*** OFFICIAL 11/25/07 NFL SNF GAME THREAD (PHI @ NE) ***

[pjf1969]

if your br is such that you can dance around with that kind of variance-normal people will just stand back and watch the train wreck-stuey

[Rustjive]

[ QUOTE ]
lol this thread should get stickied because it has so many posts that exemplify how to not think about sportsbetting

[/ QUOTE ]

I really need you and Thremp to explain, and drop your 'lol i'm snide' type comments. Thremp likes to say that 'blahblahblah you guys make me go on tilt/stupidity' and 'you are tards if you think the spread will be over whatever Naj says' then is nowhere to be seen when the WA line is -24.

How about you gods humor us mere mortals by explaining why you think fading the Pats is so obviously +EV. Spare me the models (which say apparently that the Pats should only be 2 touchdown favorites - they're 9-1 against that number), or historical comparisons - call me when you've addressed Belichick's irrational behavior. I really think it's a no play on the sides, the only play is the over.

[ QUOTE ]
they are due to "just" beat a team by 2 td's or so.

[/ QUOTE ]

If that's the type of reasoning you think is what sportsbetting is not about, CrushinFelt, then I totally agree.

As for being 3-7 against -24, if you don't think gelling w/ 3 new receivers takes time, then perhaps you should get your head checked. How about looking at first 5 games/next 5 games points split? That 3-7 number is as meaningless as mine.

[CrushinFelt]

[ QUOTE ]
If that's the type of reasoning you think is what sportsbetting is not about, CrushinFelt, then I totally agree.


[/ QUOTE ]

Then we are in agreement.

I was mainly talking about the fact that it took Gnagi until his 13th post in his thread to actually use any numbers, facts, or anything resembling a thought to back up his argument. I wonder if that's a record.

[NajdorfDefense]

[ QUOTE ]
'you are tards if you think the spread will be over whatever Naj says' then is nowhere to be seen


[/ QUOTE ]

Where the hell did this come from? Did anyone say this, or did you have an aneurysm?

[Rustjive]

[ QUOTE ]
Posted at 11:28 PM
Reid says McNabb is going. -17.5 looks about right if McNabb starts. Meaning NWE wins 38-13.

[/ QUOTE ]

- followed by 10+ posts after midnight that all sound like...

[ QUOTE ]
i dunno what the books will open with, but does everyone agree a fair line has to be in the 20's?

[/ QUOTE ]

- cue our buddy Thremp -

[ QUOTE ]
Every post since midnight has gotten more and more retarded. Some suggested an idea... We take a vote of people and banish them to a "I R TARD" thread in the SBF until their time is up. Then they can post other stuff. Habitual offenders will be subject to similar programs like "3 Strikes" or "Alabama Ice".

[/ QUOTE ]

- cue the unveiling of the PHI @ NE line -

[ QUOTE ]
UPDATE: My book has them at -23 this week against PHI. LOLZ.

[/ QUOTE ]

- thremp exits right -

Edit: Our setting is the Patriots -24.5 before the end of the season? thread.

[NajdorfDefense]

1) McNabb's not starting. didn't you know?

2)Robert Walker, sports book director at the MGM Mirage, told the Post...the line could change depending on whether playing status of Donovan McNabb, who injured his thumb and ankle in last Sunday's win against the Miami Dolphins.
“We think (the line) would be 19 1/2, 20 with McNabb," Walker said.

20 <<< 24. Amirite? Or are you saying the head linesman for MGM doesn't know what he's doing?

3) You didn't quote all the fanbois who said line [with McNabb] should be 28-30 points.

I guess the fanbois are more expert than the prof linesetters, even though their guess was off by 6-8 points as NWE-22 was widely available for days even with McNabb's widely known ankle and thumb injury.

[Rustjive]

Line hit 23 within the hour of it opening. McNabb was ruled out within the last day. Nice revisionist history.

Re: your second point:

[ QUOTE ]
Posted by Me at 12:35 AM
Don't see it - take the Bills line, add 6 to account for HFA, and Philly is, what, favored by 3 over Buffalo on a neutral field? That's -19. If the books want to balance the public hammering the Pats it'll have to be 20 or more.

Edit: What I mean is by closing it'll be -19 and/or close to -20.

[/ QUOTE ]

And re: your last line: 17.5 == 19.5, 20? Naj Ph.D in Mathematics go!

Defend your butt buddy less, be less snide. Not saying I wouldn't love to learn from you, but please, this is Sports Betting forum, not the 'haha noobs' forum. I mean, reading post after post after post about how 'Thremp is the man', I can't see how that's tiring at all.

[Thremp]

Rust,

Please quote my post and all the ones I mentioned preceding verbatim instead of making fake arguments with fake quotes.

Thanks for intellectual dishonesty.

[furyshade]

[ QUOTE ]
Rust,

Please quote my post and all the ones I mentioned preceding verbatim instead of making fake arguments with fake quotes.

Thanks for intellectual dishonesty.

[/ QUOTE ]

lol, nice catch

[Kneel B4 Zod]

[ QUOTE ]
NWE doesn't have anyone who can cover Westbrook in their LB corps.

[/ QUOTE ]

wouldn't be too shocked to see Adalius covering him today, who is just about as good a cover LB as there is