All Forums | NFL Betting Forum

NFL Super Bowl

...
Participants:
Search model icon
Views: 21254
Posts: 218
 
Rookie
Participation Meter
Joined: Sep, 2010
Posts: 554
Posted: #101

Quote Originally Posted by andarmac99:



I'm not sure what you are trying to say here but I do see colors involved and all I have to say regarding that is that the team wearing their white jerseys have won the last 6 Super Bowls and this year the Steelers are wearing white.

There's your irrelevant stat of the day!


 
MVP
Participation Meter
Joined: Apr, 2007
Posts: 16954
Posted: #102
Quote Originally Posted by JohnAlz:

What's your beef with the color yellowGood points made about schedule of both teams, but the Packer team that is playing now is not the Packer team that began the season.  Don't get me wrong, I'm leaning hard on Pittsburgh as well, but I'm not underestimating the Pack in this spot.  I think it's important to remember that the Packers were in a bit of disarray at the beginning of the year with the absence of Ryan Grant.  That completely changed the dynamic of that offense and you're right, it did show in games like the first Detroit outing, although the defense is much to blame for a lot of that game as well.   

That second Detroit game really stings.  I laid the lumber in that one.  Packers made so many key mistakes in that game.  The one that stands out in my mind was the long throw to Jennings that he bobbled and ultimately resulted in an interception.  If he had caught the easy catch it would have resulted in an easy 6, but nope it wasn't meant to be.  I think the line on that game was -7?  What became even more sickening was when Rodgers was knocked out of that game and here comes Flynn.  Then, to my surprise, Flynn drove the ball all the way down the field and threw a fucking pick!  I almost fell out of my chair, though the cover still seemed bleek.

Not to sound brash man, but really?  You're factoring in the QB's numbers into capping this game  I disagree that the Pack doesn't have anything.  Packers D is going to rattle Roethlisberger in this game.  If the Pitt O-line can't protect Ben, it's going to be a long day and the center position is still questionable.  Pouncey says he expects to play, but who knows right now.  The Pack D is playing amazing right now.  You can surely say the Eagles were subpar, the Falcons were phony, and the Bears a joke with the QB situation in that game, but you could also say the Steelers' offense has been inconsistent at times which in turn would favor the Pack D.

I know this sounds like I'm trying to make a case for the Pack, but like I said, I still lean Pittsburgh.  Just trying to point out that the Packers are going to come to play in this game.  I wouldn't expect a blow out but probably more of a .  GL to ya Dawnie 

 



It looks like he may out. I've been thinking about this and sure it would be a big bonus if he plays and is healthy but I'm not sure throwing the backup out there is as big of a loss as it's being made out to be (especially by the media so far). The guy will have two weeks to prepare and get comfortable with Ben and the first team offense, it won't be like last week where he comes in straight off the bench. The backup is actually a little heavier and according to one report stronger than Pouncey too.

Except for that safety he played well last week. Pouncey went out midway through the 1st quarter and the Steelers o-line continued to blow up the Jets front and run the ball down their throats. They've thrown in replacements all year on the o-line and have persevered. The Steelers really haven't had a top notch or even middling offensive line in 5 years (bottom of the league in sacks and yards per rush) but they continue to get it done.
 
MVP
Participation Meter
Joined: Apr, 2007
Posts: 16954
Posted: #103
Quote Originally Posted by Splooge:

Pouncey won't play if he does he will be a shell of himself.  300+ lineman don't play on high ankle sprains 2 weeks after the injury. Pack spread em out and make secondary look silly just like Pats game.  Blueprint is there and the better coaching staff will make certain the Steelers weakness is exposed. LeBeau hates to see his defense spread out and there are not many teams capable of successfully spreading out the Steeler defense because it takes a very accurate passer, solid O line and numerous weapons.  Let's take a look at which teams possess these skill sets.  Pats...yes   Saints.....yes   both losses if I remember correctly and both played similar in their offensive approach.  Packers more than capable of posing same matchup problems for Steelers especially on fast track indoors.

On the other side of the ball Steelers don't wanna get involved in a shootout, it's not their style and they don't have the O line capable of providing the protection.  The game is a complete mismatch on paper and it's obvious who should be favored in this game.  I said last week Pack would be 3+ pt fav in SB vs either Jets or Steelers so laying 2.5 was a gift. Many Steeler backers are not seeing this one correctly if you disregard the element of speed and how it's going to play a large part in this game. Packers large! GL



I can't deny the Pats and Saints had success but let's keep in mind like I said before those were outstanding spots for the Pats and Saints. They likely would have lit up the '85 Bears in those spots. The blueprint may be there but that doesn't mean that an outstanding Pittsburgh coaching staff on the other side won't be designing ways to make sure the Pats and Saints games don't happen again.

The Patriots and Saints also had great offensive lines, something the Packers don't possess. Rookie RT Brian Bulaga against LaMarr Woodley (who has the most career postseason sacks in NFL history) is a dangerous matchup for Green Bay. Quite frankly I don't trust Chad Clifton to block James Harrison either. Clifton does a good job against bigger tradition defensive ends but Harrison is a linebacker and is so good because he gets so low to the ground and turns the corner fast. Clifton is an older guy who is strong but doesn't have the quickest feet. You need quick feet to stay with Harrison or he will dip down and run right underneath you. That's not to say guys like Matthews for Green Bay won't have success against the Pittsburgh tackles but I think Woodley and Harrison may be in for big days and if that's the case Pittsburgh is looking good.

Many Steeler backers are not seeing this one correctly if you disregard the element of speed and how it's going to play a large part in this game.

I don't think many Pittsburgh backers are disregarding the speed of the Packers, but I do think there are a lot of Packer backers disregarding the speed of the Steelers.


GL
 
MVP
Participation Meter
Joined: Apr, 2007
Posts: 16954
Posted: #104
Quote Originally Posted by Splooge:

I'm pretty certain Pack's replacements who have all had half a season plus to mature and gain confidence will be just fine.  They seemed to do ok w/ their nerves in single elimination games in hostile environments in 3 straight road playoff games.  Now they  head to Disney World where the crowd will be as soft and neutral as any superbowl crowd is w/ zero pressure on them as the strongest #6 seed against the softest #2 in recent memory...it's all gravey for the Pack playing w/ house money all the pressure on the experienced Steelers w/ Big Ben who is gonna need to actually show up and carry his team in an up tempo game something he's not accustomed to doing



Again, I can't argue what the replacements/youngsters have done for the Packers as they've played well and handled tough situations. My concern as I've said is can these youngsters handle the magnitude and pressure of the Super Bowl? It doesn't have to be on game day either, how will they hold up during the week before the game? That is the big question. I've always maintained games are won and lost during the week and if a couple of these kids get distracted or caught up during the week you can bet it will show up in the game. Pittsburgh has 22 players with Super Bowl rings and 11 with two of them as well as a coaching staff with a bunch of rings, these guys have been here before and know what it will be like. It may seem like just another week for these guys. One Packer has ever even played in a Super Bowl and that was Charles Woodson 8 years ago.

"Now they  head to Disney World where the crowd will be as soft and neutral as any superbowl crowd is w/ zero pressure
on them"

Huh?

This is the Super Bowl, this grandest stage in North American sports. These guys have been dreaming of this moment and working their ass off to get here their whole lives, I'm sure they'll be treating it like a trip to Disney World (yeah right). The crowd soft and neutral? I highly doubt that as it will be the largest crowd in Super Bowl history and involves two of the most popular teams in America with the most well traveled fan bases. I think this will be one of the more rowdy crowds in Super Bowl history. Green Bay has zero pressure on them? Yeah right! They are the Super Bowl favorites dude, the pressure is on them because they are expected to win.
 
MVP
Participation Meter
Joined: Apr, 2007
Posts: 16954
Posted: #105
On February 7th when I read Peter King's Monday Morning Quarterback column on si.com under the title of "Goat of the Week" I think there's a decent shot we see this name:

Tramon Williams.

The guy has played great but he takes a lot of chances as he jumps routs and can be beaten on double moves. He's also shaky returning punts. It seems like for the last 3 weeks I've been holding my breath for all the wrong reasons when this guy field a punt.
 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Jan, 2008
Posts: 2304
Posted: #106
Great season Andy, only posted towards the end of the year but I hope you'll be back next year(along with Glyde, JohnAlz etc.) as the discussions in your threads were the best on Covers with no garbage like the rest of the forum...extremely tough to pick a side this game. I keep switching every day. I do however like the Under and may tease it with Pit. Still not sure, I think the Packers squeak out a very close one.


 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Jan, 2008
Posts: 2304
Posted: #107
Any props that stick out to you Andy?...I'll prob do a little digging later on
 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Sep, 2007
Posts: 2300
Posted: #108

Quote Originally Posted by andarmac99:



"Now they  head to Disney World where the crowd will be as soft and neutral as any superbowl crowd is w/ zero pressure
on them"

Huh?

This is the Super Bowl, this grandest stage in North American sports. These guys have been dreaming of this moment and working their ass off to get here their whole lives, I'm sure they'll be treating it like a trip to Disney World (yeah right).

I didn't make my point.  What I was trying to say here was not that they are treating it like a trip to Disney World but that the crowd would be as soft as a Disney World crowd typical of SBs in general.  I know the Steeler fans are as national as it gets and they travel and maybe they make up a larger % than Packer fans but a large % of the tickets will be in the hands of people who are big event seekers and neither Packer or Steeler fans. Just my opinion having been to 2 SBs myself I felt both times I was at a circus and they played a football game in the middle of it where the crowd cheered for every catch made, every sack every big hit, every score regardless of who it was. Valid points made on JH, Clifton may need some help in which case they may only be able to spread 4 w/ a RB kept in for help.  I do feel the mismatch is greater on the other side w/ Matthews though.  GL

 
Captain
Participation Meter
Joined: Sep, 2005
Posts: 7442
Posted: #109

I was wondering if someone a little less lazy than me could come up with Aaron Rodger's stats the last two years against 3-4 defenses. 

 
MVP
Participation Meter
Joined: Apr, 2007
Posts: 16954
Posted: #110
Quote Originally Posted by nepatriots_12:

Any props that stick out to you Andy?...I'll prob do a little digging later on


I have three so far:

Will there be a score in the first 7:30 of the 1st quarter? NO +140

Emmanuel Sanders OVER 2.5 receptions

Emmanuel Sanders OVER 33.5 receiving yards


The oddsmakers sniffed out the first quarter trend I mentioned earlier and put up a 9.5 so I grabbed the No score in first 7:30 play. Thought there was value in the Sanders props because like I mentioned in a previous post he's getting about the same amount of targets as the other guys but their reception totals (Ward, Wallace, Miller) are all 3.5 and all their yardage totals are all higher as well.
 
MVP
Participation Meter
Joined: Apr, 2007
Posts: 16954
Posted: #111
Quote Originally Posted by Splooge:

I didn't make my point.  What I was trying to say here was not that they are treating it like a trip to Disney World but that the crowd would be as soft as a Disney World crowd typical of SBs in general.  I know the Steeler fans are as national as it gets and they travel and maybe they make up a larger % than Packer fans but a large % of the tickets will be in the hands of people who are big event seekers and neither Packer or Steeler fans. Just my opinion having been to 2 SBs myself I felt both times I was at a circus and they played a football game in the middle of it where the crowd cheered for every catch made, every sack every big hit, every score regardless of who it was. Valid points made on JH, Clifton may need some help in which case they may only be able to spread 4 w/ a RB kept in for help.  I do feel the mismatch is greater on the other side w/ Matthews though.  GL




 
MVP
Participation Meter
Joined: Apr, 2007
Posts: 16954
Posted: #112
Quote Originally Posted by glyde69:

I was wondering if someone a little less lazy than me could come up with Aaron Rodger's stats the last two years against 3-4 defenses. 




 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Sep, 2007
Posts: 2300
Posted: #113
Quote Originally Posted by glyde69:

I was wondering if someone a little less lazy than me could come up with Aaron Rodger's stats the last two years against 3-4 defenses. 

10-3 Record

286/444 for 3515 yds = 270yds/game 64.4 comp% 24tds 4ints

not too shabby!

 

 
Legend
Participation Meter
Joined: Oct, 2002
Posts: 55434
Posted: #114

Quote Originally Posted by scsiegel89:

can't believe they are giving pittsburgh points. its a gift from above

This alone should make you question your bet Amac

 
MVP
Participation Meter
Joined: Apr, 2007
Posts: 16954
Posted: #115
Quote Originally Posted by Splooge:

10-3 Record

286/444 for 3515 yds = 270yds/game 64.4 comp% 24tds 4ints

not too shabby!

 




 
MVP
Participation Meter
Joined: Apr, 2007
Posts: 16954
Posted: #116
Quote Originally Posted by TRAIN69:

This alone should make you question your bet Amac





And why is that?


I just don't believe in that type of garbage and would never let it scare me off a bet.

Are you saying the books know Green Bay is going to win and thus are taking a stand on the Super Bowl? So instead of trying to get 50/50 action with a massive volume on each side where they could just laugh to the bank raking in the juice, they are instead actually gambling with the line and putting themselves at risk of losing on the biggest game of the year if Pittsburgh wins?

Think about that for a minute. It's so absurd it's not even funny.


 
MVP
Participation Meter
Joined: Apr, 2007
Posts: 16954
Posted: #117
The people that think they are going to win because they are "siding with the books" on what look like fishy lines aren't good enough cappers to figure out why the line is where it is in the first place.



 
Captain
Participation Meter
Joined: Sep, 2005
Posts: 7442
Posted: #118

I just got an email from someone who saw my question in this thread regarding Rodgers and 3-4 defenses, and he threw me some good stats I thought I would share.

Info is from Sharp from SHARPFOOTBALLANALYSIS.COM: He is truly one of the better cappers around and always has really good insight.

Teams against 3-4 defenses:

In the Super Bowl, both teams run 3-4 defenses which operate in a similar style and uses similar pressure concepts. The obvious question is, which QB and team has historically performed the best against 3-4 defenses. And on this point, the gap between the two teams is monumental:

The AFC has 9 teams that run a 3-4, whereas the NFC has just 5. The Steelers play in the AFC North, and two other teams run a 3-4 (Baltimore and Cleveland). Whereas the Packers play in the NFC North, and are the only team to run a 3-4 (Detroit, Minnesota and Chicago run 4-3 defenses). Thus, the Steelers regularly face 3-4 defenses, either in divisional or conference play.

Let's begin the examination in 2008, when Aaron Rodgers took over as a starter, and limit the games we consider to Steelers or Packers games vs. teams who run a 3-4 who have at least a .500 record. This point is valid (and will be discussed in the footnote) as it really is insignificant if the Packers beat a 1-7 Dallas team this year or the Steelers beat a 4-12 Browns team in 2008.

The Packers are just 3-4 (ironically) SU and ATS since 2008 vs. 3-4 defenses at or above .500 w/ Aaron Rodgers starting. This season alone, they are 1-3 SU, losing to Washington, Miami and New England (Matt Flynn played this game and it is removed from the 3-4 record since 2008), and beating the Jets 9-0. Rodgers averaged a QB rating of 84. The Packers averaged 21 points for and 20 points against in these games.

Meanwhile, the Steelers have played 18 games in the same parameters (since 2008, vs. 3-4 defenses with a record at or above .500) and are 16-2 SU and 12-6 in these games w/ Big Ben starting. Roethlisburger averaged a QB rating of 91. The Steelers averaged 25 points for and 19 points against in these games.  Their only losses were this year to NE and to the Jets (without Polamalu, during the regular season).

Thus it appears in terms of either :
• games played vs. 3-4 defenses with winning records (7 vs 18),
• success in those games (3-4 SU vs 16-2 SU),
• QB performance vs. those defenses (84 rtg vs 91 rtg), and
• points scored (21 vs 25)
• margin of victory (1 vs 6)
the Packers are at a disadvantage to the Steelers when it comes to this key aspect of the game.

Footnote: It can also be added to complete the study that Aaron Rodgers/Green Bay played 4 very bad teams with 3-4 defenses since 2008 and Big Ben/Steelers played 9 very bad teams w/ 3-4 defenses. Both GB and Pit did extremely well vs. these losing teams, and both QBs had tremendous days vs. these teams. So removing these games is justified and makes logical sense because the Super Bowl is not a game played against sub-.500 competition. Additionally, the Steelers faced over twice as many of these bad teams, adding further to the experience edge in their favor.


 

 

 
Legend
Participation Meter
Joined: Oct, 2002
Posts: 55434
Posted: #119

Quote Originally Posted by andarmac99:





And why is that?


I just don't believe in that type of garbage and would never let it scare me off a bet.

Are you saying the books know Green Bay is going to win and thus are taking a stand on the Super Bowl? So instead of trying to get 50/50 action with a massive volume on each side where they could just laugh to the bank raking in the juice, they are instead actually gambling with the line and putting themselves at risk of losing on the biggest game of the year if Pittsburgh wins?

Think about that for a minute. It's so absurd it's not even funny.


I was commenting on sciegel saying Pitt + points was a gift.

Why did the linesmakers make Pitt +2.5/3, when they very well could have made them -2.5/3?

I'm not "siding with the books"....GB is favored for a reason, they are the better team

BOL 

 
Prospect
Participation Meter
Joined: Dec, 2010
Posts: 81
Posted: #120
Quote Originally Posted by glyde69:

I hit em ML at +135.

 

Am I the only one completely surprised GB opened up -2.5/3?  I was ready to unload on anything under Pitt -3 and I thought for sure it would be Pitt -2.5 to open.

I could always buy out of this bet if it comes to it, but for now I am pretty happy.

 

I had it pegged exactly like you.That's why I'm now thinking of taking Green Bay.Just can't figure out why Green Bay's the favorite.Maybe the line makers are telling us who wins.
 
Veteran
Participation Meter
Joined: Sep, 2007
Posts: 2300
Posted: #121
[Quote: Originally Posted by glyde69]

I just got an email from someone who saw my question in this thread regarding Rodgers and 3-4 defenses, and he threw me some good stats I thought I would share.

Info is from Sharp from SHARPFOOTBALLANALYSIS.COM: He is truly one of the better cappers around and always has really good insight.

Teams against 3-4 defenses:

In the Super Bowl, both teams run 3-4 defenses which operate in a similar style and uses similar pressure concepts. The obvious question is, which QB and team has historically performed the best against 3-4 defenses. And on this point, the gap between the two teams is monumental:

The AFC has 9 teams that run a 3-4, whereas the NFC has just 5. The Steelers play in the AFC North, and two other teams run a 3-4 (Baltimore and Cleveland). Whereas the Packers play in the NFC North, and are the only team to run a 3-4 (Detroit, Minnesota and Chicago run 4-3 defenses). Thus, the Steelers regularly face 3-4 defenses, either in divisional or conference play.

Let's begin the examination in 2008, when Aaron Rodgers took over as a starter, and limit the games we consider to Steelers or Packers games vs. teams who run a 3-4 who have at least a .500 record. This point is valid (and will be discussed in the footnote) as it really is insignificant if the Packers beat a 1-7 Dallas team this year or the Steelers beat a 4-12 Browns team in 2008.

The Packers are just 3-4 (ironically) SU and ATS since 2008 vs. 3-4 defenses at or above .500 w/ Aaron Rodgers starting. This season alone, they are 1-3 SU, losing to Washington, Miami and New England (Matt Flynn played this game and it is removed from the 3-4 record since 2008), and beating the Jets 9-0. Rodgers averaged a QB rating of 84. The Packers averaged 21 points for and 20 points against in these games.

Meanwhile, the Steelers have played 18 games in the same parameters (since 2008, vs. 3-4 defenses with a record at or above .500) and are 16-2 SU and 12-6 in these games w/ Big Ben starting. Roethlisburger averaged a QB rating of 91. The Steelers averaged 25 points for and 19 points against in these games.  Their only losses were this year to NE and to the Jets (without Polamalu, during the regular season).

Thus it appears in terms of either :
• games played vs. 3-4 defenses with winning records (7 vs 18),
• success in those games (3-4 SU vs 16-2 SU),
• QB performance vs. those defenses (84 rtg vs 91 rtg), and
• points scored (21 vs 25)
• margin of victory (1 vs 6)
the Packers are at a disadvantage to the Steelers when it comes to this key aspect of the game.

Footnote: It can also be added to complete the study that Aaron Rodgers/Green Bay played 4 very bad teams with 3-4 defenses since 2008 and Big Ben/Steelers played 9 very bad teams w/ 3-4 defenses. Both GB and Pit did extremely well vs. these losing teams, and both QBs had tremendous days vs. these teams. So removing these games is justified and makes logical sense because the Super Bowl is not a game played against sub-.500 competition. Additionally, the Steelers faced over twice as many of these bad teams, adding further to the experience edge in their favor.


 

 

[/Quote 

Rodgers 10-3 L13 vs 3-4 D's w/ excellent stats what more does one need to know?? Seems like you are obsessed w/ twisting it to your liking to justify Steelers lean and/or  just over thinking a part of this matchup that has little to no relevance.  I would think my biggest concern if I was backing the Steelers  would be how i'm going to defend a Packer offense when they spread me out 4 & 5 wide...how the loss of my best offensive lineman will impact things as well as weakest part of that line (tackle) will do against Matthews especially w/ offensive line signal caller and anchor to their already weakest O line ever to make it to a SB not playing. 

 
Captain
Participation Meter
Joined: Sep, 2005
Posts: 7442
Posted: #122

Rodgers 10-3 L13 vs 3-4 D's w/ excellent stats what more does one need to know?? Seems like you are obsessed w/ twisting it to your liking to justify Steelers lean and/or  just over thinking a part of this matchup that has little to no relevance.  I would think my biggest concern if I was backing the Steelers  would be how i'm going to defend a Packer offense when they spread me out 4 & 5 wide...how the loss of my best offensive lineman will impact things as well as weakest part of that line (tackle) will do against Matthews especially w/ offensive line signal caller and anchor to their already weakest O line ever to make it to a SB not playing. 

[/Quote]

I'm not twisting around anything.  Just posting some info I saw from someone who is neutral on the game thus far.  Come to think of it, I haven't picked a side yet either(although I lean Pitt). 

 
All-Star
Participation Meter
Joined: May, 2008
Posts: 12070
Posted: #123

Quote Originally Posted by andarmac99:



Again, I can't argue what the replacements/youngsters have done for the Packers as they've played well and handled tough situations. My concern as I've said is can these youngsters handle the magnitude and pressure of the Super Bowl? It doesn't have to be on game day either, how will they hold up during the week before the game? That is the big question. I've always maintained games are won and lost during the week and if a couple of these kids get distracted or caught up during the week you can bet it will show up in the game. Pittsburgh has 22 players with Super Bowl rings and 11 with two of them as well as a coaching staff with a bunch of rings, these guys have been here before and know what it will be like. It may seem like just another week for these guys. One Packer has ever even played in a Super Bowl and that was Charles Woodson 8 years ago.

"Now they  head to Disney World where the crowd will be as soft and neutral as any superbowl crowd is w/ zero pressure
on them"

Huh?

This is the Super Bowl, this grandest stage in North American sports. These guys have been dreaming of this moment and working their ass off to get here their whole lives, I'm sure they'll be treating it like a trip to Disney World (yeah right). The crowd soft and neutral? I highly doubt that as it will be the largest crowd in Super Bowl history and involves two of the most popular teams in America with the most well traveled fan bases. I think this will be one of the more rowdy crowds in Super Bowl history. Green Bay has zero pressure on them? Yeah right! They are the Super Bowl favorites dude, the pressure is on them because they are expected to win.

 

Just for the record, teams who've won a prior SB within 3 years against teams with a group of players in their very first SB together, the prior  SB winning teams are just 1-8 ATS in the past 17 years since the free agency period began.

Including last season with the Colts winning the SB 3 years prior and the Saints in the 1st SB with their group of players, and the first time team won, and the Steelers in 2009 SB when they won the SB 3 years prior but failed to cover against Zona a first time SB team. 

There's no evidence that winning a prior SB helps teams cover the spread .

I'm just saying........................................

 
Banned
Participation Meter
Joined: Dec, 2010
Posts: 2401
Posted: #124
Quote Originally Posted by dawniewags:

I agree with this post 100% and i want to add something about packers end of season run compared to steelers

Packers final 6 games PAY ATTENTION here

@ falcons +2 points lost 20-17  then home to cupcake gift 49ers blow out win 34-16 

then @ Detriot - 6.5 points LOST 3 -7  !

U mean to tell me that the backups couldnt score one TD or even get two fg's to win the game @ Detriot ?

THEEE worst team in NFL past 3 years who also was playing inured with 3rd string QB !

THEN @ Patriots LOST  27 - 31   Defense ? what defense ?

then of course another gift at home the fumbling bumbling Giants

weeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee win 45 -17 

 

then to just make the playooffs struggled mightily at home vs the Baers to finally score 1 td late in 4th qtr to win 10-3

so they said steelers only beat tow wc teams at home ? BUT dammit these two wcs were winningteams both with good defense and offense far better than the NFC conf had in playoffs !

OMG are we forgetting that the NFC had a DIV winner in with a losing record ?

they keep talkingabout packers defense  how superb it was all year !

 

WTF is the media looking at ?

look at the teams they played early season ?

 

game 1 @ Eagles a rookie O line with basically rookie QB 1st year starting !

ooooooyeah week 2 the team that started out 0-8 the BILLS LOL

then at Baers lose the game favored by 3 hmmmmmmmm

home to DET  big favorite by two TD's almsot lost the game they squeaked by 2 points 28-26 

then two st losses followed @ wash and Home to Miami favored in both games

then @ the JETS  won 9-0 

then two teams that were falling apart at the seams Cowboys and vkings and both teams fired thier cocahes after GB hseallcked them both 45-7 31 -3

sure any teams defense would look great with that cupcake schedule

YES Steelers also had it farily easy this year

THE previous years playoff teams fell apart in thier DIV  the bengals just never got it started

Browns well they always sucked !

but in reality steelers finshed div at 5-1  packers were 4-2  barely

steelers wrapped up playoff spot long before packers even qualified

and secured #2 seed by week 16 !

SO Packers beat the top 3 NFC seeds right ?

yeah the betup mike Vick and eagles weakend denfse

the FRaud #1 seed falcons that got there on the softest schedule of all with 12 teams that were not playoff teams !

then the fraud bears who finshed season - 8 ypg per 16 games with only a +3 to margin !

 

Packers got to +10 due to 5 TO's from giants game in week 16 they were only +5 in to's for 15 weeks !

Steelers finshed highest in that ctaergory with 18 TO"s after 16 games played !

ON a slighty stronger schedule than packers had !

besides i'd rather BET on STEEL than on Cheese LOL

Black n Gold vs Green and Yellow 

 

YES Yellow not gold as packers fans call it !

Steerls is far darker shade of yellow almost gold tone !

the only thing packers have is their QB #  which is 12 and was worn by quite a few winners in superbowls also a 4 time loser wore # 12  Jim kelly  but still was voted into HOF !

SO Thats it #7 vs # 12  o yeah #7 was Elawys number also !

 




good stats mate your incredibly persuasive for people to take Steelers and only Steelers
 
 
Banned
Participation Meter
Joined: Dec, 2010
Posts: 2401
Posted: #125
when was the last time we got overtime in a superbowl game?
All Forums | NFL Betting Forum
About Us
Contact Us
Careers
Our Team
Brand
Testimonials
Betting Guides
Sportsbook Reviews
Sports Betting News
Podcasts
Responsible Gaming
Betting Sites
Canada Betting Sites
Canada Casinos
Best Betting Apps
Contests
Streak Survivor
King of Covers
Office Pools
The Covers community has
810,221
lifetime members worldwide
Covers 30 Years Logo Established in 1995,
Covers is the world
leader in sports
betting information.
Site Map Help Privacy Terms of Service youtube logo facebook logo twitter logo instagram logo linkedin logo google news logo
Covers is verified safe by: Evalon Logo GPWA Logo GDPR Logo GeoTrust Logo Evalon Logo
Copyright © 1995 - 2026 CS Media Limited All Rights Reserved.

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.