Unders are 81-73 from 1997-2006 ...and going with covers data in 2007 ...
Unders went 11-5 last year in Week 1....... for a total of
92-78( 54 % ) since 1997
Week 1 Overs between 40-44.5 are 35-21 ( 62.5 % )
On extreme Week 1 Totals (35 or less, 45 or higher), UNDER’s have gone 31-13 for 70.4%
Last year 4-0
2 YEAR TRENDS : Bet over on any total 37 or less, bet under on any total 51 orhigher.
2006-07 record 29-22 57% 2007-08 record 27-17 61%
( For all its worth the only game set > 35 but < 37 last year went Over ...The only line set under 35 went under and the only line set over 51 went under as well )
Based on the Overs run when the total is between 40-44.5 ( 62.5 % ) and the extreme total stat here are the plays :
Dallas-Clev Under
GB-Minn Under
Cinci-Balt Under
Buff-Seattle Under
Jax-Tenn Neutral
NYJets-Miami Neutral
Detroit-Atlanta Over
NE-KC Over
Pitt-Hou Over
NO-TB Over
Phil-Stl Over
SD-Caro Over
Ariz-SF Over
Indi - Chi Over
Den-Oak Over
Last year ( 11-5 Unders ) 8 games were set between 40-44.5 , going 5-3 Unders , leaving the remainder of the totals going 6-2 to the under ...
What do you think of the rule changes affecting the totals? For example would not the removing of the force out rule allow the defense to stop more throws to the outside and endzone. It effectively reduces the field size by two to three feet all the way around. In my mind I see this lowering the totals forcing at least a few more field goals then touchdowns.......
Unders are 81-73 from 1997-2006 ...and going with covers data in 2007 ...
Unders went 11-5 last year in Week 1....... for a total of
92-78( 54 % ) since 1997
Week 1 Overs between 40-44.5 are 35-21 ( 62.5 % )
On extreme Week 1 Totals (35 or less, 45 or higher), UNDER’s have gone 31-13 for 70.4%
Last year 4-0
2 YEAR TRENDS : Bet over on any total 37 or less, bet under on any total 51 orhigher.
2006-07 record 29-22 57% 2007-08 record 27-17 61%
( For all its worth the only game set > 35 but < 37 last year went Over ...The only line set under 35 went under and the only line set over 51 went under as well )
Based on the Overs run when the total is between 40-44.5 ( 62.5 % ) and the extreme total stat here are the plays :
Dallas-Clev Under
GB-Minn Under
Cinci-Balt Under
Buff-Seattle Under
Jax-Tenn Neutral
NYJets-Miami Neutral
Detroit-Atlanta Over
NE-KC Over
Pitt-Hou Over
NO-TB Over
Phil-Stl Over
SD-Caro Over
Ariz-SF Over
Indi - Chi Over
Den-Oak Over
Last year ( 11-5 Unders ) 8 games were set between 40-44.5 , going 5-3 Unders , leaving the remainder of the totals going 6-2 to the under ...
What do you think of the rule changes affecting the totals? For example would not the removing of the force out rule allow the defense to stop more throws to the outside and endzone. It effectively reduces the field size by two to three feet all the way around. In my mind I see this lowering the totals forcing at least a few more field goals then touchdowns.......
Robertofiory: Thanks for answering my question above.
Anyway, I don't see how Carolina can be in your underdog trend pick of the week after those trends you gave about sand diego!
he Chargers were 14-5 ATS last season, including 8-1 at home, including playoffs. …
San Diego has covered its last nine, and 13 of its previous 15, games, including playoffs, and is 23-9-1ATS in its last 33 regular-season home games. … The Chargers have
covered their last 12 games as a favorite of between 7.5 and 10 points
and have covered eight of their last 10 season-opening games.
So all that vs Delholmme at QB is 25-5 as a dog.. I don't understand your philosophies
Robertofiory: Thanks for answering my question above.
Anyway, I don't see how Carolina can be in your underdog trend pick of the week after those trends you gave about sand diego!
he Chargers were 14-5 ATS last season, including 8-1 at home, including playoffs. …
San Diego has covered its last nine, and 13 of its previous 15, games, including playoffs, and is 23-9-1ATS in its last 33 regular-season home games. … The Chargers have
covered their last 12 games as a favorite of between 7.5 and 10 points
and have covered eight of their last 10 season-opening games.
So all that vs Delholmme at QB is 25-5 as a dog.. I don't understand your philosophies
Robertofiory: Thanks for answering my question above.
Anyway, I don't see how Carolina can be in your underdog trend pick of the week after those trends you gave about sand diego!
the Chargers were 14-5 ATS last season, including 8-1 at home, including playoffs. … San Diego has covered its last nine, and 13 of its previous 15, games, including playoffs, and is 23-9-1ATS in its last 33 regular-season home games. … The Chargers have covered their last 12 games as a favorite of between 7.5 and 10 points and have covered eight of their last 10 season-opening games.
So all that vs Delholmme at QB is 25-5 as a dog.. I don't understand your philosophies
Fair enough, you're right ..they should be out of contention ...
As for the question >>>
How the heck are favorites and home teams the exact same statistic? I don't think that can be possible over a 5 year span!
you're right again ...Here is the text from Kramer @ cappers mall >>>
" As you get ready for week 1 of NFL , here are some "angles" to consider - These are a little different from trends ...
FROM 2000-2005 :
NFL home teams in Week 1 are just 31-42-7 ATS (42 percent). This of course implies that roadies are a 58 percent winning proposition during this time.
The public at large has a tendency to overvalue home teams and this is especially true in Week 1 when there is no current season data to make predictions from.
Consequently, the oddsmakers almost surely shade the home teams, by and large making road teams the choice for the value player. Home favorites indeed are just 21-32-3 ATS (40 percent) in the first week of NFL action since 1999-2004
Again, mid-range favorites are similarly the poorest performers when we look at home teams.
Consider that home teams priced between –3 1/2 and –6 1/2 have stumbled to a 6-13 ATS (32 percent) mark in Week 1 games those past five seasons
it is important to note some of the basics regarding home and road, favorite and dog, as well as totals performance.
In all, over the last 10 years, (1997-2006) road teams hold a 78-71 ATS edge for 52.3%. favorites are 69-79 (46.6%),
and under plays have converted at a 81-73 mark in Week 1 of the NFL season. ( 1997 - 2006) "
Robertofiory: Thanks for answering my question above.
Anyway, I don't see how Carolina can be in your underdog trend pick of the week after those trends you gave about sand diego!
the Chargers were 14-5 ATS last season, including 8-1 at home, including playoffs. … San Diego has covered its last nine, and 13 of its previous 15, games, including playoffs, and is 23-9-1ATS in its last 33 regular-season home games. … The Chargers have covered their last 12 games as a favorite of between 7.5 and 10 points and have covered eight of their last 10 season-opening games.
So all that vs Delholmme at QB is 25-5 as a dog.. I don't understand your philosophies
Fair enough, you're right ..they should be out of contention ...
As for the question >>>
How the heck are favorites and home teams the exact same statistic? I don't think that can be possible over a 5 year span!
you're right again ...Here is the text from Kramer @ cappers mall >>>
" As you get ready for week 1 of NFL , here are some "angles" to consider - These are a little different from trends ...
FROM 2000-2005 :
NFL home teams in Week 1 are just 31-42-7 ATS (42 percent). This of course implies that roadies are a 58 percent winning proposition during this time.
The public at large has a tendency to overvalue home teams and this is especially true in Week 1 when there is no current season data to make predictions from.
Consequently, the oddsmakers almost surely shade the home teams, by and large making road teams the choice for the value player. Home favorites indeed are just 21-32-3 ATS (40 percent) in the first week of NFL action since 1999-2004
Again, mid-range favorites are similarly the poorest performers when we look at home teams.
Consider that home teams priced between –3 1/2 and –6 1/2 have stumbled to a 6-13 ATS (32 percent) mark in Week 1 games those past five seasons
it is important to note some of the basics regarding home and road, favorite and dog, as well as totals performance.
In all, over the last 10 years, (1997-2006) road teams hold a 78-71 ATS edge for 52.3%. favorites are 69-79 (46.6%),
and under plays have converted at a 81-73 mark in Week 1 of the NFL season. ( 1997 - 2006) "
What do you think of the rule changes affecting the totals? For example would not the removing of the force out rule allow the defense to stop more throws to the outside and endzone. It effectively reduces the field size by two to three feet all the way around. In my mind I see this lowering the totals forcing at least a few more field goals then touchdowns.......
Such changes should be reflected in the totals line adjusted by the oddsmakers .Though , it might take some time to determine the difference . It should affect the better passing teams more so than the run oriented teams , but you never know if a call out of bounds that was normally called a force out on a third down play doesn't become points for the opposition . Quarterbacks won't shy away from throwing to the sidelines when the situation dictates , such as the may be when time is an issue or the receiver is breaking towards the sideline and it must be thrown away from defender .
Here is one article with coaches comments on the subject ...
On my first stop on my first trip around the AFC South, I asked Tony Dungy about the abolition of the force out-rule judgment. Receivers have to get both feet down in bounds, or passes will be ruled incomplete.
A piece of Dungy's answer made my ears perk up: "I think it'll change where you throw the ball, definitely."
"I think it will be bigger for the offense, just having to understand that some of those jump balls you threw on the sideline and the things right on the boundary may not be completions this year," Dungy said. "But I like the rule. I think it will be much easier to officiate consistently. And you won't have those plays that get reviewed or maybe don't get reviewed -- is it a force out? Isn't it? What constitutes that? I think everyone knows now you have to get two feet down and that will make it easier."
I was surprised that he suggested the rule change could actually impact some play calls, and left eager to see what the other three coaches had to say on the subject.
But Gary Kubiak, Jeff Fisher and Jack Del Rio all lined up on the other side. Each said he don't envision the change influencing any decisions regarding pass plays.
Kubiak: "I don't see how much it's going to change. It takes a judgment call out of the game. I think they are trying to make it pretty concrete. We'll see. I think it's one of those things where one year there may be zero that it affected and the next year there may be 15 because you changed the rule, so let's wait and see."
Del Rio: "It's a handful of plays over the course of the year. I think it's going to be one of those rules that's going to make a whole lot of sense. We're going to have less confusion. It's pretty clean. You either get two down or you don't get two down. You either get two down and possess the ball or not... As long as there is not a catch and then tackle and carry, he's got to get his feet down. No I don't think it changes the game of football at all as we know it."
Fisher: "I think it's a good rule. We [on the competition committee] went back and looked at dozens of plays that were ruled force outs, half of them were and half of them weren't. We went back and looked at dozens that were not ruled force outs, half of them were and half of them weren't. It's a hard play to officiate. So we just eliminated it. You either get the feet in or your don't. It's a reward for a good play if you can get him out of bounds. But there is also an element of forward progress involved, so if the guy is five yards from the boundary and makes the catch, you essentially stop his progress, it's going to be ruled a catch. You're not going to have a situation where you take a guy from here and run him and dump him out of bounds."
Among players, defensive backs certainly feel like a rule alteration has finally gone their way.
"I think it's a good rule," injured Houston cornerback Dunta Robinson said. "A lot of things have gone against us as DBs in the past. To get one of these rules on our side is a good thing. If he's in the air, I'm going, I'm pushing him out, I'm doing everything I can."
What do you think of the rule changes affecting the totals? For example would not the removing of the force out rule allow the defense to stop more throws to the outside and endzone. It effectively reduces the field size by two to three feet all the way around. In my mind I see this lowering the totals forcing at least a few more field goals then touchdowns.......
Such changes should be reflected in the totals line adjusted by the oddsmakers .Though , it might take some time to determine the difference . It should affect the better passing teams more so than the run oriented teams , but you never know if a call out of bounds that was normally called a force out on a third down play doesn't become points for the opposition . Quarterbacks won't shy away from throwing to the sidelines when the situation dictates , such as the may be when time is an issue or the receiver is breaking towards the sideline and it must be thrown away from defender .
Here is one article with coaches comments on the subject ...
On my first stop on my first trip around the AFC South, I asked Tony Dungy about the abolition of the force out-rule judgment. Receivers have to get both feet down in bounds, or passes will be ruled incomplete.
A piece of Dungy's answer made my ears perk up: "I think it'll change where you throw the ball, definitely."
"I think it will be bigger for the offense, just having to understand that some of those jump balls you threw on the sideline and the things right on the boundary may not be completions this year," Dungy said. "But I like the rule. I think it will be much easier to officiate consistently. And you won't have those plays that get reviewed or maybe don't get reviewed -- is it a force out? Isn't it? What constitutes that? I think everyone knows now you have to get two feet down and that will make it easier."
I was surprised that he suggested the rule change could actually impact some play calls, and left eager to see what the other three coaches had to say on the subject.
But Gary Kubiak, Jeff Fisher and Jack Del Rio all lined up on the other side. Each said he don't envision the change influencing any decisions regarding pass plays.
Kubiak: "I don't see how much it's going to change. It takes a judgment call out of the game. I think they are trying to make it pretty concrete. We'll see. I think it's one of those things where one year there may be zero that it affected and the next year there may be 15 because you changed the rule, so let's wait and see."
Del Rio: "It's a handful of plays over the course of the year. I think it's going to be one of those rules that's going to make a whole lot of sense. We're going to have less confusion. It's pretty clean. You either get two down or you don't get two down. You either get two down and possess the ball or not... As long as there is not a catch and then tackle and carry, he's got to get his feet down. No I don't think it changes the game of football at all as we know it."
Fisher: "I think it's a good rule. We [on the competition committee] went back and looked at dozens of plays that were ruled force outs, half of them were and half of them weren't. We went back and looked at dozens that were not ruled force outs, half of them were and half of them weren't. It's a hard play to officiate. So we just eliminated it. You either get the feet in or your don't. It's a reward for a good play if you can get him out of bounds. But there is also an element of forward progress involved, so if the guy is five yards from the boundary and makes the catch, you essentially stop his progress, it's going to be ruled a catch. You're not going to have a situation where you take a guy from here and run him and dump him out of bounds."
Among players, defensive backs certainly feel like a rule alteration has finally gone their way.
"I think it's a good rule," injured Houston cornerback Dunta Robinson said. "A lot of things have gone against us as DBs in the past. To get one of these rules on our side is a good thing. If he's in the air, I'm going, I'm pushing him out, I'm doing everything I can."
i was thinking KC all day... i mean, 16 points is alot, in my books, thats the public play. i've been in a bad luck streak forever. i love this bet so much. im guessing pats will cover if i place the bet with KC. something to think about.
i was thinking KC all day... i mean, 16 points is alot, in my books, thats the public play. i've been in a bad luck streak forever. i love this bet so much. im guessing pats will cover if i place the bet with KC. something to think about.
i love all them plays. the cleveland plays scares me alittle , but im all over my home town team houston, and following u on kansas city. good luck will make final decision on sunday
i love all them plays. the cleveland plays scares me alittle , but im all over my home town team houston, and following u on kansas city. good luck will make final decision on sunday
Thank you RobertoFiory. I am not trying to nit-pick, it's just I was paying close details to your information because Trends is a big factor for me when making my choices, I just wanted to be sure the information is concrete.
Thank you again.. hopefully this can ge a good season.. Good luck to you
Thank you RobertoFiory. I am not trying to nit-pick, it's just I was paying close details to your information because Trends is a big factor for me when making my choices, I just wanted to be sure the information is concrete.
Thank you again.. hopefully this can ge a good season.. Good luck to you
Roberto as i have known you for years, and remember from 2 years ago you consistently bet against the patriots. One is because they have usually been favored heavily either home or away. However you consistently lose, and end result of you leaving covers half way through last season. You seem to have a personal vendetta against new england, and therefore i would advise to any tailers that you are betting with your heart and not your head when u consistently bet against them. Whether it be the jacksonville game from 2 years ago when new england covered, or any of the first 8 games last year that you bet against them.
Roberto as i have known you for years, and remember from 2 years ago you consistently bet against the patriots. One is because they have usually been favored heavily either home or away. However you consistently lose, and end result of you leaving covers half way through last season. You seem to have a personal vendetta against new england, and therefore i would advise to any tailers that you are betting with your heart and not your head when u consistently bet against them. Whether it be the jacksonville game from 2 years ago when new england covered, or any of the first 8 games last year that you bet against them.
Roberto as i have known you for years, and remember from 2 years ago you consistently bet against the patriots. One is because they have usually been favored heavily either home or away. However you consistently lose, and end result of you leaving covers half way through last season. You seem to have a personal vendetta against new england, and therefore i would advise to any tailers that you are betting with your heart and not your head when u consistently bet against them. Whether it be the jacksonville game from 2 years ago when new england covered, or any of the first 8 games last year that you bet against them.
do you have an exact record of his bets against or for patriots games.? didint think so. look he is basically saying the superbowl winner does not cover on opening weekend of the following year at a high percentage. is that a stupid bet? not actually its a great bet. new england's lines have been skewed since week 4 of last year. you would agree with me correct. how many games have they covered since vegas has skewed the lines? i believe 5 games outta of 15. thats is not a high percentage. i RECOMMEND u quick betting on the guy wearing a short sleeve hoodie and start lookin the other way. QUIT losing YOUR money on this team. they have been making me rich since BETTORS like yourself love betting on new england. goodl uck though opening kickoff in less than 5 hours
Roberto as i have known you for years, and remember from 2 years ago you consistently bet against the patriots. One is because they have usually been favored heavily either home or away. However you consistently lose, and end result of you leaving covers half way through last season. You seem to have a personal vendetta against new england, and therefore i would advise to any tailers that you are betting with your heart and not your head when u consistently bet against them. Whether it be the jacksonville game from 2 years ago when new england covered, or any of the first 8 games last year that you bet against them.
do you have an exact record of his bets against or for patriots games.? didint think so. look he is basically saying the superbowl winner does not cover on opening weekend of the following year at a high percentage. is that a stupid bet? not actually its a great bet. new england's lines have been skewed since week 4 of last year. you would agree with me correct. how many games have they covered since vegas has skewed the lines? i believe 5 games outta of 15. thats is not a high percentage. i RECOMMEND u quick betting on the guy wearing a short sleeve hoodie and start lookin the other way. QUIT losing YOUR money on this team. they have been making me rich since BETTORS like yourself love betting on new england. goodl uck though opening kickoff in less than 5 hours
It is great to see you back. Win or lose you've got the best angles. Just get with the money management as well as a sports exchange (assuming you aren't already there) as opposed to a bookie and I think you'd be riding a Rolls (assuming you aren't already). Best wishes and hope to see a lot more of your posts.
It is great to see you back. Win or lose you've got the best angles. Just get with the money management as well as a sports exchange (assuming you aren't already there) as opposed to a bookie and I think you'd be riding a Rolls (assuming you aren't already). Best wishes and hope to see a lot more of your posts.
do you have an exact record of his bets against or for patriots games.? didint think so. look he is basically saying the superbowl winner does not cover on opening weekend of the following year at a high percentage. is that a stupid bet? not actually its a great bet. new england's lines have been skewed since week 4 of last year. you would agree with me correct. how many games have they covered since vegas has skewed the lines? i believe 5 games outta of 15. thats is not a high percentage. i RECOMMEND u quick betting on the guy wearing a short sleeve hoodie and start lookin the other way. QUIT losing YOUR money on this team. they have been making me rich since BETTORS like yourself love betting on new england. goodl uck though opening kickoff in less than 5 hours
what website offers quick betting, sounds interesting?.... is that like ok on your mark, get set, go... and see who can finalize there wagers the fastest???.... because i would bet with the wireless mouse i could have a distinct advantage
do you have an exact record of his bets against or for patriots games.? didint think so. look he is basically saying the superbowl winner does not cover on opening weekend of the following year at a high percentage. is that a stupid bet? not actually its a great bet. new england's lines have been skewed since week 4 of last year. you would agree with me correct. how many games have they covered since vegas has skewed the lines? i believe 5 games outta of 15. thats is not a high percentage. i RECOMMEND u quick betting on the guy wearing a short sleeve hoodie and start lookin the other way. QUIT losing YOUR money on this team. they have been making me rich since BETTORS like yourself love betting on new england. goodl uck though opening kickoff in less than 5 hours
what website offers quick betting, sounds interesting?.... is that like ok on your mark, get set, go... and see who can finalize there wagers the fastest???.... because i would bet with the wireless mouse i could have a distinct advantage
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.