really NO kicked a 50 yd FG at the gun at half to score 3 points in the first half.. They had 13 points with 6 minutes left and Pitt had the ball after a catch on the NO side of the field with a 1st down if Miller just does not fumble. If that happens they probably put up 13 at home.. None the less the gave up a late TD to give up 20 which aint bad at NO.. Take 20 all day .. Yep now the Pats torched them (2nd half it was 10-3 at half) but Brady has always torched Pitt and Pats were on a roll.. Rogers is very good but he aint Brady especially in his first SB.. Rogers more like Brees and will take 20 again at the drop of a hat.. That being said loved Pitt the last two games but the Pack is a Pitt clone and for real probably will just watch this one .. Common myth Pitts pass defense sucks but bottom line the gave up the 3rd fewest TD's(15) in the NFL ..(1st in points allowed)...despite nobody running on them (only gave up 5 rushing TD's) They give up the yds its their scheme .. Make them dump it off till we sack ..pick..or force FG's..
Your bolded post above is why I would never guarantee something that would happen or has the chance to happen.
This literally doesnt have the chance to hit 3.5. There are going to be large bettors that will prevent it.
Again, I would never guarantee anything that is not 100%. If this line had the inkling of going north, I wouldnt have said anything. But this line may hit 3, 3.5 is just not going to happen.
0
Quote Originally Posted by RJSizzle:
Its all good, John.
Your bolded post above is why I would never guarantee something that would happen or has the chance to happen.
This literally doesnt have the chance to hit 3.5. There are going to be large bettors that will prevent it.
Again, I would never guarantee anything that is not 100%. If this line had the inkling of going north, I wouldnt have said anything. But this line may hit 3, 3.5 is just not going to happen.
Hey guys I just wanted to touch up on a couple of things I posted in posts #36 and #37.
In post #36 it should say: "In games Rodgers started and finished Green Bay averaged 364.5 yards and 25.4 points per game."
The Detroit game in which he was concussed late in the 2nd quarter and unable to finish is NOT included in these numbers.
In Post #37 where I mentioned the 1st and 2nd year players for the Packers, it should say "1st and 2nd year starters". Most of them are still 1st or 2nd year players but a couple have been around for 3-4 years but haven't played much until this year.
Also, I started looking at some props and other wagers of this type. I don't see a 1st quarter line yet but something to keep in mind is the scores after the first quarter of the previous 12 Super Bowls:
10-0
3-0
3-0
14-6
3-0
0-0
0-0
3-0
3-0
7-0
3-0
7-3
One time out of 12 was there more than 10 points scored in the 1st quarter and that game had the opening kickoff returned for a TD which may have opened the game up a little bit as the "feeling out process" may have been replaced by a bit of a sense of urgency with the quick scoring. I think a 1st quarter UNDER play is a strong bet here. More people are aware of this trend each year but yet it continues to hit year after year.
0
Hey guys I just wanted to touch up on a couple of things I posted in posts #36 and #37.
In post #36 it should say: "In games Rodgers started and finished Green Bay averaged 364.5 yards and 25.4 points per game."
The Detroit game in which he was concussed late in the 2nd quarter and unable to finish is NOT included in these numbers.
In Post #37 where I mentioned the 1st and 2nd year players for the Packers, it should say "1st and 2nd year starters". Most of them are still 1st or 2nd year players but a couple have been around for 3-4 years but haven't played much until this year.
Also, I started looking at some props and other wagers of this type. I don't see a 1st quarter line yet but something to keep in mind is the scores after the first quarter of the previous 12 Super Bowls:
10-0
3-0
3-0
14-6
3-0
0-0
0-0
3-0
3-0
7-0
3-0
7-3
One time out of 12 was there more than 10 points scored in the 1st quarter and that game had the opening kickoff returned for a TD which may have opened the game up a little bit as the "feeling out process" may have been replaced by a bit of a sense of urgency with the quick scoring. I think a 1st quarter UNDER play is a strong bet here. More people are aware of this trend each year but yet it continues to hit year after year.
Also, I started looking at some props and other wagers of this type. I don't see a 1st quarter line yet but something to keep in mind is the scores after the first quarter of the previous 12 Super Bowls:
10-0
3-0
3-0
14-6
3-0
0-0
0-0
3-0
3-0
7-0
3-0
7-3
One time out of 12 was there more than 10 points scored in the 1st quarter and that game had the opening kickoff returned for a TD which may have opened the game up a little bit as the "feeling out process" may have been replaced by a bit of a sense of urgency with the quick scoring. I think a 1st quarter UNDER play is a strong bet here. More people are aware of this trend each year but yet it continues to hit year after year.
If you feel the 1st quarter will play out like most of the ones in years past then you may want to look at this prop:
"Will there be a score in the first 7:30 of the 1st quarter?"
8 of the previous 12 mentioned above did NOT have a score of any kind in the first 7:30 of the 1st quarter (although last year missed by 1 second).
Right now the "NO" on this prop is +145.
0
Quote Originally Posted by andarmac99:
Also, I started looking at some props and other wagers of this type. I don't see a 1st quarter line yet but something to keep in mind is the scores after the first quarter of the previous 12 Super Bowls:
10-0
3-0
3-0
14-6
3-0
0-0
0-0
3-0
3-0
7-0
3-0
7-3
One time out of 12 was there more than 10 points scored in the 1st quarter and that game had the opening kickoff returned for a TD which may have opened the game up a little bit as the "feeling out process" may have been replaced by a bit of a sense of urgency with the quick scoring. I think a 1st quarter UNDER play is a strong bet here. More people are aware of this trend each year but yet it continues to hit year after year.
If you feel the 1st quarter will play out like most of the ones in years past then you may want to look at this prop:
"Will there be a score in the first 7:30 of the 1st quarter?"
8 of the previous 12 mentioned above did NOT have a score of any kind in the first 7:30 of the 1st quarter (although last year missed by 1 second).
Unfortunately I'll be against you in the SB for two main reasons...
1) Rodgers ability to spread the wealth. I don't think the Packers are going to try to run the ball much in this game and the best way to beat the Steelers is to spread them out and pass the ball. NE and NO both used a similar game plan to this and both had success. While the Steelers will be able to get pressure on Rodgers from time to time his ability to make plays and spread the wealth against a beatable secondary will be key. Personally I think he will be successful moving the ball for the most part as the weakness of the defense is against the pass which is the strength of the Packer O.
2) Packer Defense. They are playing lights out right now and the likes of Raji, Jenkins, Matthews, etc. should be able to hound Big Ben all day against a further beaten up O-line. Now I realize Big Ben is a stud and will make some plays both with his arms and legs but the Packer D tend to come up with big plays week in and week out and I expect them to be up for the challenge. The Steeler O is also inconsistent on a week to week basis (this week a prime example) and with no real weaknesses on this Defense I don't expect much to change in terms of their consistency. They will get their points but it might not be enough.
BOL on the play should be a good one
First point: No question the Packers can spread it out with the best of them but I really think people are overlooking what this Steelers offense has morphed into as the season has gone on. This is a deep team now at receiver. These Steelers aren't the "smash mouth, run it down your throats" Steelers of old. They have 5 receiver sets now and they use them quite a bit, heck on the game clinching play last week where you'd think the big bad Steelers would pound it up the middle they instead went to an empty back 5 receiver set and picked up the 1st down on a pass. Check out the targets the receivers have gotten since Antonio Brown became a part of the game plan in Week 11:
Mike Wallace: 55 Hines Ward: 52 Emmanuel Sanders: 46 Heath Miller: 40 RB position: 39 Antonio Brown: 25
If you add the 11 targets Matt Spaeth got when Heath Miller was injured for two games (Spaeth only had one other target during the whole span) then the targets look like this:
Mike Wallace: 55
Hines Ward: 52
Heath Miller: 51 Emmanuel Sanders: 46
RB position: 39
Antonio Brown: 25
This is a very balanced passing offense with no real reliance on any one or two receivers and every player has an equal chance to see a pass thrown his way. There are a lot of players to defend and a lot of places Ben can now go with the ball, and he has shown he is not afraid to go to anyone and has a lot of trust in these guys equally. The Packers are going to have to cover the entire field.
Second point: I can't really argue here, the Packers D has been outstanding. My one real big concern though is the age, there are a lot of young guys back there who could be susceptible to a mental fuck up on a stage this big. There is also one old guy (Woodson) who let's face it, has lost a step. If the Steelers somehow get Mike Wallace matched up on Woodson it could spell bad news. Just last week the speedy Wallace ran right by the legendary Darrelle Revis and had him beat by a country mile on that long pass play but the ball was severly underthrown and Revis caught up to it and batted it down, a good throw there and Wallace had a walk-in touchdown. Mike Wallace is freakin fast! I might throw some coin on him for Super Bowl MVP if I get the right odds.
0
Quote Originally Posted by bigslickk:
Andy always a pleasure reading your threads
Unfortunately I'll be against you in the SB for two main reasons...
1) Rodgers ability to spread the wealth. I don't think the Packers are going to try to run the ball much in this game and the best way to beat the Steelers is to spread them out and pass the ball. NE and NO both used a similar game plan to this and both had success. While the Steelers will be able to get pressure on Rodgers from time to time his ability to make plays and spread the wealth against a beatable secondary will be key. Personally I think he will be successful moving the ball for the most part as the weakness of the defense is against the pass which is the strength of the Packer O.
2) Packer Defense. They are playing lights out right now and the likes of Raji, Jenkins, Matthews, etc. should be able to hound Big Ben all day against a further beaten up O-line. Now I realize Big Ben is a stud and will make some plays both with his arms and legs but the Packer D tend to come up with big plays week in and week out and I expect them to be up for the challenge. The Steeler O is also inconsistent on a week to week basis (this week a prime example) and with no real weaknesses on this Defense I don't expect much to change in terms of their consistency. They will get their points but it might not be enough.
BOL on the play should be a good one
First point: No question the Packers can spread it out with the best of them but I really think people are overlooking what this Steelers offense has morphed into as the season has gone on. This is a deep team now at receiver. These Steelers aren't the "smash mouth, run it down your throats" Steelers of old. They have 5 receiver sets now and they use them quite a bit, heck on the game clinching play last week where you'd think the big bad Steelers would pound it up the middle they instead went to an empty back 5 receiver set and picked up the 1st down on a pass. Check out the targets the receivers have gotten since Antonio Brown became a part of the game plan in Week 11:
Mike Wallace: 55 Hines Ward: 52 Emmanuel Sanders: 46 Heath Miller: 40 RB position: 39 Antonio Brown: 25
If you add the 11 targets Matt Spaeth got when Heath Miller was injured for two games (Spaeth only had one other target during the whole span) then the targets look like this:
Mike Wallace: 55
Hines Ward: 52
Heath Miller: 51 Emmanuel Sanders: 46
RB position: 39
Antonio Brown: 25
This is a very balanced passing offense with no real reliance on any one or two receivers and every player has an equal chance to see a pass thrown his way. There are a lot of players to defend and a lot of places Ben can now go with the ball, and he has shown he is not afraid to go to anyone and has a lot of trust in these guys equally. The Packers are going to have to cover the entire field.
Second point: I can't really argue here, the Packers D has been outstanding. My one real big concern though is the age, there are a lot of young guys back there who could be susceptible to a mental fuck up on a stage this big. There is also one old guy (Woodson) who let's face it, has lost a step. If the Steelers somehow get Mike Wallace matched up on Woodson it could spell bad news. Just last week the speedy Wallace ran right by the legendary Darrelle Revis and had him beat by a country mile on that long pass play but the ball was severly underthrown and Revis caught up to it and batted it down, a good throw there and Wallace had a walk-in touchdown. Mike Wallace is freakin fast! I might throw some coin on him for Super Bowl MVP if I get the right odds.
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.
I'm going to hold off and look at this game a little more. Like you said Mac, this one is about so much more than stats. Good stuff everyone
This cracked me up. Love your description, and you're absolutely right man!
Hot Forum Topics
