Why the Falcons should be faded

PeePee · 10-19-09, 04:02 PM

They made $ for me last night. Down the rd it's remain to be seen and the line value....

atlman_7 · 10-19-09, 04:25 PM

turnovers are a part of football. the falcons caused 2 of the turnovers last night, cutler made a terrible pass on the others. falcons should have out the bears away in the 3rd quarter. miami was the first game of the season, neither team was playing up to par. your reasoning makes no sense. you would make a better arguent by saying fade the national TV winner or noticing the fact that they play 4 of there next against teams coming off they bye. good teams know how to win ugly games.

Limey · 10-19-09, 09:04 PM

atlman, yes - of course turnovers are a part of football. However, there is a large element of luck involved in them, and even teams that happen to be really good at making picks and stripping the ball would not be able to rely on using those things to overcome being out-yardaged in games on a consistent basis. Moving the ball and preventing it being moved are a huge part of football, and Atlanta haven't done either this season quite as well as most people will assume they have simply from looking at their record. Therefore they are probably going to be over-rated on the spread for 2-3 weeks.

I don't really understand your point regarding the Miami game, at all. Miami pretty much outplayed Atlanta, with higher yards per offensive play, higher yards per rush, good redzone defense. The Falcons only won by TWELVE points despite being PLUS FOUR on turnovers and starting their drives on average on the 47-yard line! This is not a good performance at home. On top of that, there were four fumbles in the game and Atlanta recoved all four (three by Miami and one of their own) and that's lucky.

The yards allowed per point conceded statistic is quite significant also; the Falcons currently have an unsustainably high figure. This means that they simply are going to concede more points per yard conceded than they have so far, as the season progresses.

I'm not, repeat not, saying Atlanta are a bad team. I also have no emotional investment in them one way or another.

atlman_7 · 10-19-09, 11:32 PM

I agree with what you saying but I do not think you can fade a team week and and week out on your basis. Im just pointing out that better reasons to fade would be the fact they they some how got stuck playing i think 5 teams coming off their bye weeks.
As for being out gained every week, the offense isnt clicking yet I dont think that keeps up. Also last year the Falcons gave up tons of yards, but they're scoring defense was excellent. A bend but dont break kind of situation.
As for fading them, I really cant just say Im going to fade team X for the next few weeks, without looking at match ups. next week for instance i think ATL is +3 at Dallas. I myself often fade home teams who get 3 or less points bc without homefield advantage its just PICK. I guess to sum up by rambling I would never recommend others to fade a team off of just what you said. There are tons of factors, not just whether or not turnovers were unlucky or a team gets outgained in yardage.

Limey · 10-20-09, 11:12 AM

Hi atlman. I sort of agree and disagree with you, if that makes any sense. To put it in an extreme way, if Atlanta were +13 at home to Detroit this weekend - of course I'm not going to oppose them. I'm even slightly leery of this Sunday at Dallas, because it looks like a game that could easily go the same way as the Chicago one where they get outgained but get a couple of picks from another QB somewhat prone to them.

However, I think it is very useful in handicapping to search out factors that suggest certain teams are over or under-rated so that you are already kind of prepared for their games. You look to act on that knowledge as long as there are no really strong factors pointing the other way, and until you feel the value in that team has gone. An example would be a particular team who one big statistical factor suggested would be over-rated at the start of this season and promptly went 0-3 ATS the first three weeks. Once a team has gone 0-3 of course their inflated rating is gone, but getting on those three games was nicely profitable. With a fairly tricky three games coming up, I'm prepared to take the chance that siding against Atlanta in all three will result in at least two winning bets, although if they get stuffed heavily at New Orleans then the value will no doubt disappear afterwards.

Just food for thought, really...

Limey · 10-25-09, 08:41 PM

I'm going to be a jerk and bump this, since the Falcons seemed to be a popular pick this weekend....!

RayzHELL · 10-26-09, 11:01 PM

New Orleans is Up Next!

At New Orleans the FALCONS are 9-point dogs at BetUS. I still think New Orleans SAINTS -9 is the play.

atlman_7 · 10-27-09, 12:48 AM

Just going to point out that under the short period of mike smith and matt ryan, the falcons havent lost back to back games. i know thats not a huge time period but food for thought. also after how flat atlanta was in pretty every part of the game - offense, defense, special teams - im sure they will get things together and atleast make a game of this. i just think 9 is too big, especially for a confernece rivalry.

tltaylor89 · 10-27-09, 12:49 AM

falcons deserved to lose if you let Romo rush then pass for a td