By Youngbrig on Wednesday, January 09, 2002 - 08:51 pm: Edit |
Athos:
I see Mariucci playing it conservative and trying to control the ball with Hearst and Co.; I also see them being successful with this strategy-- hence a close, low-scoring game...
Oakland, I don't think, is as bad as they've looked recently...They outgain everyone, including the Jets last week...I seem them breaking-out with a rout...
I also see them losing the next week...
I would play Phila minus but I feel that McNabb has regressed this year and this will become painfully obvious against a tough Bucs D; the Bucs, btw, will play with added fire because they all like Dungy and don't want to see him leave...Its "Us against the world" for the Bucs...
Ravens are still the defending champs and thus are still cocksure enough to think that they can turn it on and repeat now that the playoffs are here...I feel this will carry them against Miami...
YoungBrig
By Blazers on Thursday, January 10, 2002 - 11:25 am: Edit |
Rams v. Steelers....let's start the game. Steelers will make it closer than you think. I will be watching the game at 6 am in Pattaya. Will try to go to blow job bars at half time.
Ravens will beat Miami outright.
By Jocannon on Saturday, January 12, 2002 - 08:58 am: Edit |
Here's my selections (in order of best bet to worst bet):
8) San Fran vs Green Bay OVER 39 pts
7) GB -4.0
6) Baltimore +3.0
5) Raiders -4.5
4) Philadelphia -3.5
3) Tampa Bay vs Philadelphia OVER 33 pts
2) Baltimore vs Miami OVER 33 pts
1) Jets vs Oakland OVER 42 pts
But what do I know? I haven't had a winning week since early in the season. Maybe I'm due.
By Ootie on Saturday, January 12, 2002 - 05:11 pm: Edit |
Standings after Game #1
Farsider.....2-0.....14 pts
Conejo.......2-0.....12 pts
Athos........2-0.....10 pts
Bullitt........2-0......7 pts
Jocannon....2-0......7 pts
Ootie.........1-1......3 pts
Youngbrig...0-2......0 pts
Farsider had to have loved that late Philly interception TD (the Philly/TB OVER was his best bet). After winning the silver last time, he's taking dead aim at the gold now.
Congrats to the rest of you 2-0 guys! I think I may have to consult with each of you the next time I visit my bookie.
A Probably needs to be almost perfect now in the last three games kind of guy,
Out-of-Towner
By Farsider on Saturday, January 12, 2002 - 07:14 pm: Edit |
Going for gold, all the way!
Actually, I'm just glad the Eagles won.
BTW... I watched that late interception at a bar in a restaurant with Billfromreading and Dimone (the ECHO event). At the time, I had no idea it was instrumental in putting me in the lead in this contest... a lead that might go away after tonight's game. (16-10 Oakland right now) We'll see.
By Ootie on Saturday, January 12, 2002 - 08:06 pm: Edit |
Standings after Game #2
Conejo.......4-0.....15 pts
Bullitt........4-0......15 pts
Jocannon....4-0......13 pts
Farsider.....3-1.....15 pts
Youngbrig...2-2......15 pts
Athos........2-2.....10 pts
Ootie.........1-3......3 pts
Wow! Three mongers with perfect records. I hope you guys made a lot of money. (Double check your scores to make sure I didn't make any mistakes).
I'm clearly out of your league this weekend (I've been mathematically eliminated from the gold medal). The only bright spot is that I didn't place any bets this weekend or I would have lost my shirt (although I did lose a lot of pride; Wait a minute! What pride? I've always sucked at picking pro football!).
I think in the future I'll just stick to college football.
A Will cry myself to sleep tonight kind of guy,
Out-of-Towner
By Jocannon on Saturday, January 12, 2002 - 09:02 pm: Edit |
It figures. The one weekend I don't go to TJ so therefore no bets made at Caliente. Guess that ought to tell me something.
Well, I've always aspired for a gold medal.
Wishing the rest of you with money on the games tomorrow, good luck.
By Athos on Saturday, January 12, 2002 - 09:36 pm: Edit |
My best game was the Eagles -3.5, of course was too lazy to get my ass to TJ waiting for next weekend games.
By Youngbrig on Sunday, January 13, 2002 - 01:28 am: Edit |
Tampa Bay looked as awful this year as last year...Unrecognizable from the Bucs team of the last 6 weeks...Embarrassing...Keyshawn came to play, and Simeon Rice...Alstott was working hard but had no room to run...
4 guys logjammed at 15 points...tommorrow should be interesting-- will the ghosts of Lambeau rattle the 49ers?...Will Jay Fiedler be able to sustain drives against the Ravens D?...
At Playoff time, Billick tells his boys to bust in the door screaming like banshees...We'll see who's screaming tomorrow in Miami...
YoungBrig
By Ootie on Sunday, January 13, 2002 - 06:48 am: Edit |
"4 guys logjammed at 15 points"
YB, just to reclarify my earlier post to avoid any possible misunderstanding: the best record wins the gold; total points is only used for the tie breaker. So it's possible to finish with the most points and not have the best record.
Also, had the competition finished today, Conejo would have been the gold medal winner (as the order of the standings indicates) because his 15 points contains a 7 (which is higher than Bullitt's 6).
A Last place kind of guy,
Out-of-Towner
By Athos on Sunday, January 13, 2002 - 09:35 am: Edit |
Ootie
I ranked by number so my number 1 is my best best while 8 is my worst.
Go Packers so Mariucci can become Charger next head coach next week...
By Ootie on Sunday, January 13, 2002 - 11:04 am: Edit |
Athos,
I know. That's the way I interpreted your post.
Looks like Youngbrig will win the tiebreaker if he can at least tie for the best record (his two best bets have already won and his third best bet is looking pretty good at the moment).
A Keeping you "posted" kind of guy,
Out-of-Towner
By Ootie on Sunday, January 13, 2002 - 12:50 pm: Edit |
Standings after Game #3
Jocannon....6-0......28 pts
Conejo.......6-0.....26 pts
Farsider.....5-1.....24 pts
Bullitt........5-1......23 pts
Athos........3-3.....16 pts
Youngbrig...2-4......15 pts
Ootie.........2-4......8 pts
It's a shame that some of you have to lose. This has been a tremendous performance by the top four guys.
If Baltimore covers and the total points is OVER, Jocannon will win at 8-0, and this will probably happen because he said that he wasn't able to get to Caliente this weekend to place a bet (I almost called up my bookie to place a bet on Jo's last four selections because of his post; it looks like I should have; doesn't it always seem to happen this way?).
Conejo will win at 8-0 if Miami covers and the total points is UNDER.
If Miami covers and the total points is OVER, Bullitt will win the tiebreaker in the three-way 7-1 record deadlock with Jocannon and Conejo by one point (31-30-30).
If Baltimore covers and the total points is UNDER, Jocannon wins the tiebreak at 7-1 with Conejo (34-32).
So Jocannon has a 50% chance of winning, Conejo 25%, and Bullitt 25%. My only chance of winning is if I find out that everybody has forgotten about this thread and I unscrupulously announce myself as the gold medal winner.
Bad news for Farsider. He has been mathematically eliminated for the gold medal because his last two picks are the same as Conejo's.
A Hoping to escape last place kind of guy,
Out-of-Towner
By Ootie on Sunday, January 13, 2002 - 03:56 pm: Edit |
Final Standings!
Jocannon....7-1.....34 pts
Conejo.......7-1.....32 pts
Farsider.....6-2.....31 pts
Bullitt........5-3.....23 pts
Youngbrig...4-4.....21 pts
Athos........4-4.....17 pts
Ootie.........4-4.....17 pts
All hail Jocannon, winner of the gold medal. His top six selections all won. The odds of that happening are at least 64-1 (it's easier to pick a roulette number). He was a perfect 4-0 against the spread.
Conejo probably would have won the gold in almost any other similar competition with his superb performance, but a silver medal isn't too shabby. He was a perfect 4-0 against the total points.
Farsider gets the bronze to go along with his silver medal from the last contest.
I lost the tiebreaker to Athos and officially finished in last (which isn't fair when you're batting a respectable .500 - LOL; but it just goes to show you how much ability this group has).
The Consensus of all of our ipinions finished 6-2 (2-2 against the spread + 4-0 against the total points).
A Hoping everybody had some fun kind of guy,
Out-of-Towner
By Jocannon on Sunday, January 13, 2002 - 04:06 pm: Edit |
With a curled lip and my best Elvis impersonation:
"Thankew, thankew, thankew very much"
Looks like Conejo and I do a lot better when there's no money riding on our picks.
Ootie: I'd like to see a medal awards ceremony at AB during your next trip to the left coast. I'd say your downfall started with the best bet being the Jets ;-)
A Realizing Bragging Rights only last 'til Next Saturday Kinda Guy
jocannon
By Athos on Sunday, January 13, 2002 - 06:26 pm: Edit |
Early LV lines for next weekend
Rams -10 vs Packers (line jumped within min from -9)
Bears -2.5 vs Eagles
Patriots -3 vs Raiders
Steelers -6 vs Ravens
I like the Bears, Patriots, Steelers to cover.
Rams ok to tease either way.
By Farsider on Sunday, January 13, 2002 - 06:52 pm: Edit |
I say we do this again for next week's games!
By Youngbrig on Sunday, January 13, 2002 - 10:25 pm: Edit |
Farsider: I'm in too...I'm mystified at that 49ers loss and am determined to make up for it next week...
Congratulations to Jocannon-- great job ATS...And to Conejo against the points...
YoungBrig
PS Wow, Rams -10, hmmm....
By Conejo on Monday, January 14, 2002 - 02:59 am: Edit |
Actually I did play two 3-team parlays this week hit one missed the other (I changed my GB/SF bet to under after looking at the weather reports that forcast snow & ice, but when I watched the game highlights it looked pretty clear. Oh well). Hopefully we will all win some money next week, then we can celebrate in the ZN.
Good luck to us all!
By Conejo on Monday, January 14, 2002 - 03:13 am: Edit |
BTW Question for Athos (I think it is you that plays teasers off the board): I have only played the pink teaser cards when I play teasers. How do you go about playing a teaser off the board & how do you figure out what the spread is and the wager line? I have never seen this offered at Caliente. I am assuming that you are playing in TJ, but maybe you are playing with a bookie or in Vegas.
Thanks in advance for any info.
Conejo
By Ootie on Monday, January 14, 2002 - 05:06 am: Edit |
Jo,
I picked the Jets as much because the Raiders were struggling as for any other reason. Also, Athos had told me that this was the year of the underdog. I guess I'm the kiss of death: when I spot a trend and jump on the bandwagon, the extra weight almost always knocks the wheels off.
All,
It sounds like everybody wants to do this again, so I'll post the "official" odds tomorrow and we'll follow the exact same format. Unfortunately, I'll be away for a week on a ski trip in Vermont beginning Thursday so I won't be able to post the standings after each game (or the final results for that matter). Anybody want to be scorekeeper for this week?
A Will likely be going downhill again this weekend in more ways than one kind of guy,
Out-of-Towner
By Athos on Monday, January 14, 2002 - 09:41 am: Edit |
Ootie
I was talking about the regular season being the year of the underdogs.
Playoffs is totally different, I am sticking with home teams.
Conejo
The pink slips give you 4 pts teasers and rewards are even lower than regular 6 pts teasers so I do not play any more the pink slips.
For regular teaser, you can do 6, 6.5 and 7 pts teasers, min 2 games, max 6 games.
I like the playoffs to bet straight, strategy has to be different from regular season. Parlay seem easier to hit in the playoffs too.
By Athos on Monday, January 14, 2002 - 10:08 am: Edit |
Opening lines at Caliente
Bears -2 32.5
Patriots -3 40.5
Steelers -5 32.0
Rams -10 54.5
The only difference with LV is Bears is -2.5 in LV.
Ootie you pick the odds for the gold medal.
JoCannon what's your position on these games???
Bears-Eagles Can go either way, if Jim Miller is allowed to throw deep, Bears will win. Brian Urlacher say hello to McNabb, Bears will not allow McNabb to scramble and will force him to be a pocket passer. Bears passing D is nowhere nears as good as their running D. Eagles cannot run the ball and the screen to Duce Staley is not going to work against Bears D. Bears may just win low scoring game with the A train and big receivers Marty Booker. Eagles blitz all the time and very weak against the run.
Edge Bears.
Patriots-Raiders another tough game to call, snow forecast for Sat so not very cold but night game so not sure about weather. Raiders have no D while Patriots have weak passing O but good RB. Raiders have good passing O but avg running game but Garner is a winner. I believe the Pats corners can cover the older Raiders receivers.
Slight edge to the Patriots.
Rams-Packers Only way Packers win is by shutting down Faulk and win turnover battle. Packers D is way overrated, avg at best. Warner is going to kill them. Rams D way overrated but good with the lead as quickness is there.
Edge Rams but 10 pts is too much for straight bet or parlay.
Steelers-Ravens. ah the real Grbac will be exposed, low scoring torturing game. Steelers win easily. Steelers too much D, Steelers receivers make big plays. Terry Allen will be lucky to rush for 39 yards. Steelers kicker is only worry but Kordel is good in these low scoring games.
Edge Steelers -5 is very palatable.
I say play the odds in Jan:
4 straight bets home team
1 teaser with your 2 fav teams
1 parlay with your 2 fav teams
1 3 team parlay
1 4 team parlay
By book_guy on Monday, January 14, 2002 - 10:52 am: Edit |
I don't know what the FFFF you're talking about. "Parlay" "teaser" "odds" whatchamacallit. It's all Greek to me.
By Farsider on Monday, January 14, 2002 - 10:59 am: Edit |
I'm willing to tally up the points and award the medals.
I don't think I'll be near my computer often enough this weekend to post updates after each game, however.
By Strangelove on Monday, January 14, 2002 - 01:41 pm: Edit |
If it snow is in the forecast, and the game a late game, then I would dare not say "not cold" in Foxborough. The temperature itself may not look that low. But, it is wind chill factor that matters all. The stadium sits in the middle of nowhere, and gusty winds blow through it in late afternoon.
By Bookie on Monday, January 14, 2002 - 01:51 pm: Edit |
Greetings All,
This is the most active thread on the board. Nice to see. Thought I'd stick my two cents worth in. All the games are too tough for me to play except Patriots-Raiders. As I see it Raiders are still being priced off their mid-year form. They certainly didn't get well against the Jets on Saturday, they just played against an exhausted DL that could put no pressure on Gannon and that was the whole game. I see the rested NE Defense shutting down the Raiders like everybody else they've played lately, and the patient NE offense getting enough done and I see the Raiders throwing picks late when they try to extend the field to catch up.
Best of luck...
By Jocannon on Monday, January 14, 2002 - 02:13 pm: Edit |
Athos: I pretty much agree with your analysis as well as that of Bookie. Right now I am inclined to lay the points with NE and Chicago and take the points with GB and Bal.
A Ravens field goal gives them a touchdown edge which can be huge with their defense and the way it plays when it really counts. This pick pains me as I still hate that friggin traitor Modell. Bettis will be rested but could be rusty. Sometimes that bye week works against a team like the Steelers as they can get too pumped while waiting.
I think the Pack can score enough to keep the game close.
It seems to be the year for winning ugly. The Patriots and Bears just find a way to get it done.
Farsider: your choice. I do plan to be around home this weekend so I could post the standings after each game. You decide.
By Ootie on Monday, January 14, 2002 - 03:05 pm: Edit |
OK Athos. We'll use your spreads and points for the contest as follows:
Bears -2 32.5
Patriots -3 40.5
Steelers -5 32.0
Rams -10 54.5
Here's my pathetic average picks, guaranteed to go 4-4 again, which is death when you're in a league of sharks like this one here. So if you want to go 8-0, you'll need to figure out which of the four I'm going to lose - LOL. In order from best bet to worst:
(8) Packers +10
(7) Steelers / Ravens UNDER 32.0
(6) Bears / Eagles UNDER 32.5
(5) Steelers -5
(4) Bears -2
(3) Rams / Packers OVER 54.5
(2) Patriots / Raiders OVER 40.5
(1) Raiders +3
A One gold medal and counting kind of guy,
Out-of-Towner
By Jocannon on Monday, January 14, 2002 - 03:48 pm: Edit |
I waited to pick until the end last week so I'll give you guys a shot (albetit a small one-brag brag) and make them early this week.
(8) Ravens +5
(7) Packers +10
(6) Bears -2
(5) Bears / Eagles OVER 32.5
(4) Steelers / Ravens UNDER 32.0
(3) Rams / Packers UNDER 54.5
(2) NE -3
(1) Patriots / Raiders UNDER 40.5
By Farsider on Monday, January 14, 2002 - 04:30 pm: Edit |
Jocannon... you may as well go ahead and keep score. I'd do it, but I know for a fact I'll be working all day Sunday.
Which, of course, means I won't be able to watch the games either.
My picks:
8) PHI +2: I'll sink or swim with the Eagles.
7) NE/OAK OVER: Decent weather here means a shootout.
6) STL/GB OVER: I'd still take Over here if the line was 60.
5) GB +10: Rams win, but Favre helps Pack cover.
4) PHI/CHI OVER: Fairly low scoring, but not THAT low.
3) BAL +5: Steelers face team they didn't want to see. Ravens win outright.
2) BAL/PIT UNDER: Tight defensive battle.
1) OAK +3: Raiders win on the road.
This week, so much for the home-team favorites. I'll probably finish last. But hey, this is for fun, right?
By Jocannon on Monday, January 14, 2002 - 05:13 pm: Edit |
Farsider: OK, I'll cover it.
Ootie: We've got 5 picks different this week. So if you're shooting for 4-4, guess I'll have to settle for 7-1 again.
By Athos on Monday, January 14, 2002 - 08:32 pm: Edit |
Here are my gold medals picks, they may be different than my Caliente picks on Wed/Thu.
8) Steelers -5
7) Bears -2
6) Patriots -3
5) Rams Under 54.5
4) Packers +10
3) Patriots Under 40.5
2) Steelers under 32.0
1) Bears over 32.5
I am rooting for Rams and Steelers to have a good teaser following week.
I hate the Raiders and I'll root for Gitano and the Bears.
By Bullitt on Monday, January 14, 2002 - 10:18 pm: Edit |
8) Pitt -5
7) StL -10
6) Pitt Ov 32
5) Phi +2
4) Phi Ov 32.5
3) StL Ov 54.5
2) Oak +3
1) Oak Ov 40.5
By Youngbrig on Monday, January 14, 2002 - 11:42 pm: Edit |
Let's try this again:
8. Chi -2
7. Chi/Phila OVER
6. St.L/GB UNDER
5. Balt +5
4. GB +10
3. NE -3
2. NE/Oak OVER
1. Pitt/Balt OVER
By Youngbrig on Monday, January 14, 2002 - 11:52 pm: Edit |
Farsider, I really feel good about the Bears covering on Sunday and scoring some points while they're at it...They've proved themselves all year and I simply am not sold on the Eagles or Donovan McNabb...Tampa Bay played extremely poorly this past Saturday...
Baltimore is cocky and confident and a steal at +5...
I have to believe that Favre and Co. can keep the game close at St.L...This line is bloated; if this were the regular season the line would be 7...
Oakland is good enough to win at home against the tired Jets, but not good enough to win against the hungry Pats in their frigid house...The Black Hole will be a continent away this weekend...
YoungBrig
By Ootie on Tuesday, January 15, 2002 - 07:28 am: Edit |
I just heard that Parcells might have some interest in coaching San Diego.
A Chargers' fans should be salivating at this possibility kind of guy,
Out-of-Towner
By Athos on Tuesday, January 15, 2002 - 05:24 pm: Edit |
Marty S. is interviewing with the Chargers as well as Ted Cottrel. Chargers are getting the short end of the stick ...again.
By Sakebomb on Tuesday, January 15, 2002 - 10:03 pm: Edit |
Marty S.??? Oh no....this guy just "did more favors for the US government by killing both the chiefs and the indians."
I'm praying for either Ted C. or the Tuna. The Chargers needed some serious attitude adjustment.
By Jocannon on Wednesday, January 16, 2002 - 11:21 am: Edit |
Let's not forget my beloved Browns where Marty first developed his rep of "unable to win the big ones".
Any doubters? I'd be glad to give you my tapes of the 3 AFC Championship losses to Denver in the mid-80's. ESPN Classic just showed "The Drive" game last Sunday night. I didn't bother to watch it since I saw it live from my goal-line seat. Sickening.
Hell, why not throw Marv Levy into the mix as well, in case the Colts pass him over.
By Conejo on Saturday, January 19, 2002 - 03:13 am: Edit |
Some of these picks fly in the face of the picks I made at Caliente tonight but I'm going to pick these purely on my gut & what I would like to see happen.
Here goes nothing:
8)Bears -2
7)Steelers Under
6)Rams Over
5)Rams -10
4)Bears Under
3)Steelers -5
2)Raiders +3
1)Raiders Over
Let the chips fall where they may.
By Jocannon on Saturday, January 19, 2002 - 04:48 pm: Edit |
Standings after Game 1 Phil 33 Bears 19:
Farsider 12 (fast out of the gate again)
Bullitt 9
Youngbrig 7
jocannon 5
Athos 1
Conejo 0
Ootie 0 (tough to reclaim gold that way, mi amigo)
By Conejo on Saturday, January 19, 2002 - 10:46 pm: Edit |
When I wrote here goes nothing before posting my picks, I guess I really meant it!
By Jocannon on Sunday, January 20, 2002 - 02:21 am: Edit |
I had this question last week and should have asked it then. What happens to the pick when a tie is involved? Game 2 is a push since the line was NE -3. It is interesting that, other than Athos, everybody had this game (and the related over/under pick) at the bottom of their lists.
Several options:
Everyone gets credit for 1/2 a win;
Pick is a push, ignore it and all lower picks move up;
Ignore pick entirely and everybody gets zero.
Where is Ootie when we need him? It's his game and he made up the rules.
I will make an arbitrary decision (subject to review by the commissioner, Ootie), and award 1/2 credit to everyone on the game line pick. With that in mind, here are the tentative standings after Game 2:
Farsider 12.5 Hangin on
Bullitt 10
Youngbrig 8.5
jocannon 7
Athos 7 Gets a favorable ruling from the refs
Conejo 1 waddya mean nothing?
Ootie .5 (he shoots, he scores, therefore may be biased in his ruling)
Weigh in with your viewpoint of how the tie should be handled. Maybe public outcry will affect the final decision of the league.
By Jocannon on Sunday, January 20, 2002 - 04:50 pm: Edit |
In a total blowout reminiscent of the Rams victory, Bullitt runs away from the rest of the competition with a final tally of 6-1-1. He also was correct on his top 6 picks. The rest of us had as many picks today as Favre threw.
Final standings:
Bullitt......6-1-1...34pts
Farsider...3-4-1...18.5pts
Athos......3-4-1...15pts
Conejo.....3-4-1...15pts
Youngbrig.2-5-1....9.5pts
Ootie.......2-5-1....8.5pts
jocannon..2-5-1....7pts- from last week's champ to this week's chump
Enjoy the bragging rights, Bullitt. Based on the experiences of the past champs, they don't last very long.
By Farsider on Sunday, January 20, 2002 - 05:39 pm: Edit |
Jocannon... I would have done exactly as you did with regard to the tie. In any event, it sure didn't make much difference in the standings. Thanks for filling in for Ootie.
My quick early leads have occurred because, by luck of the draw, the Eagles have been involved in the first game each week, and for once following my rooting interest paid off. Might have to think twice about this upcoming game vs. the Rams, though. St. Loo looked pretty invincible.
Take away the Eagles, and I'm eating everyone's dust both weeks.
Nice job, Bullitt!
By Farsider on Sunday, January 20, 2002 - 05:51 pm: Edit |
One more afterthought: Bullitt might have come within a few inches of snow in Foxboro of achieving a perfect score.
By Bullitt on Sunday, January 20, 2002 - 05:57 pm: Edit |
Thanks for the props boys. I would give the crown for the raiders to still be in it. That call sucked! Even the my friends who are raider haters think the call was bogus. Almost 24 hours have past since that call and I am still stunned.
By Youngbrig on Sunday, January 20, 2002 - 10:21 pm: Edit |
Bullitt: Congratulations-- Nicely done...The call on Brady I think was technically correct but the rule is a bad rule...That should have been a fumble...Irregardless, I never have been in favor of replay-- make the call on the field and go with it...
Farsider: One thing to consider about the Rams: they were outgained today by GB fairly decisively...If the Eagles come out with the same sort of aggressiveness they showed at Chicago, it might be a tempting play-- at least against the spread...
Of course, judging by my performance the past couple of weeks, one strategy might be to take a look at my picks, and then go the opposite way...
YoungBrig
By Athos on Monday, January 21, 2002 - 10:58 am: Edit |
Early lines for next week from LV
Steelers -8.0 35.5
Rams -11.0 51.0
I am going to tease with the steelers and the other game in both directions.