Week 9 Looking Ahead Pats vs Rams

[Stifler's Mom]

Patriots -2?

Are you kidding me? Am I missing something here?

Pats will be pissed off and wax the overrated Rams next week!!

I know they're a little beat up in the secondary, and I'm not sure if Dillon will be playing, but lets face it, New England has had injuries before and other guys have stepped up big. They have been nothing but the true definition of a TEAM during the last 3 yrs.

Patriots win 21 straight, and now are we to think they will lose 2 in a row?

Bellichick's D will have Bulger shitting his underoos by the 2nd qtr.

Only real thing I can see is super bowl revenge from 3 years ago...but the Rams don't have the D to do what Pittsburgh did to New England.

[rjp]

Rams win outright. Be careful.

[HOMEDAWG]

STIF, didn't you read the post???


Teams that are off of their first loss of the season have traditionally not done well the following week. Starting week 6 and on, you should play against any favorite of 7 points or less off its first loss of the season in its last game. This system is 21-0 ATS since 1992.

[Stifler's Mom]

The Rams are overrated and poorly coached.

I know it's one of those where the line looks "too easy" to the public, but hell, those games have been hitting all year.

Then again, the Rams still get major respect from the public for winning the super bowl in 99, LOL

Unless the Pats injuries are more than I realize....I know Ty Law got hurt yesterday for one.

[Stifler's Mom]

Interesting stuff. I guess this means the Patriots are going to lay down this week and take another beating :dunno:

[yomonte]

Any team that lost by 17-19 pts and had a bye the next week and was a dog, won SU.

GL

[Stifler's Mom]

All these trends, LOL

I guess I will have to reconsider now..

Thanks

[rjp]

Stif, fuck the "trends". Rams should cover 3 points against NE.

[feargreed]

STIF,

Remember the reason you have me about betting HOU, a rested team?

I hate STL cuz they always screw me, but they are rested.

[Stifler's Mom]

The Rams suck if you ask me, lol

[feargreed]

Originally posted by Stifler's Mom
The Rams suck if you ask me, lol

I won't argue with you there.

After a loss to the fish and a bye week playing injured NE.

You think NE really has a chance?

[Stifler's Mom]

I liked Houston because of more reasons than that they were a rested team.

Though they're not the most talented team in the NFL, Houston plays solid football every week.

The Rams are a sloppy team, and have an idiot for a head coach.

[Stifler's Mom]

.Teams that are off of their first loss of the season have traditionally not done well the following week. Starting week 6 and on, you should play against any favorite of 7 points or less off its first loss of the season in its last game. This system is 21-0 ATS since 1992.

Nice trend, LMFAO.

Even worse, I second guessed myself and took the LAMBS today, partly becuase of this stupid ass trend, and partly because of the Pats injuries :bang:

This trend is now 0-2 with both teams getting HAMMERED since it was posted here. 21-0 my ass :puke:

[HOMEDAWG]

STIF, there is a technical on this game, NE was a dog @ gametime... so that was NO PLAY under the trend.

[Stifler's Mom]

My rant was not directed at you homedawg....don't want you to take it that way.

Patriots opened at -2, and that makes them a fave in my book, no matter what the public drove the line to.

I mean am i to sit here and make my play 36 seconds before game time to make sure NE remains the fave?

This trend = :flush:

I am guessing it came from some stupid tout's writeup anyway :puke:

[feargreed]

If it makes you feel better, I loss money on the dam LAMBS as well.

I am officially not betting on the LAMBS again, at least for this season.

They are not the same team anymore.

[Stifler's Mom]

It just drives me nuts that I had a winner pegged early and I let it slide. No biggie....i had a great day today.

What i was really questioning is the origin of this trend. It sounds like something that would come right out of some tout's "21-0 ATS SUPER MEGA SYSTEM" or something.

Now I can see how one could say that New England doesn't count today cause they moved to the dog by gametime. It could also be said that Miami didn't count last Monday night cause it moved to +7.5 at some places by gametime.

If the Rams and Dolphins had won/covered, you can be ASSURED those plays would have counted under the system because of the opening line and it would now be "23-0 since 1992"

I think these touts that make these systems up only count the wins, and find some stupid reason why the losses don't count. That's what my point was.

How many other losses didn't count in the last 12 years because of line movement, or something else?

Basically, unless a trend can be verified by someone who's not touting, it's probably garbage.