nfl/college betting thread

[SMD Jabroni]

i have oakland as the last in a 3 game parlay.
i just need them to win this game. its a tie right now. eek.

i also put oak/minn/dal in a 3 game moneyline parlay. 10 to win 20
also did a 10 point 3 team teaser.
oak+3.5
minn+12.5
Dallas+3
12 to win 10

 

[ribbybruno]

i have oakland as the last in a 3 game parlay.
i just need them to win this game. its a tie right now. eek.

i also put oak/minn/dal in a 3 game moneyline parlay. 10 to win 20
also did a 10 point 3 team teaser.
oak+3.5
minn+12.5
Dallas+3
12 to win 10

Close call but you got there! Well done! Raiders score 17 4th quarter points.

 

[SMD Jabroni]

phew.
you covered the spread too. good job.

now lets go vikings. i am a bit scared of that bet since minnesota has been up and down recently.

 

[grilldoggy]

lasers win again

Just so I can root for the black and silver tonight -

Oakland (-6.5) Vs Houston in Mexico City - I don't see Texans containing Raiders offense if the Broncos couldn't

Yeah, I was rooting for Houston, but some guy with a laser pointer had a different idea.

 

[SMD Jabroni]

did a bunch of teasers and parlays and put titans and giants in all of them.
please don't screw me.

 

[ribbybruno]

Houston (+1.5) @ Home Vs San Diego - Texans have not lost a game at home

1 Unit

 

[OzExorcist]

I know hindsight is 20:20 and all, but I'm thinking the flaw there was probably that of all those home wins, only one (KC) was against a team in the top half of the league by DVOA... while Houston themselves rank 30th.

Or looked at another way, they were a 6-win team coming into this week but they only had a Pythagorean expectation of 3.99 wins.

They're a bad team that's gotten lucky.

 

[ribbybruno]

I know hindsight is 20:20 and all, but I'm thinking the flaw there was probably that of all those home wins, only one (KC) was against a team in the top half of the league by DVOA... while Houston themselves rank 30th.

Or looked at another way, they were a 6-win team coming into this week but they only had a Pythagorean expectation of 3.99 wins.

They're a bad team that's gotten lucky.

Yes, agreed! I made a bad bet there. There were no games I really liked and just picked one game. Dumb!

 

[smallfrie]

Green Bay is a 4-point road underdog and even though I hate Aaron Rodgers and the Packers... With their season on the line and this really is their last hope at making a move in at least the correct direction toward a wildcard. And on Monday Night Football even playing away in Philly I am going to say Green Bay will win. Philly has a weak defense and I can't see with all that is on the line this going well for them. I am betting on Green Bay. Even though it will cost me money I hope Philly wins big lol.

***Packers are 4-1 against the Eagles in their last 5 meetings***

 

[OzExorcist]

So... if I can offer a suggestion or two, there's a few things you might want to reconsider there.

First is the "season on the line" bit. You're implying that they're going to play better than they have been just because their season is on the line. Is that a real thing that can actually happen though? Do you think they were just cruising along playing at 70% effort in their recent losing streak, just waiting for their "season to be on the line" to get properly motivated?

It's a nice talking head narrative, but in reality I don't think it changes much.

Next is the bit about Philly having a weak defense. I'm... not sure where you're getting that from? They're the #1 ranked defense by DVOA. They're Massey Peabody's #6 ranked team overall. Even by less advanced metrics they've allowed the fifth-fewest points per game of any team, and the seventh-fewest yards per game.

The last bit is my favourite kind of gambler's fallacy though: GB being 4-1 in their last five against Philly.

Yes, that's technically true. They don't play in the same division though so those games happened in 2014, 2013, 2011, 2010 and 2007. There's been coaching, quarterback and a bunch of other personnel changes over that period on both sides so it's hardly relevant information.

Also, why stop at five games? I suspect it's a case of making data fit the outcome you'd already decided you wanted... because if you make it 10 games instead of five, Philly actually has a 6-4 lead. I don't think that's any more helpful to predicting the outcome of this game than the past five games, but it's interesting to think about how that cutoff was chosen...

 

[smallfrie]

So... if I can offer a suggestion or two, there's a few things you might want to reconsider there.

First is the "season on the line" bit. You're implying that they're going to play better than they have been just because their season is on the line. Is that a real thing that can actually happen though? Do you think they were just cruising along playing at 70% effort in their recent losing streak, just waiting for their "season to be on the line" to get properly motivated?

It's a nice talking head narrative, but in reality I don't think it changes much.

Next is the bit about Philly having a weak defense. I'm... not sure where you're getting that from? They're the #1 ranked defense by DVOA. They're Massey Peabody's #6 ranked team overall. Even by less advanced metrics they've allowed the fifth-fewest points per game of any team, and the seventh-fewest yards per game.

The last bit is my favourite kind of gambler's fallacy though: GB being 4-1 in their last five against Philly.

Yes, that's technically true. They don't play in the same division though so those games happened in 2014, 2013, 2011, 2010 and 2007. There's been coaching, quarterback and a bunch of other personnel changes over that period on both sides so it's hardly relevant information.

Also, why stop at five games? I suspect it's a case of making data fit the outcome you'd already decided you wanted... because if you make it 10 games instead of five, Philly actually has a 6-4 lead. I don't think that's any more helpful to predicting the outcome of this game than the past five games, but it's interesting to think about how that cutoff was chosen...

So someone was paying attention here, thought I would not see one person say anything about my weak defense comment.
But onto your other comments about not mattering that season is on the line. This Packers team has responded in similar situations in the past when in must win situations, so to discount that is a mistake.
Wow you noticed that they are not in same division lol.
You do realize this Packers core unit has been together for a long time? I am assuming you think they are a hugely different team from the one that went 4-1 in the last 5?
I think Farve's last season was 2007 in GB but mentioning a QB change is pretty ridiculous yes they lost one great that played in one of the last 5 meetings and replaced him with another great.

But I am sure you win big on NFL bets right?
I think I am right, but in the end they have to play the game.
So lets forget about the Vegas line and make our own pre-game.
Green Bay wins by 9
BTW I am a huge Detroit Lions fan. I used to go to the games when they were still in the Pontiac Silverdome before I left Detroit for good in 1990 so that is the main reason
I hope I am wrong about this game, I really detest the Green Bay Packers.

 

[OzExorcist]

*shrugs*

Take it on board, don't take it on board, you can do what you like

As for the makeup of the teams yes, GB has had the same coach throughout AFAIK and Rodgers was the Green Bay QB in all but one of those games. Those are two very important pieces, obviously. There have obviously been countless changes to the rest of the playing and coaching group though.

And Philly of course have had multiple coaching and QB changes to go along with everything else during that same time too - Green Bay aren't the only team playing in this game. So... again, I'm just suggesting it might be prudent to think carefully about just how much predictive value a game played nine years ago has on a game being played today.

Also I'm genuinely curious, why the last five games and not the last 6, or 8, or 10? Hell GB are 26-16 lifetime against the Eagles, that's pretty impressive I think!

As for the effort thing, again I'd say it just bears thinking about: do you believe they weren't really trying the past four game when they were losing? Or do you think they're magically able to give more than 100% of their effort now that the "season is on the line"? Neither really stands up to scrutiny IMO.

I do OK on my NFL bets BTW, thanks for asking

 

[smallfrie]

*shrugs*

Take it on board, don't take it on board, you can do what you like

As for the makeup of the teams yes, GB has had the same coach throughout AFAIK and Rodgers was the Green Bay QB in all but one of those games. Those are two very important pieces, obviously. There have obviously been countless changes to the rest of the playing and coaching group though.

And Philly of course have had multiple coaching and QB changes to go along with everything else during that same time too - Green Bay aren't the only team playing in this game. So... again, I'm just suggesting it might be prudent to think carefully about just how much predictive value a game played nine years ago has on a game being played today.

Also I'm genuinely curious, why the last five games and not the last 6, or 8, or 10? Hell GB are 26-16 lifetime against the Eagles, that's pretty impressive I think!

As for the effort thing, again I'd say it just bears thinking about: do you believe they weren't really trying the past four game when they were losing? Or do you think they're magically able to give more than 100% of their effort now that the "season is on the line"? Neither really stands up to scrutiny IMO.

I do OK on my NFL bets BTW, thanks for asking

If you have two teams both with season make or break game vs each other.
They are going to play harder. The NFL is grueling, painful and if you think the great players are playing at 100% all the time all season long, THEY are not. So in this game I think they will play at 100% and I think that advantage goes to Green Bay who are more experienced and more talented in the key areas QB and receiving. As far as last 5 games I think referring to this game it is a good number to look at, any further back the change in GB specifically (where I think I know more about play vs less about Philly) is to great any less not really a trend I would value at all, but having said that I don't think it is of huge value but it is just another little thing to add to a long list. I realize Philly is far more a different team over that time frame but that really just tends to lead me to lean more to GB's favor. I think if this game were not the situation of "must win" I would agree with the Vegas line.

 

[SMD Jabroni]

denver killed me on sunday night.
still made money but i could have nearly doubled my money with denver winning by 3.

made some money back with packers on monday night.

usually do parlays and teasers, if it sounds like im just getting all crazy on games. lol.

lets go dallas+6.5 on thursday. lol.

 

[smallfrie]

denver killed me on sunday night.
still made money but i could have nearly doubled my money with denver winning by 3.

made some money back with packers on monday night.

usually do parlays and teasers, if it sounds like im just getting all crazy on games. lol.

lets go dallas+6.5 on thursday. lol.

˙ʇᴉ pᴉoʌɐ oʇ ƃuᴉoƃ ʇsnɾ ɯɐ I os ʇᴉ op plnoɔ ǝuo sᴉɥʇ ʇnq sʎoqʍoƆ ǝɥʇ ɥʇᴉʍ ɹɐǝʎ llɐ uʍop ǝpᴉsdn uǝǝq ʇ,uǝʌɐɥ I

 

[SMD Jabroni]

oh no.
now im scared.
i was a little scared before. but now im petrified.

 

[ribbybruno]

Detroit/New Orleans OVER 52.5 @ Superdome - Pigskin gonna fly! 2 High power offenses going to tango!

Green Bay (-6) @ Home Vs Houston - Packers getting on track - Rodgers the difference in this game

1 Unit Each

 

[SMD Jabroni]

raiders KILLED me by not covering a damn thing against kc.

gotta work my way back up with smaller stakes.

also, not a alot of games i liked this week.

parlay 1
arizona -2
vikings-2
washignton -2
2.60 to win 12.17

parlay2-all straight up
colts
cinci
falcons
dallas
3 to win 9

also have some bets on ufc tonight, so hopefully ill win a few of those.
dallas and washington are my two favorite games this week.
depending on how my other bets do, ill probably bet alot on dallas.

will also do a teaser with the sunday night/monday night football games.

 

[ribbybruno]

Miami (+1.5) @ Home Vs Arizona - Dolphins (5-1) @ Home vs Cardinals (1-4) Away - Like the dog here

1 Unit

 

[we will rock you]

im taking the ravens to beat the pats tonight

 

[SMD Jabroni]

need nyg to beat the eagles thursday night football.
make back the money i lost on the weekend and then some.

 

[ribbybruno]

Here are a few games I wagered on this weekend in the NFL.

Oakland (-3.5) @ Home Vs Indy - Raiders need to step on the gas to win division. Kansas City 1 game behind them and have beat them twice. Raiders need to win out!

Oakland/Indy OVER 52.5 - Indy needs to win out as well and still has hopes for playoffs with some help. Expect both offenses to be in high gear.

Cleveland (+5.5) @ Home Vs San Diego - Browns need a win! Period! Chargers are out of playoff race and could have sugar plums on their minds.

Carolina (+3) @ Home Vs Atlanta - Panthers playing better and are 4-3 at home. Rivalry game! Spoiler alert!

1 Unit Each

 

[OzExorcist]

Erm... I'm just trying to work out why the Browns need a win? If they keep losing they're a lock for the #1 draft pick, which is valuable and their new moneyball front office knows that it's valuable.

I don't think anyone is getting fired at the end of the season (or if they are, that it'll make any difference whether the team went 1-15 or 0-16) so... yeah, I'm not sure I've got any idea where you're coming from there?

 

[ribbybruno]

Erm... I'm just trying to work out why the Browns need a win? If they keep losing they're a lock for the #1 draft pick, which is valuable and their new moneyball front office knows that it's valuable.

I don't think anyone is getting fired at the end of the season (or if they are, that it'll make any difference whether the team went 1-15 or 0-16) so... yeah, I'm not sure I've got any idea where you're coming from there?

You are a player for the Browns. All year long you have worked hard, had close games that the team should have won, been laughed at by fans wearing paper bags. You want to win at least one game. Sure, you may be tied with San Francisco for the worst record. The draft this year has plenty of talent to help your football team. The Browns could spread that money around instead of using most of it on the first pick. Time to shore up a defense that has had difficulty in second halves of games.

 

[OzExorcist]

You are a player for the Browns. All year long you have worked hard, had close games that the team should have won, been laughed at by fans wearing paper bags. You want to win at least one game. Sure, you may be tied with San Francisco for the worst record. The draft this year has plenty of talent to help your football team. The Browns could spread that money around instead of using most of it on the first pick. Time to shore up a defense that has had difficulty in second halves of games.

So I know they won outright and you're gonna think that validates your pick... but let's put that kind of results-oriented thinking aside for a moment.

The bit about close games isn't even true! Before this weekend they only had four games decided by one score or less. Their 10 other games they lost by an average of 17.2 points. So it's not like they've been having heartbreaking losses all year or anything - they've been getting blown out fair and square.

As for the fans, I don't think that has any predictive value whatsoever on the outcome of the game but still, come on: everyone who was paying any attention knew the Browns were going to be terrible this year. They probably had the paper bags at the ready regardless.

And I don't even know where to start with what you're saying about draft picks and money. The difference in salary between the first and second pick in the draft is only about $1 million over four years, which is nothing. And the Browns already have a ton of cap space available. So it's not like they don't want the first pick because they can't afford it or anything.

On the flipside the number one pick is a fair bit more valuable than the number two pick (it's worth the equivalent of having the #2 and #50 pick). This is particularly important if you're a moneyball team like Cleveland now is, and there's a decent chance you trade the pick away for more picks further down the draft: you'll get more/better picks for #1 than you will for #2.