Home dogs...11-3 ats

Teams in NFL Wild Card round contests playing off a straight up season ending loss as a favorite tend to bounce back up off the carpet, going 30-15-1 ats. (New Orleans, Kansas City)

Very well put!! and Iwould like to add
-You don't suppose the hawks will be sick and tired of hearing by game day the following.
1-they don't belong!
2-no 7-9 team should be in the playoffs when 10-6 teams were left out. revamp the system-
3-They are a bd team in a bad division.
4- they have no quality wins this year
5-they are a 10 1/2 point home underdog--trust me they know the spread
6-they don't have a chance and will get blown out
I think they will have the mond set of smash them in the mouth from start to finish. 60 minutes of smash mouth football.
ps-you think sharps will be laying 10 1/2 --not a chance!!!---think sharps will pounce on hawks on game day---take 10 1/2 now
Very well put!! and Iwould like to add
-You don't suppose the hawks will be sick and tired of hearing by game day the following.
1-they don't belong!
2-no 7-9 team should be in the playoffs when 10-6 teams were left out. revamp the system-
3-They are a bd team in a bad division.
4- they have no quality wins this year
5-they are a 10 1/2 point home underdog--trust me they know the spread
6-they don't have a chance and will get blown out
I think they will have the mond set of smash them in the mouth from start to finish. 60 minutes of smash mouth football.
ps-you think sharps will be laying 10 1/2 --not a chance!!!---think sharps will pounce on hawks on game day---take 10 1/2 now
One honedog will cover & the other will not.
One honedog will cover & the other will not.
ps-you think sharps will be laying 10 1/2 --not a chance!!!---think sharps will pounce on hawks on game day---take 10 1/2 now
Sharps already pounced on the Saints -9.5 and -10 and most won't be interested in the Seahawks on Saturday unless they've deluded themselves into believing this shitty team can somehow will itself to a competitive performance using the "Nobody believes in us!" card..
ps-you think sharps will be laying 10 1/2 --not a chance!!!---think sharps will pounce on hawks on game day---take 10 1/2 now
Sharps already pounced on the Saints -9.5 and -10 and most won't be interested in the Seahawks on Saturday unless they've deluded themselves into believing this shitty team can somehow will itself to a competitive performance using the "Nobody believes in us!" card..
When a handicapper offers this as his #1 reason for a team covering a spread, you know the rest of what you're about to read isn't going to be convincing, either.
When a handicapper offers this as his #1 reason for a team covering a spread, you know the rest of what you're about to read isn't going to be convincing, either.
Wait, the Seahawks play in a loud stadium? And this loudness has aided them in the past? Holy shit, this is all brand new information!! I hope the bookies aren't reading this or else they'll quickly adjust this line down to +7.
I'm being a smartass, of course, but only to show that using common knowledge to make your case about a game is unhelpful in handicapping. The whole world knows that the Seahawks play in a loud stadium and that the loudness gives them an edge over visiting teams. The oddsmakers know this, too, which means they account for it in every line they make involving a Seahawks home game.
Wait, the Seahawks play in a loud stadium? And this loudness has aided them in the past? Holy shit, this is all brand new information!! I hope the bookies aren't reading this or else they'll quickly adjust this line down to +7.
I'm being a smartass, of course, but only to show that using common knowledge to make your case about a game is unhelpful in handicapping. The whole world knows that the Seahawks play in a loud stadium and that the loudness gives them an edge over visiting teams. The oddsmakers know this, too, which means they account for it in every line they make involving a Seahawks home game.
Everyone knows this, too, and it means nothing.
Everyone knows this, too, and it means nothing.
Yikes, you already covered the meaningless "anything is possible" angle in reason #1, and here in reason #3 you're using it again. This is more than a little desperate.
Yikes, you already covered the meaningless "anything is possible" angle in reason #1, and here in reason #3 you're using it again. This is more than a little desperate.
I absolutely HATE to hear you say youre a fan!!!
I LOVED all of the points that you brought up and I do think the Seahawks "could" cover this game, but its just hard to "trust" and/or "follow" someone who is a 'Hawks fan here... The Saints are not a 'great' road team and the Hawks are traditionally a 'good' home team but this Seattle team has been pretty bad all season long! I LOVED reading your writeup and I LOVED reading your points, I just HATED reading that youre actually a Seahawks fan bc it "taints" your entire point of view!!
.... with all that said, I still am beginning to view the Seahawks as "the play" here but i just wish you were a neutral standpoint so I could weigh your opinion more heavily!
Best of Luck to you my Friend!!!
I absolutely HATE to hear you say youre a fan!!!
I LOVED all of the points that you brought up and I do think the Seahawks "could" cover this game, but its just hard to "trust" and/or "follow" someone who is a 'Hawks fan here... The Saints are not a 'great' road team and the Hawks are traditionally a 'good' home team but this Seattle team has been pretty bad all season long! I LOVED reading your writeup and I LOVED reading your points, I just HATED reading that youre actually a Seahawks fan bc it "taints" your entire point of view!!
.... with all that said, I still am beginning to view the Seahawks as "the play" here but i just wish you were a neutral standpoint so I could weigh your opinion more heavily!
Best of Luck to you my Friend!!!
Give us a break. No, they didn't. They didn't cover the spread for the game, 1st quarter, 2nd quarter, 3rd quarter, 1st half, or 2nd half. They only won the 4th quarter, 3-0, by which point the Saints already had them put away, 34-16. Additionally, they had fewer first downs, fewer rushing yards, fewer passing yards, held the ball for 7.5 minutes less than the Saints, and were flagged for more than twice as many penalties as the Saints. New Orleans muffed a snap on an extra point and also missed a chip shot field goal and still the Seahawks couldn't cover the 11.5 points.
Give us a break. No, they didn't. They didn't cover the spread for the game, 1st quarter, 2nd quarter, 3rd quarter, 1st half, or 2nd half. They only won the 4th quarter, 3-0, by which point the Saints already had them put away, 34-16. Additionally, they had fewer first downs, fewer rushing yards, fewer passing yards, held the ball for 7.5 minutes less than the Saints, and were flagged for more than twice as many penalties as the Saints. New Orleans muffed a snap on an extra point and also missed a chip shot field goal and still the Seahawks couldn't cover the 11.5 points.
Come on now, what kind of laughable hindsight is that? But I suppose I can't disagree entirely. If the Seahawks hadn't sucked quite as hard that afternoon, they might not have lost by as many points as they did. Yes, makes sense!
Come on now, what kind of laughable hindsight is that? But I suppose I can't disagree entirely. If the Seahawks hadn't sucked quite as hard that afternoon, they might not have lost by as many points as they did. Yes, makes sense!
That's a lazy assumption on your part, as well as an incorrect one. I'll prove it.
Last year, the Cowboys shutout the Eagles on the last day of the regular season, 24-0. Six days later, they hosted them again at Cowboys Stadium and won, 34-14.
Two years ago, the Ravens beat the Dolphins in Miami, 27-13. They met again in Miami in the wildcard round and the Ravens pounded them again, 27-9.
In 2005, the Steelers beat the Bengals in Cincinnati, 27-13. The Steelers returned to Cincinnati in the wild card round and beat them again, 31-17.
In 2004, the Eagles beat the Vikings in Philadelphia, 27-16. They hosted them again in the playoffs and beat them by nearly the same score, 27-14.
Also in 2004, the Falcons blew out the Rams in the Georgis Dome, 34-17. The Rams came back to the Georgia Dome for the divisional round of the playoffs and got drubbed even worse, 47-17.
I think you get the picture. It's not uncommon for one team to deliver a pair of double-digit beatings in the same season to another team, one in the regular season and the other in the postseason.
That's a lazy assumption on your part, as well as an incorrect one. I'll prove it.
Last year, the Cowboys shutout the Eagles on the last day of the regular season, 24-0. Six days later, they hosted them again at Cowboys Stadium and won, 34-14.
Two years ago, the Ravens beat the Dolphins in Miami, 27-13. They met again in Miami in the wildcard round and the Ravens pounded them again, 27-9.
In 2005, the Steelers beat the Bengals in Cincinnati, 27-13. The Steelers returned to Cincinnati in the wild card round and beat them again, 31-17.
In 2004, the Eagles beat the Vikings in Philadelphia, 27-16. They hosted them again in the playoffs and beat them by nearly the same score, 27-14.
Also in 2004, the Falcons blew out the Rams in the Georgis Dome, 34-17. The Rams came back to the Georgia Dome for the divisional round of the playoffs and got drubbed even worse, 47-17.
I think you get the picture. It's not uncommon for one team to deliver a pair of double-digit beatings in the same season to another team, one in the regular season and the other in the postseason.
But they didn't punch it in, so you have no point here.
But they didn't punch it in, so you have no point here.
(yawn)
Seahawks backers sure are overusing the word "if" this week, aren't they?
(yawn)
Seahawks backers sure are overusing the word "if" this week, aren't they?
Here are some stats to highlight how the Hawks offense performed in their individual matchups against the Saints personnel..
Hasselbeck: 32 for 44, 366 yards, 1 touchdown, 0 turnovers.
OL pass blocking: 0 sacks given up.
BMW: 6 catches for 100 yards on 7 targets.
Lynch: 5.1 ypc on 7 carries, 2 lost fumbles.
In other words, a prediction of Seattle scoring just 7 points isn't very logical
Not much of what you're trying to sell is very logical. So who suggested that Seattle would only score 7 points on Saturday? Huh? Where'd that come from?
Here are some stats to highlight how the Hawks offense performed in their individual matchups against the Saints personnel..
Hasselbeck: 32 for 44, 366 yards, 1 touchdown, 0 turnovers.
OL pass blocking: 0 sacks given up.
BMW: 6 catches for 100 yards on 7 targets.
Lynch: 5.1 ypc on 7 carries, 2 lost fumbles.
In other words, a prediction of Seattle scoring just 7 points isn't very logical
Not much of what you're trying to sell is very logical. So who suggested that Seattle would only score 7 points on Saturday? Huh? Where'd that come from?
Here are some stats to highlight how the Hawks offense performed in their individual matchups against the Saints personnel..
Hasselbeck: 32 for 44, 366 yards, 1 touchdown, 0 turnovers.
OL pass blocking: 0 sacks given up.
BMW: 6 catches for 100 yards on 7 targets.
Lynch: 5.1 ypc on 7 carries, 2 lost fumbles.
In other words, a prediction of Seattle scoring just 7 points isn't very logical because if you look at the last meeting it's clear that they obviously aren't overmatched by the Saints D.
Right. They're overmatched by the Saints O, which scored five touchdowns on them that day.
Here are some stats to highlight how the Hawks offense performed in their individual matchups against the Saints personnel..
Hasselbeck: 32 for 44, 366 yards, 1 touchdown, 0 turnovers.
OL pass blocking: 0 sacks given up.
BMW: 6 catches for 100 yards on 7 targets.
Lynch: 5.1 ypc on 7 carries, 2 lost fumbles.
In other words, a prediction of Seattle scoring just 7 points isn't very logical because if you look at the last meeting it's clear that they obviously aren't overmatched by the Saints D.
Right. They're overmatched by the Saints O, which scored five touchdowns on them that day.
-Their only touchdown (a two-yard pass to Ben Obomanu) cut the lead to 21-13 and was immediately responded by Brees and Colston on a beautiful play. To cut it one score and then have that TD erased IMMEDIATELY is a huge blow mentally and momentum-wise.
Indeed it was a huge blow. Alas, things like that happen all too often to teams that stink.
-Their only touchdown (a two-yard pass to Ben Obomanu) cut the lead to 21-13 and was immediately responded by Brees and Colston on a beautiful play. To cut it one score and then have that TD erased IMMEDIATELY is a huge blow mentally and momentum-wise.
Indeed it was a huge blow. Alas, things like that happen all too often to teams that stink.
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.