*** OFFICIAL 10/01/07 NFL MNF GAME THREAD (NE Pats @ Cincy)*** - Page 4

Murphinator · #31 09-28-2007, 12:37 AM

I don't see how anyone can bet on Cincy, especially with out Rudi playin.

Vagos · #32 09-28-2007, 09:35 AM

I know Palmer can match Brady performance wise in this game, but in the end, the gulf between these two defenses spans almost the entire league, so I think New England -7 is the call here. That said, I'm avoiding betting on the game altogether as I'll be passionately rooting for my Bungles to pull off the big upset. I say the fact that it's MNF at home gives them a shot.

Vagos · #33 09-28-2007, 09:50 AM

[ QUOTE ]
Also, Cinci is really really bad.

[/ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Da Bungals suck!

[/ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Bangels blow chode

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm surprised so many people are saying this. They might not be the top notch contender some people had them pegged as entering the season, but "really really bad"? Gimme a break, that's a huge leap. You guys know the season isn't even a quarter of the way through yet, right? They beat the Ravens on Monday Night to open the season and were favorites to win the toughest division in football. Now two weeks later they're just plain terrible?

They had a gritty win against the Ravens in week 1 and although the game in Cleveland was ugly, the defense came back last week and played decent on the road against a good Seattle offense. They lost that game cause Palmer threw 2 INT's and their kick returner fumbled the kickoff with 1 minute left in the game. If he doesn't fumble that kickoff and they win on the road in Seattle, then what? They're 2-1 with a shot at the playoffs. But instead he fumbled and now they're awful. lol, NFL fans are so fickle.

gringo_grinder · #34 09-28-2007, 02:46 PM

They are horribly overrated. Did they beat Baltimore? yes. Bal had 6 turnovers and Cincy still only won by a 4th Q touchdown against a team where all the big names got injured. They still only scored 27 points at home. Sometimes, winning doesn't mean you're good.

Then they lost to Cleveland.

gg 1-3 Cincy.

I like the Pats by a lot. When two guys names Derek Anderson and Braylon Edwards tear up your secondary, it's going to be comical to see what Brady and Moss will do. I like Pats by 20+.

kaboshedx · #35 09-28-2007, 02:58 PM

Cinci is far from being "horribly overrated" by the public. This ship has sailed, many people have noted their mediocrity.

If anything at this point I believe they are underrated by the public. 7-7.5 points is alot to give on the road, but the Pats actually are that good. Although I like 6.5 ALOT more than anything on or past the 7.

psuasskicker · #36 09-28-2007, 03:23 PM

[ QUOTE ]
They had a gritty win against the Ravens in week 1

[/ QUOTE ]

lol... No they didn't. They did everything in their power in the final seconds to hand away a game where the Ravens had turned it over 5 times and had a horrible OPI call. They yet again got a gift of a turnover, so that's six turnovers and a terrible OPI call with the assist from Billick with horrible play-calling, and the game was still ridiculously close.

Calling this team anything but really bad is generous. They'll be lucky to win 8 games this year. Cinci u9.5 wins was easy easy money before the season.

- C -

ur54sold · #37 09-28-2007, 04:07 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Cinci is far from being "horribly overrated" by the public. This ship has sailed, many people have noted their mediocrity.

If anything at this point I believe they are underrated by the public. 7-7.5 points is alot to give on the road, but the Pats actually are that good. Although I like 6.5 ALOT more than anything on or past the 7.

[/ QUOTE ]

I completely agree. I think cincy is a mediocre team with 3 superstars who capture public attention.

paperchamp · #38 09-28-2007, 04:39 PM

[ QUOTE ]

I can understand not wanting to bet the NE side, but I think betting against the NE side is foolish. The Pats seem to be on a mission, and if you're not going to bet on them, I'd avoid it altogether.

[/ QUOTE ]

Sounds like some extremely square logic.

kyro · #39 09-28-2007, 04:41 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

I can understand not wanting to bet the NE side, but I think betting against the NE side is foolish. The Pats seem to be on a mission, and if you're not going to bet on them, I'd avoid it altogether.

[/ QUOTE ]

Sounds like some extremely square logic.

[/ QUOTE ]

Thankfully I don't bet on games. [img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img]

In all seriousness, I am a square, and that's cool, but betting on the Pats just seems like a bad idea right now. I could see myself betting on the Bengals because it seemed "sharp" and then when the Pats are winning 31-10 in the 3rd saying to myself "are you [censored] stupid?"

paperchamp · #40 09-28-2007, 04:56 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

I can understand not wanting to bet the NE side, but I think betting against the NE side is foolish. The Pats seem to be on a mission, and if you're not going to bet on them, I'd avoid it altogether.

[/ QUOTE ]

Sounds like some extremely square logic.

[/ QUOTE ]

Thankfully I don't bet on games. [img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img]

In all seriousness, I am a square, and that's cool, but betting on the Pats just seems like a bad idea right now. I could see myself betting on the Bengals because it seemed "sharp" and then when the Pats are winning 31-10 in the 3rd saying to myself "are you [censored] stupid?"

[/ QUOTE ]

Ok, well that's fine. I was just letting you know that no winning sports bettor actually thinks like that. Many times the lines that seem the most obvious to the public have the most value on the opposite side.