Two Plus Two Newer Archives  

Go Back   Two Plus Two Newer Archives > General Gambling > Sports Betting
FAQ Community Calendar Today's Posts Search

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old 08-13-2007, 08:00 PM
gtrunner57 gtrunner57 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 111
Default Re: Mortal Lock!!

[ QUOTE ]
I live in the Twin Cities and I can assure you that the Vikings, sans 1998, have ALWAYS played to the level of their competition. There is no need to analyze their schedule.

[/ QUOTE ]

Can you elaborate as to why there would be no need to analyze their schedule while trying to determine how many wins they will have? Perhaps you think an opponent has little effect on the probability of winning a game. This would be supported by your assertion that the Vikings play to the level of their competition, thereby negating any effect that the competition has on the outcome of the game. Can you provide statistics showing how the Vikings' chance to win a game is uncorrelated from how good their opponent is for the last 8 years?
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 08-13-2007, 11:35 PM
sekrah sekrah is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 1,649
Default Re: Mortal Lock!!

[ QUOTE ]
Like it, but Vikes had best run D in NFL last year, Jackson will be better than last year, and a great run attack in Peterson and Chester Taylor. They will pick up Kelly Holcomb [Eagles 4th stringer right now] or McCown or someone better than Jackson as well.
Bears will be worse and so will GB possibly.

[/ QUOTE ]


Very unlikely Green Bay will be any worse this year. They were a young team last year that lost practically nobody and have an extra years experience under there belt.

Green Bay will win 8 or 9 this year.

I think Detroit will be better and might find 6 or 7 this year too.


All of that being said.. I don't think this is a mortal lock. Good defense, solid offensive line they might become a Ravens-lite type team and grab some wins. The pro's dont let the lines get this way without a reason.

The entire NFC North is underrated right now IMO. The Bears won't be as good but everyone else is better than they were last year IMo.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 08-14-2007, 12:35 AM
blackasthma blackasthma is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 187
Default Re: Mortal Lock!!

[ QUOTE ]
I can assure you that the Vikings, sans 1998, have ALWAYS played to the level of their competition. There is no need to analyze their schedule. This team absolutely sucks.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is an argument supporting.....the UNDER @ 7 ???

If the Vikings play to the level of their competition, doesn't that seemingly imply they should win 8 games and the correct play would be OVER 7? I would've never touched the UNDER with a ten-yard pole, and I'd be even less inclined to do so if there's a shred of truth to your argument.

I believe highly subjective statements like yours are common among fans of most teams in the NFL (and the NBA as well). Similar in effect to one declaring that his hometown is "one of the fastest growing communities in the country," only because he is proud to live there. I think the truth is that most NFL teams, on average, intrinsically do play to the level of their competition. Dynasties and perennial losers aside, not much talent separates the bulk of NFL teams from each other. Contrast this to college football. I NEVER hear anyone accuse a college team of sucking because they "play to the level of their competition." Why? Because there can be drastic differences in the athletic talent base on teams, even those within the same conference (e.g., Oklahoma & Baylor in Big 12).

I actually do think there is some truth to your theory about the Vikings. Your conclusion, however, makes no sense. Last year, the Lions nearly won in New England. Did the Lions play to the level of the Patriots, or vice versa? The Lions' season point differential in 2006 was actually better than that of the Niners, yet the Lions lost 4 more games than San Fran. With few exceptions, the level of competition among all pro sports teams lies within a very tight range. In any given year, some of these teams are "lucky" to win more than their fair share while others are "unlucky" to lose more than their fair share. But that shouldn't imply that they "suck" or that they are even "good." If anything, it means they just haven't yet managed to truly distance themselves from the rest of the pack...
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 08-14-2007, 09:02 AM
NajdorfDefense NajdorfDefense is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Manhattan
Posts: 8,227
Default Re: Mortal Lock!!

GB will win 9?? Uh-huh, sure. Feel free to make me a line on that.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 08-15-2007, 12:05 PM
funkytown funkytown is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 124
Default Re: Mortal Lock!!


Some people argue for the sake of argument. Tell you what, call me and if you want to play the over, I'll book any amount you want to wager. Put up or....
Reply With Quote
Reply


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:54 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.