PR II went 9-2 when a team should have won the game by 4 pts or more. This past week 5.
3-0 when under 4 pts.
The 2 losers were KC should have won by 5.49 over Jags and the Browns who should of won by 7.44.
KC out gained Jags by over 100 yards and won ave per play by over 1 yard and then on top of that won the TO battle.
How could they have lost ?
I really doubt many teams would lose under those circumstances.
Looking at the Lions game with Lions off near regression and still winning ATS VS Bengals I'd have to lean KC with being off a game they should have won.
Lions have been a spread covering machine with Coach Cambell and Goff.....except on the road on grass which is what KC has.
This from you tube.
Mahomes has been very good under 3 pt favorite.
This info supports my near-regression on Lions.
To me play has to be.... as much as I don't like it with my 2 futures plays with KC UNDER wins......on KC or no play.
2
To remove first post, remove entire topic.
season --- 9-12, lost 3.3 units
PR II went 9-2 when a team should have won the game by 4 pts or more. This past week 5.
3-0 when under 4 pts.
The 2 losers were KC should have won by 5.49 over Jags and the Browns who should of won by 7.44.
KC out gained Jags by over 100 yards and won ave per play by over 1 yard and then on top of that won the TO battle.
How could they have lost ?
I really doubt many teams would lose under those circumstances.
Looking at the Lions game with Lions off near regression and still winning ATS VS Bengals I'd have to lean KC with being off a game they should have won.
Lions have been a spread covering machine with Coach Cambell and Goff.....except on the road on grass which is what KC has.
This from you tube.
Mahomes has been very good under 3 pt favorite.
This info supports my near-regression on Lions.
To me play has to be.... as much as I don't like it with my 2 futures plays with KC UNDER wins......on KC or no play.
Doing pretty well right now with both Colts and Jags sitting a-top the AFC . Crazy but true.
Packers struggling past 2 games but I think they had some injuries likely affected them.
With Bengals on deck will that be the perfect game to get their stuff together ?
I seen some good cappers on you tube last week said Bengals were the right play VS lions although they did not make a play.
But now they have turned on this Bengals after their performance saying the team is patheticly terrible and to never bet them.
A sign Bengals have reached the bottom ?
Interesting they did the same thing last week With Titans and golly gee Titans got it done.
I call these switch games. Incredibly I have seen a you tube capper talk about this exact same thing, switch games. Not sure he called it that but that is what he was talking about.
Plays coming up soon.
Only 1 play with my other system, 2 plays ended up being byes.
but 4 total plays. The bounce factor is roar'in it's head this week.
1
Top 3 Largest Performers Week 1 ............
Colts, Jags, Packers
Doing pretty well right now with both Colts and Jags sitting a-top the AFC . Crazy but true.
Packers struggling past 2 games but I think they had some injuries likely affected them.
With Bengals on deck will that be the perfect game to get their stuff together ?
I seen some good cappers on you tube last week said Bengals were the right play VS lions although they did not make a play.
But now they have turned on this Bengals after their performance saying the team is patheticly terrible and to never bet them.
A sign Bengals have reached the bottom ?
Interesting they did the same thing last week With Titans and golly gee Titans got it done.
I call these switch games. Incredibly I have seen a you tube capper talk about this exact same thing, switch games. Not sure he called it that but that is what he was talking about.
Plays coming up soon.
Only 1 play with my other system, 2 plays ended up being byes.
but 4 total plays. The bounce factor is roar'in it's head this week.
KC and Arizona snatched defeat from the jaws of victory. Eagles were reminding me of the Vikings of last year with all the 1 score wins with Darnold who is doing it again in Seattle. How about Daniel Jones? A few interesting stories early in the year.
0
@theclaw
BOL this week
KC and Arizona snatched defeat from the jaws of victory. Eagles were reminding me of the Vikings of last year with all the 1 score wins with Darnold who is doing it again in Seattle. How about Daniel Jones? A few interesting stories early in the year.
@theclaw BOL this week KC and Arizona snatched defeat from the jaws of victory. Eagles were reminding me of the Vikings of last year with all the 1 score wins with Darnold who is doing it again in Seattle. How about Daniel Jones? A few interesting stories early in the year.
Yep .............
Both Darnold and Geno were terrible with the Jets but both did well with Seattle. Crazy how bad Jets front office must be.
0
Quote Originally Posted by sportschat:
@theclaw BOL this week KC and Arizona snatched defeat from the jaws of victory. Eagles were reminding me of the Vikings of last year with all the 1 score wins with Darnold who is doing it again in Seattle. How about Daniel Jones? A few interesting stories early in the year.
Yep .............
Both Darnold and Geno were terrible with the Jets but both did well with Seattle. Crazy how bad Jets front office must be.
He did outplay Hurts in Passer Rating by a small amount although Hurt's had a little better completion % and ave per pass attempt but it was Dart with no Int's while Hurts had 1 that was the difference in Passer Rating.
Giants had more yards but Eagles had a higher ave per play.
Giants with 0 TO's and they won TO battle by 2. And Giants pounded the Eagles in the run game.
That was the difference according to PR II with Giants should of won by 11.22 pts.
2
Wow, Dart is the man ............
He did outplay Hurts in Passer Rating by a small amount although Hurt's had a little better completion % and ave per pass attempt but it was Dart with no Int's while Hurts had 1 that was the difference in Passer Rating.
Giants had more yards but Eagles had a higher ave per play.
Giants with 0 TO's and they won TO battle by 2. And Giants pounded the Eagles in the run game.
That was the difference according to PR II with Giants should of won by 11.22 pts.
Rare that I disagree with you, but I only like the Ravens at +7.5 at home. Ordinarily I'd be inclined to back the Bengals getting 14.5, but Flacco is a downgrade from Browning and should have a hard time fending off the Packers' pass rush.
The Raiders would have been a bounceback play for me, but they're a home favorite. Home favorites coming off a 4+ TD road loss in which they've scored fewer than 10 points are 8-21 ATS in the 17 years I've been tracking them. Those -3 to -4 are 1-10 ATS. (The ones favored by a TD or more are 4-3 ATS.)
Best of luck whatever happens.
2
Rare that I disagree with you, but I only like the Ravens at +7.5 at home. Ordinarily I'd be inclined to back the Bengals getting 14.5, but Flacco is a downgrade from Browning and should have a hard time fending off the Packers' pass rush.
The Raiders would have been a bounceback play for me, but they're a home favorite. Home favorites coming off a 4+ TD road loss in which they've scored fewer than 10 points are 8-21 ATS in the 17 years I've been tracking them. Those -3 to -4 are 1-10 ATS. (The ones favored by a TD or more are 4-3 ATS.)
What the reasoning for the Ravens? It already a tall order to win by more than 7 for an away team. I just have issues with Ravens defense. Add in they go into a bye. Kinda feels like another blowout before they can right the ship.
According to the Bounce Factor they are due a regression. Long term it is a very good spot to back a Team.
I do agree Ravens don't look good but that is how the Bounce Factor works, backing pathetic teams that should be at or near the bottom.
This is when you want to back them.
The one thing I don't like is Injuries but I have no history on them so I will back the BF when the spot comes
0
Quote Originally Posted by Ppkay:
What the reasoning for the Ravens? It already a tall order to win by more than 7 for an away team. I just have issues with Ravens defense. Add in they go into a bye. Kinda feels like another blowout before they can right the ship.
According to the Bounce Factor they are due a regression. Long term it is a very good spot to back a Team.
I do agree Ravens don't look good but that is how the Bounce Factor works, backing pathetic teams that should be at or near the bottom.
This is when you want to back them.
The one thing I don't like is Injuries but I have no history on them so I will back the BF when the spot comes
Rare that I disagree with you, but I only like the Ravens at +7.5 at home. Ordinarily I'd be inclined to back the Bengals getting 14.5, but Flacco is a downgrade from Browning and should have a hard time fending off the Packers' pass rush. The Raiders would have been a bounceback play for me, but they're a home favorite. Home favorites coming off a 4+ TD road loss in which they've scored fewer than 10 points are 8-21 ATS in the 17 years I've been tracking them. Those -3 to -4 are 1-10 ATS. (The ones favored by a TD or more are 4-3 ATS.) Best of luck whatever happens.
Good stuff ..........
Yes I do agree I'd rather see Browning then Flacco. Hopefully Flaco will be ineffective and Browning comes in and saves the day for the cover.
Flacco is not good, he got lucky when he first joined Browns and won alot of the 1 score close games.
But when the Bounce Factor comes calling I will always play it.
Maybe some day I will learn and trust when not to play it, that would be incredible if I could do that at a good rate.
As far as Raiders go, very good info you posted.
The one thing I will say is that info doesn't tell us about a team like the Raiders who are off a string of ATS losses and some other big losses.
They also lost 41-24 so how many of those 8-21 ATS teams came into that spot off these other losses?
In other words the Raiders are in a more specific spot then that trend is measuring.
Remember the BF is also a 2 game method so Raiders should regress within 2 games, it doesn't have to be the first game but will be more then not.
0
Quote Originally Posted by garbagetime:
Rare that I disagree with you, but I only like the Ravens at +7.5 at home. Ordinarily I'd be inclined to back the Bengals getting 14.5, but Flacco is a downgrade from Browning and should have a hard time fending off the Packers' pass rush. The Raiders would have been a bounceback play for me, but they're a home favorite. Home favorites coming off a 4+ TD road loss in which they've scored fewer than 10 points are 8-21 ATS in the 17 years I've been tracking them. Those -3 to -4 are 1-10 ATS. (The ones favored by a TD or more are 4-3 ATS.) Best of luck whatever happens.
Good stuff ..........
Yes I do agree I'd rather see Browning then Flacco. Hopefully Flaco will be ineffective and Browning comes in and saves the day for the cover.
Flacco is not good, he got lucky when he first joined Browns and won alot of the 1 score close games.
But when the Bounce Factor comes calling I will always play it.
Maybe some day I will learn and trust when not to play it, that would be incredible if I could do that at a good rate.
As far as Raiders go, very good info you posted.
The one thing I will say is that info doesn't tell us about a team like the Raiders who are off a string of ATS losses and some other big losses.
They also lost 41-24 so how many of those 8-21 ATS teams came into that spot off these other losses?
In other words the Raiders are in a more specific spot then that trend is measuring.
Remember the BF is also a 2 game method so Raiders should regress within 2 games, it doesn't have to be the first game but will be more then not.
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.
Hot Forum Topics
