Colts +2.5 @ Denver

[imgv94]

Wow just read this thread...

slacker00- Superb job on calling this game!! You basically predicted the final score, you know you're Colts...

isetcap-You didn't make one comment about this game until it was over, that is just not right, and you know it isn't right.. Kind of suprised me cause usually that is not your style..

I would like to know if you meant what you said in this thread?

If by "idiot" you mean I don't subscribe to the proclamations of a $10 bettor when he announces one side or another a "sucker bet" then you're probably right.

I would like to know if you realize how arrogant and ignorant that comment was? According to you $10 bettors shouldn't be taken seriously??? C'mon how fvcking shallow and just ridiculous is that? Some people have families to support, recent hard times, or actually "can" get excited with a small $10 or $20 bet.. Doesn't mean their any lower than you or have less knowledge..

[AC1318]

AC did you just quote yourself

Yes I did
I was hoping you changed your mind as I recall You had stated you were feeling under the influence along with a few others, I hope all profited from this game or at least split with denver

[isetcap]

Wow just read this thread...

slacker00- Superb job on calling this game!! You basically predicted the final score, you know you're Colts...

isetcap-You didn't make one comment about this game until it was over, that is just not right, and you know it isn't right.. Kind of suprised me cause usually that is not your style..

I would like to know if you meant what you said in this thread?


I would like to know if you realize how arrogant and ignorant that comment was? According to you $10 bettors shouldn't be taken seriously??? C'mon how fvcking shallow and just ridiculous is that? Some people have families to support, recent hard times, or actually "can" get excited with a small $10 or $20 bet.. Doesn't mean their any lower than you or have less knowledge..

I wasn't commenting on the game itself when I made the original statement. I was commenting on the absurdity of someone continuously telling us which bet is a "sucker bet", as if he's talking down to anyone who might choose that side. I actually find that arrogant and ignorant, and I was pointing out how shallow and ridiculous those kinds of statements are.

I didn't comment on the game itself until I was inappropriately called an "idiot" and a "dumbass" for pointing out the absurdity of a $10 bettor talking down to everyone as if he were the greatest wagerer of all time. Maybe he is, but that still doesn't mean he should make everyone else feel their picks are "sucker bets", especially when the picks in question are winners. If the $10 bettor is in fact as great as he purports himself to be through his obtuse statements, then surely he would find it advantageous to elevate his wagering to perhaps $100 or even $1000 a contest thereby effectively increasing his mastermind return by 10 or even 100 times. If he's figured out where all the "sucker bets" are but hasn't figured out this basic principle then perhaps it is safe for me to assume that he does have less sportsbetting knowledge than myself, even though I'm certain he is the best at pointing out winning "sucker bets".

[the underdog]

i win between $1000-$1500 every season betting no more than $25 a game and i'm happy. sometimes i feel like i want to bet more but i don't want to get too emotionally invloved does anyone understand me? most i ever wagered was $200 on a game and i almost had a heart attack.

[tacomax]

I've had lots of PMs informing me that isetcap is becoming a problem poster - this will be top of the agenda at the next meeting of the secret committee. If his behavior doesn't improve then we might have to run him out of town.

[isetcap]

Listen Taco I'm not trying to start any problems. But maybe you can help me out with a problem my buddy is having;

He met a special girl online. She's a very respected poster at a forum run by the "university" for which he "works". He's gone through all the standard stuff to get her to come out to Newark and visit him; sending pics of his body, car, house, and mink. Nothing's worked thus far so I'm wondering if you can post an image of your SIA hat. I'm sure he'll be able to seal the deal if he shows her that.

[pags11]

I really have respect for guys that come in after the game and tell people what terrible plays they've made when they didn't post their opinion before the game...

then they comment on the size of people's wagers which doesn't fucking matter at all...I've met guys at sportsbooks that bet $10 a game and are sharper that the dime players...that comment alone shows a lot of ignorance...

also, tacomax is very gay, just wanted to note that...

[pags11]

also, the next time you and tacomax get together for a fudge-packing session, you can discuss what losers you guys will play...

[isetcap]

I really have respect for guys that come in after the game and tell people what terrible plays they've made when they didn't post their opinion before the game...

I'm not sure who you're ranting about here but I guess it's not me since I never stated that anyone made a terrible play.

[isetcap]

also, tacomax is very gay, just wanted to note that...

I'd be interested in finding out how it is that you know Taco's sexual orientation. While you're explaining away your homophobia maybe you can also help us to understand what it means to be "very gay". You sure he isn't just "half gay" or maybe he's "ultra gay"? That's good stuff, pags. Really shows how elevated your mentality is.

Or maybe you're just joking around and I'm taking you too seriously. If that's the case, I apologize.

[pags11]

isetcap,

gay can refer to more than one's sexual orientation...in this case gay would mean uncool and or without any common sense...more like south park gay...you did talk about the size of a person's wager, and any capper that is worth their salt doesn't ever comment on the size of a wager...you should know that by now...also, chiming in on threads after or during a game (especially when you are saying something negative)is just bush...have an opinion before at least...sometimes you are kind of like the darth vader around here (tacomax is that old emperor guy...you have some good qualities, but then you do shit like this and I wonder what the hell you are all about...

[imgv94]

I'd be interested in finding out how it is that you know Taco's sexual orientation. While you're explaining away your homophobia maybe you can also help us to understand what it means to be "very gay". You sure he isn't just "half gay" or maybe he's "ultra gay"? That's good stuff, pags. Really shows how elevated your mentality is.

Or maybe you're just joking around and I'm taking you too seriously. If that's the case, I apologize.

isetcap where is your common sense dude?

Please tell me you didn't really interpret pags comments as homophobic?

C'mon dude...

[isetcap]

...sometimes you are kind of like the darth vader around here (tacomax is that old emperor guy...you have some good qualities, but then you do shit like this and I wonder what the hell you are all about...

I've got to admit, that did bring a smile to my face.

Let's just chalk it up to the fact that I don't like it when people denegrate others' picks by arbitrarilly defining them as "sucker bets". It's simply not helpful and only creates a negative environment. People who take the time to post their picks here should not have to have someone come along and make them feel stupid because they happen to be on the other side.

A "sucker bet" is paying -110 on the coin toss for the Superbowl (unless you know the coin is weighted toward a particular side). Selecting the specific side of a contest after capping your position and evaluating the price to determine positive value is not a "sucker bet".

[imgv94]

Let's just chalk it up to the fact that I don't like it when people denegrate others' picks by arbitrarilly defining them as "sucker bets". It's simply not helpful and only creates a negative environment. People who take the time to post their picks here should not have to have someone come along and make them feel stupid because they happen to be on the other side.
A "sucker bet" is paying -110 on the coin toss for the Superbowl (unless you know the coin is weighted toward a particular side). Selecting the specific side of a contest after capping your position and evaluating the price to determine positive value is not a "sucker bet".

Well said iset.. I agree 100% and now understand your actions here..

Buddybear did come into this thread making a negative comment (INDY=SUCKER BET)that likely made Colts bettors feel or even appear like they were dummies.. And after the Colts were victorious I believe isetcap felt some vindication for himself and others who liked and wagered on the Colts..

Am I right here iset?

[isetcap]

Well said iset.. I agree 100% and now understand your actions here..

Buddybear did come into this thread making a negative comment (INDY=SUCKER BET)that likely made Colts bettors feel or even appear like they were dummies.. And after the Colts were victorious I believe isetcap felt some vindication for himself and others who liked and wagered on the Colts..

Am I right here iset?

I'm not sure I had a sense of vindication, as I'm not sure the Colts winning actually proved it was the better side. I did think that I had found an angle that worked and more than anything else I wanted to act as a counterbalance to the sucker bet statement for people who felt it was smart to select Indy.

As an aside, many people I speak with and respect were backing the Broncos as was I originally, and the person I respect most here at SBR (Owned) was heavily on Denver so there's certainly no sense of vindication for me in their loss.

I do appreciate your open-mindedness about the subject, IMG.

[maritime]

I have to say that Denver's decision to not bring pressure on Manning makes me think that the theory of not revealing Denver's ultimate gameplan (ie Shanihan's strategy in a more meaningful playoff game) seems plausible. It also makes me think about this weeks game with the Pats. I think the reverse is true here. The Pats have to know that they their best chance to beat Colts in playoffs is to get them at home, in the snow possibly. And to do that they need this game. It's an interesting take on the Denver/Colts game. One I didn't think about but have thought about in the past...if a team think's they have a strategy or gameplan that could work, why use it in a regular season game and then let the other team have time to make adjustments? Anyway...

[Jay Edgar]

Is or was this a "Replay" game on the NFL Network? If so I'd like to see that. Their package may shed at least a little light on the question of whether Shanny played possum.

In my frustration at tearing up my Denver ticket I posted that they never sent anybody extra at Manning, but that's not strictly true. They did try a time or two at least, though not effectively and even somewhat halfheartedly it seemed to me. (It was ILBs the times I remember).

[imgv94]

I honestly don't think either side was the right play. This turned into a game where the last team that had the ball would win..

[tacomax]

gay can refer to more than one's sexual orientation...in this case gay would mean uncool and or without any common sense...more like south park gay...

Yes, you can try and spin that one if you want. Having said that, it's pretty lame to dish out an insult and then back-track once someone calls you on it. But anyway, that's your explanation for your use of the word gay. OK, that's cool.

But can you now please explain your reasoning for the term "the next time you and tacomax get together for a fudge-packing session". Just to remind you, neither me nor isetcap work in the fudge-packing industry. Well I don't anyway.

[tacomax]

Buddybear did come into this thread making a negative comment (INDY=SUCKER BET)that likely made Colts bettors feel or even appear like they were dummies.. And after the Colts were victorious I believe isetcap felt some vindication for himself and others who liked and wagered on the Colts..

Am I right here iset?

B-I-N-G-O

Maybe it's the drugs I'm taking, but imgv seems to be growing on me.

[moses millsap]

South Park Gay. Funny stuff. Next time I rub somebody the wrong way by outing them as a fag, I'll just tell them I mean it in the South Park kind of a way.

[pags11]

isetcap,

good shit here...I can handle that response...

tacomax,

I swear to you at the time I made the comment I meant it as gay, because I think you're a bit of a tool...you have a bunch of book smarts in you, but not very good people skills...thus, you are gay by one version of an american definition...

yes, I have made reference to you using a strap-on, and yes I have called you a fudge-packer, but in this case your gayness was of a different kind (much worse in my opinion as I have no problem with gay people, but I do have problem with guy's who claim to have magic beans--that just screams of being a nerd)...are you one of those guy's that sits in his basement and reads Harry Potter all weekend?...'cause you seem to be that type...go out and bang a chick every once in a while, you might not be so uptight then...

[nosuzieno]

I have to say that Denver's decision to not bring pressure on Manning makes me think that the theory of not revealing Denver's ultimate gameplan (ie Shanihan's strategy in a more meaningful playoff game) seems plausible. It also makes me think about this weeks game with the Pats. I think the reverse is true here. The Pats have to know that they their best chance to beat Colts in playoffs is to get them at home, in the snow possibly. And to do that they need this game. It's an interesting take on the Denver/Colts game. One I didn't think about but have thought about in the past...if a team think's they have a strategy or gameplan that could work, why use it in a regular season game and then let the other team have time to make adjustments? Anyway...

ah, kind of "throw this one" to hide our greatness, also insuring that if we do play Indy again, it will be at RCA, adding to our chances of victory? How diabolical!

[isetcap]

ah, kind of "throw this one" to hide our greatness, also insuring that if we do play Indy again, it will be at RCA, adding to our chances of victory? How diabolical!

Mike Shanahan is a piece of Shit, but he's no dumbass. He knows very well that his team does not play a style of football that is going to allow them to keep up with the Colts record in the regular season. When he sits down and looks at the schedule, he makes this comparison...

Do I want to try really hard to beat the Colts now, knowing that it still is going to be very difficult to win, we already have 1 loss this season, and our schedule is much more difficult than the Colts? In this scenario, I have to hope we win (not a given); then for the win to really pay off I have to make sure I match Indy win for win the rest of the season to get home field advantage. That means it's very likely I don't get to rest anyone late in the season. Even with home field advantage, I still have to make sure I beat Indy one more time to get to the Superbowl, knowing full well how difficult it is to beat a great team twice in a season.

OR

Do I stay vanilla and hide my scheme, effectively handing home field to Indy? This allows me to maneuver through the regular season with much more room for error. Instead of having to execute on many different levels, I can sit back, rest players where appropriate, continue to play conservatively, and wait until the game has genuine importance and then throw my best punch. During that time, my team is likely to improve offensively, while Indy is already at the top of its offensive game and probably isn't going to get much better.

So really it's a question of whether I put all of my eggs in the regular season basket or do I sell out for post season success? If you know Mike Shanahan, then you know what his decision will be.

[nosuzieno]

had denver won, they would be both be one loss teams with D having straight up advantage and a win already over NE. Now, although a lot can change, they are poised to host one playoff game at best.

I respect the theory but can not believe Shanny had better game plan that he is saving for potential post-seaon meeting (didn't happen last year) at expense of trying to get to Superbowl on the road through Indy AND possibly NE. His face as Viniteri hit certainly didn't have that "I've got em where I want em now" look on it.
No, he simply got beat (again) by Colts.