*** OFFICIAL 10/07/07 NFL SNF GAME THREAD (CHI @ GB) ***

[Lori]

[ QUOTE ]
Everybody seems to be on the Packers except those saying "BSP?"

Somebody explain to me why the line is where it is. I don't want to hear who the better pick is or anything like that, I just want to know why the books seem to agree on 3-3.5.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think it's down to the fact that the Packers are just so one-dimensional on offense. It's clearly a very good dimension but they're not going to be able to protect leads (except by scoring more points [img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img] ) and they're going to be relatively easy to prepare for.
Jennings is still not able to practice much, and the Packers are likely going to be going with a rookie safety.
Enough doubts to put the line considerably below seven, and although I concede that -3.5 looks reasonable, I don't think it's particuarly special with so many small but real doubts.

[droopy0021]

[ QUOTE ]
Kabosh, I agree that I would not lay 3.5 here v the Bears. If the Bears are 100% healthy this week, I like my bet a lot less, however:

Dvoracek and Brown are out for the year with ACL tears, 2 backups are out for the year, and Vasher is listed as Doubtful. They are clearly missing solid Def starters.

Harris, Briggs, AA all questionable.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'll give my BSP analysis. I'm a big Bear fan (living in WI) and will be attending Sunday. I feel GB -3 is a good bet. The Bears are very banged up on D and the offense has been bad.

Vasher
Brad Biggs, of the Chicago Sun-Times, reports Chicago Bears CB Nathan Vasher (groin) was held out of practice Wednesday, Oct. 3. He is not expected to play Week 5.
Tillman
Brad Biggs, of the Chicago Sun-Times, reports Chicago Bears CB Charles Tillman (ankle) was held out of practice Wednesday, Oct. 3, but did some running on the side.
Archuletta
Has a broken hand and if he plays will likely play with a cast. He hasn't been able to cover anyone in a couple years and this year hasn't been able to wrap up. Now he has a broken hand.
T Harris
Sprained knee 2 weeks ago, played vs. Lions and is expected to play this week.
Briggs
Hasn't practiced and didn't look good running sprints Tuesday. Hamstring injury, DNP vs. Lions.

Kitna was 20-24 vs. Bears. Favre is playing very well this year, utilizing quick passing that will make it tough on Bears front 4 to put pressure and blitzes won't get to him in time to stop slants. GB is getting V Morency more involved in the offense since he came back last week so running game might have a pulse (not that it needs one if Favre continues to play at a high level after ugly Week 1 where offensive line didn't block).

Griese should be better. Benson is looking to be a tool unfortunately. The o-line for Bears is aging poorly and that is a big problem with running game. Relying on D Hester to have 300+ yards in the return game (like he did vs. Detroit) will leave Bears wanting. Bears WRs lead the NFL (unofficial stats) with 16 drops. Many of those were key vs. Dallas, one should've been a TD (Berrian) and one by Muhammad that would've been a 1st down and next play....INT.

I don't see any reason statistically or logically the Bears cover the 3. Could also be why betting on NFL is crazy and some magic mojo or trap game moves Bears to win.

[Alzee]

I don't agree with the reasoning that people put behind BSP picks/BSP counter-picks. It makes no sense to not make what seems to be a logical pick just because "the public" likes the pick too... that in my mind is pretty dumb. I understand fading the public when you get an adv from them pushing the lines for your sake, but to not like a pick just because the majority likes it is pretty ridiculous if that's the only rationale behind it.

I am taking GB -3 because they've covered for me and paid me kindly with their ML wins so I owe it to them :-)... not to mention the fact that the value in this bet is Chicago's inconsistency @ QB, Packers pass rush, and Chicago's banged up D... all of these combined make it worth 2u in my book. Plus I love Favre's easy going mentality as his career comes to an end he is loose and having fun while the Bears/Grossman/Griese are in quite the opposite boat, which is sure to lead to even further disaster... The only way this bet doesn't win is if CHI D steps up and wins the Turnover battle by a 3-1 margin.

[kaboshedx]

[ QUOTE ]
I don't agree with the reasoning that people put behind BSP picks/BSP counter-picks. It makes no sense to not make what seems to be a logical pick just because "the public" likes the pick too... that in my mind is pretty dumb. I understand fading the public when you get an adv from them pushing the lines for your sake, but to not like a pick just because the majority likes it is pretty ridiculous if that's the only rationale behind it.

I am taking GB -3 because they've covered for me and paid me kindly with their ML wins so I owe it to them :-)... not to mention the fact that the value in this bet is Chicago's inconsistency @ QB, Packers pass rush, and Chicago's banged up D... all of these combined make it worth 2u in my book. Plus I love Favre's easy going mentality as his career comes to an end he is loose and having fun while the Bears/Grossman/Griese are in quite the opposite boat, which is sure to lead to even further disaster... The only way this bet doesn't win is if CHI D steps up and wins the Turnover battle by a 3-1 margin.

[/ QUOTE ]

link to 2+2 BSP record? Your analysis just shaded me more to the Bears play, ty.

[Alzee]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I don't agree with the reasoning that people put behind BSP picks/BSP counter-picks. It makes no sense to not make what seems to be a logical pick just because "the public" likes the pick too... that in my mind is pretty dumb. I understand fading the public when you get an adv from them pushing the lines for your sake, but to not like a pick just because the majority likes it is pretty ridiculous if that's the only rationale behind it.

I am taking GB -3 because they've covered for me and paid me kindly with their ML wins so I owe it to them :-)... not to mention the fact that the value in this bet is Chicago's inconsistency @ QB, Packers pass rush, and Chicago's banged up D... all of these combined make it worth 2u in my book. Plus I love Favre's easy going mentality as his career comes to an end he is loose and having fun while the Bears/Grossman/Griese are in quite the opposite boat, which is sure to lead to even further disaster... The only way this bet doesn't win is if CHI D steps up and wins the Turnover battle by a 3-1 margin.

[/ QUOTE ]

link to 2+2 BSP record? Your analysis just shaded me more to the Bears play, ty.

[/ QUOTE ]

In picking CHI you must be trusting in Hester to keep the game close, a Favre meltdown, or a miracle @ QB for CHI... but once again, that's just my opinion.

[Thremp]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I don't agree with the reasoning that people put behind BSP picks/BSP counter-picks. It makes no sense to not make what seems to be a logical pick just because "the public" likes the pick too... that in my mind is pretty dumb. I understand fading the public when you get an adv from them pushing the lines for your sake, but to not like a pick just because the majority likes it is pretty ridiculous if that's the only rationale behind it.

I am taking GB -3 because they've covered for me and paid me kindly with their ML wins so I owe it to them :-)... not to mention the fact that the value in this bet is Chicago's inconsistency @ QB, Packers pass rush, and Chicago's banged up D... all of these combined make it worth 2u in my book. Plus I love Favre's easy going mentality as his career comes to an end he is loose and having fun while the Bears/Grossman/Griese are in quite the opposite boat, which is sure to lead to even further disaster... The only way this bet doesn't win is if CHI D steps up and wins the Turnover battle by a 3-1 margin.

[/ QUOTE ]

link to 2+2 BSP record? Your analysis just shaded me more to the Bears play, ty.

[/ QUOTE ]

In picking CHI you must be trusting in Hester to keep the game close, a Favre meltdown, or a miracle @ QB for CHI... but once again, that's just my opinion.

[/ QUOTE ]

Std square thinking.

[silentbob]

[ QUOTE ]
they've covered for me and paid me kindly with their ML wins so I owe it to them

[/ QUOTE ]
Think about what you just wrote above.

[Alzee]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
they've covered for me and paid me kindly with their ML wins so I owe it to them

[/ QUOTE ]
Think about what you just wrote above.

[/ QUOTE ]

perhaps you missed the "humor" in that BSP reasoning tossed into the middle of my analysis?

[silentbob]

Aside from the smiley-face, I don't see any substantive distinction between that sentence and the rest of your analysis.

[Alzee]

<begin joke> from now on i will clearly mark the beginning and end of jokes and/or sarcasm just to keep everyone in the loop <end joke>