packers line down to 7 on a few lines now.

GChild · 01-15-12, 12:08 AM

Pack pound downy boy

letsgo · 01-15-12, 12:30 AM

No, Giants beat three crappy teams at home and now everyone thinks they are great.

LT Profits · 01-15-12, 12:59 AM

Happy with my Giants +8.5 play, I would not play them at +7.

Speedy88 · 01-15-12, 01:40 AM

I cannot believe this line has dropped so far. 3 weeks ago, this line would have been GB -12. Now it is GB -7. People get to caught up with the NOW and forget the entire season as a whole. Lets not forget that this Packer team was very close to going undefeated and being considered one of the greatest NFL teams of all time. And at the same time, we were talking about the Giants as one of the worst defensive teams in the NFL. It is amazing how much can change in a few weeks.

I think GB rolls in this one. This is coming from a NYG fan too. I'm thinking GB rolls, something like 35-17.

209Raidernation · 01-15-12, 01:41 AM

im leaning gb, gb rested , pretty much healthy, will show no mercy and crush jpp"guaranteed win"

LT Profits · 01-15-12, 01:45 AM

Originally posted by Speedy88

I cannot believe this line has dropped so far. 3 weeks ago, this line would have been GB -12. Now it is GB -7. People get to caught up with the NOW and forget the entire season as a whole. Lets not forget that this Packer team was very close to going undefeated and being considered one of the greatest NFL teams of all time. And at the same time, we were talking about the Giants as one of the worst defensive teams in the NFL. It is amazing how much can change in a few weeks.

I think GB rolls in this one. This is coming from a NYG fan too. I'm thinking GB rolls, something like 35-17.

You seem to be forgetting that the Giants were decimated by injuries all year and that they actually have one of the BEST defensive lines in the NFL when they are at full strength, which they are now. That makes the entire defense look better.

Hoopster007 · 01-15-12, 01:53 AM

There D line is not going to help their CB's who will be getting torced. The packers were not healthy then either. Missing two LB's and offensive line was a mess. So that can be said for both teams. GB puts up 30+ so I guess bet depending on what you think the giants are putting up.

LT Profits · 01-15-12, 01:57 AM

Originally posted by Hoopster007

There D line is not going to help their CB's who will be getting torced. The packers were not healthy then either. Missing two LB's and offensive line was a mess. So that can be said for both teams. GB puts up 30+ so I guess bet depending on what you think the giants are putting up.

Rogers won't have as much time as he usually does though, and Giants should be able to score on GB defense now that running game is clicking, making them tougher to defend. Packers may still win the game anyway just because of Rodgers' greatness alone, but I'm a luvin' +8.5, especially with the market at +7.

GChild · 01-15-12, 02:01 AM

I don't think it matters the line could be -14 and they would still cover

LT Profits · 01-15-12, 02:05 AM

Originally posted by GChild

I don't think it matters the line could be -14 and they would still cover

That's not the point, if the game closes at +7 I have a solid +EV play regardless of the result. In other words, I did my job.

No coincidences · 01-15-12, 02:09 AM

Originally posted by LT Profits

Rogers won't have as much time as he usually does though, and Giants should be able to score on GB defense now that running game is clicking, making them tougher to defend. Packers may still win the game anyway just because of Rodgers' greatness alone, but I'm a luvin' +8.5, especially with the market at +7.

I keep reading this: the Giants' running game is "clicking"? They had 115 yards and 11 first downs total against the Jets in Week 16, and 106 yards on 31 carries in Week 17 against the Cowboys. Granted it was good last week, but I don't see anything earth-shattering. It was the worst in the NFL during the regular season, so I guess anything is a step up.

LT Profits · 01-15-12, 02:20 AM

Originally posted by No coincidences

I keep reading this: the Giants' running game is "clicking"? They had 115 yards and 11 first downs total against the Jets in Week 16, and 106 yards on 31 carries in Week 17 against the Cowboys. Granted it was good last week, but I don't see anything earth-shattering. It was the worst in the NFL during the regular season, so I guess anything is a step up.

Again injuries. You have to realize that either Bradshaw or Jacobs was out every week. Both are healthy now. In other words, Giants stats were very deceptive on both sides of the ball this year, they are a LOT better than their numbers.

No coincidences · 01-15-12, 02:21 AM

Originally posted by LT Profits

Again injuries. You have to realize that either Bradshaw or Jacobs was out every week. Both are healthy now. In other words, Giants stats were very deceptive on both sides of the ball this year, they are a LOT better than their numbers.

Bradshaw and Jacobs didn't both play in those last two games?

LT Profits · 01-15-12, 02:24 AM

Right, they finally play together and the Giants start running well. I don't see your point?

NYSportsGuy210 · 01-15-12, 02:26 AM

Giants played the Packers well already and almost beat them once in the regular season already. They are even healthier now.

Be careful...I smell upset here.

No coincidences · 01-15-12, 02:32 AM

Originally posted by LT Profits

Right, they finally play together and the Giants start running well. I don't see your point?

I'm just pointing out that in those two games combined with both on the field to end the regular season, they rushed for 221 yards on 57 carries (3.9 per, which would still rank them near the bottom of the league). Bradshaw's numbers weren't good in either game (15-54 vs. Jets, 16-57 vs. Dallas).

Not sure how one week of running the ball well means they're "clicking," but I'm just saying I keep reading that.

No coincidences · 01-15-12, 02:33 AM

Originally posted by NYSportsGuy210

Giants played the Packers well already and almost beat them once in the regular season already. They are even healthier now.

Be careful...I smell upset here.

The Packers haven't gotten healthier as well?

LT Profits · 01-15-12, 02:37 AM

Originally posted by No coincidences

I'm just pointing out that in those two games combined with both on the field to end the regular season, they rushed for 221 yards on 57 carries (3.9 per, which would still rank them near the bottom of the league). Bradshaw's numbers weren't good in either game (15-54 vs. Jets, 16-57 vs. Dallas).

Not sure how one week of running the ball well means they're "clicking," but I'm just saying I keep reading that.

Because they were still light years better than the first 14 weeks. Yes, Jacobs has been ordinary, but Bradshaw is the main man anyway and having Jacobs relieving him for a few series keeps Bradshaw fresh (thus effective) for the whole game. Now defenses are forced to respect the run, and that sets things up for Eli to succeed.

LT Profits · 01-15-12, 02:39 AM

Oh and did I mention the Green Bay defense? Giants will be fine offensively, Rodgers will be the key to the whole game.

Speedy88 · 01-15-12, 02:40 AM

I do agree that there is a chance at an upset here. But I don't see the Giants rolling into GB and defeating what is a much better packers team.

Giants do have one of the best D-line's in the NFL, but they also have one of the worst LB cores in the NFL. That pass rush will be neutralized IMO. The Giants like to take a lead so they can crank the pass rush up. I don't see GB falling behind in this game. At least not to the point where NY will be expecting pass 80% of the time. And Aaron Rodgers and the Packers are the kings of that quick strike offense. I'm not sure if Rodgers will even give the NYG D-line a chance to touch him.

No coincidences · 01-15-12, 02:44 AM

Originally posted by LT Profits

Oh and did I mention the Green Bay defense? Giants will be fine offensively, Rodgers will be the key to the whole game.

Rodgers threw for 369 yards and 4 TD's on the road vs. the Giants the first time around. He was only sacked twice for -9 yards -- the third lowest loss total on sacks he had all year long.

If he's the key to the whole game, I'm not sure how Giants' backers can feel comfortable.

LT Profits · 01-15-12, 02:53 AM

Originally posted by No coincidences

Rodgers threw for 369 yards and 4 TD's on the road vs. the Giants the first time around. He was only sacked twice for -9 yards -- the third lowest loss total on sacks he had all year long.

If he's the key to the whole game, I'm not sure how Giants' backers can feel comfortable.

Um, Giants DL? They'll put a lot more pressure on him this week. Only once this year was Rodgers under a lot of pressure while not throwing against man coverage, and you know the result.

Speedy88 · 01-15-12, 02:53 AM

Originally posted by No coincidences

Rodgers threw for 369 yards and 4 TD's on the road vs. the Giants the first time around. He was only sacked twice for -9 yards -- the third lowest loss total on sacks he had all year long. If he's the key to the whole game, I'm not sure how Giants' backers can feel comfortable.

Agreed. I think the only chance the Giants have is if Eli has one of those AMAZING games. And like I said above, I don't think the Giants D-line will have much impact on this game because:

A. Giants will likely be trailing during this game, therefore the D-line won't be able to crank up that pass rush.
B. Aaron Rodgers has one of the quickest releases for a QB
C. Aaron Rodgers is not Matt Ryan/Tony Romo/Mark Sanchez. He knows when to get rid of the ball, when to step up in the pocket, where to move in the pocket, and when to tuck it and run. Rodgers has a tendency to make defensive lineman and LB's look very bad when they try to tackle him.

LT Profits · 01-15-12, 03:01 AM

Originally posted by Speedy88

Agreed. I think the only chance the Giants have is if Eli has one of those AMAZING games. And like I said above, I don't think the Giants D-line will have much impact on this game because:

A. Giants will likely be trailing during this game, therefore the D-line won't be able to crank up that pass rush.
B. Aaron Rodgers has one of the quickest releases for a QB
C. Aaron Rodgers is not Matt Ryan/Tony Romo/Mark Sanchez. He knows when to get rid of the ball, when to step up in the pocket, where to move in the pocket, and when to tuck it and run. Rodgers has a tendency to make defensive lineman and LB's look very bad when they try to tackle him.

And what happened vs. Chiefs? When he alluded rush, he still couldn't find guys open because KC brought heat without blitzing, so there were always seven guys back. The Giants can do that now too.

beerman2619 · 01-15-12, 03:16 AM

oh god some people talking about how the chiefs shut down the pack. How many players were out for the pack game vs the Chiefs on offense? Pack coming off a bye week kids playing at home and now healthy. I don't think some of you realize how big that bye week is. Giants secondary banged up Aaron Ross playing hurt. Aaron Rodgers will have a field day with this so called great Giants defense some of you clowns think they are. Why yes a team that got swept by the Skins throw the house and car on them. No really this is just like the Giants team that went on the super bowl run and beat the Pats nevermind Giants are a

. By the way Romo had a pretty good game vs the Great Giants defense with basically a broken hand. This Giants defense especially in the secondary is still garbage.

Speedy88 · 01-15-12, 03:19 AM

Originally posted by LT Profits

And what happened vs. Chiefs? When he alluded rush, he still couldn't find guys open because KC brought heat without blitzing, so there were always seven guys back. The Giants can do that now too.

Yeah man I don't think you can compare the Chiefs game to this one. THAT WAS ONE GAME. Every team has a bad game every now and then. GB happened to only have ONE bad game out of SIXTEEN games. How many bad games did the Giants have this year??? Probably close to 5 or 6. What happened in the other 15 games that the Pack won?

And half their team was injured for that Chiefs game too, and that game was played on the road in one of the hardest stadiums to win on the road.

ebelisle22 · 01-15-12, 03:26 AM

packers lost to KC and ur shitting on giants for beating crappy teams?

PR9 · 01-15-12, 03:56 AM

Originally posted by NYSportsGuy210

Giants played the Packers well already and almost beat them once in the regular season already. They are even healthier now.

Be careful...I smell upset here.

Packers are also healthier now and that game was in NY.

Lambeau field is an entirely different story.

If the Saints played San Fran in New Orleans today in the superdome instead of San Fran then the Saints beat em by 2 or 3 TD's, probably more

Same thing with the Broncos. If it was in mile high instead of NE then it would have been a tighter game and Denver wouldn't have gotten so embarrassed. They'd lose, but not record breaking playoff numbers losing like Brady had in NE tonight.

And if the Giants played in Atlanta instead of NY the score wouldn't have been 24-2 Giants. That would be impossible.

Venue means ALOT. This game against the Packers isn't in new york.

.

StrictlyBusiness · 01-15-12, 04:00 AM

Originally posted by LT Profits

You seem to be forgetting that the Giants were decimated by injuries all year and that they actually have one of the BEST defensive lines in the NFL when they are at full strength, which they are now. That makes the entire defense look better.

and you seem to be forgetting that Rodgers can get the ball out of his hands in less than a second ? Big difference from Ryan, Romo, and Sanchez.

I read this thread, and get the impression that "LT profits" is trying to convince himself of the giants. Not good sign.

Speedy88 · 01-15-12, 04:10 AM

AARON RODGERS, ENOUGH SAID. HE ARGUABLY HAD ONE OF THE GREATEST QUARTERBACKING YEARS IN THE HISTORY OF THE NFL. Like I said, 3 weeks ago this line would have been GB -13. Now the NYG have improved over the past few weeks, but they have beaten weak teams (NYJ, DAL, and ATL). Either way, I love GB here. And I love the fact that the majority of the bets are coming in on NY's side. Me and the bookies are going to profit here.

arsenalxiv · 01-15-12, 04:22 AM

Originally posted by PR9

Packers are also healthier now and that game was in NY.

Lambeau field is an entirely different story.

If the Saints played San Fran in New Orleans today in the superdome instead of San Fran then the Saints beat em by 2 or 3 TD's, probably more

Same thing with the Broncos. If it was in mile high instead of NE then it would have been a tighter game and Denver wouldn't have gotten so embarrassed. They'd lose, but not record breaking playoff numbers losing like Brady had in NE tonight.

And if the Giants played in Atlanta instead of NY the score wouldn't have been 24-2 Giants. That would be impossible.

Venue means ALOT. This game against the Packers isn't in new york.

.

Couldn't agree more. Ravens and Packers advance tomorrow and both cover convincingly! All the books are hoping everyone remembers that game in NY so that they hopefully break even.

Packers roll by atleast 2 TDs.

LT Profits · 01-15-12, 05:30 AM

Originally posted by StrictlyBusiness

and you seem to be forgetting that Rodgers can get the ball out of his hands in less than a second ? Big difference from Ryan, Romo, and Sanchez.

I read this thread, and get the impression that "LT profits" is trying to convince himself of the giants. Not good sign.

I'm not trying to "convince" myself of anything, this is the first playoff game this year that I bet the straight ATS line, so I am obviously confident, especially since I got 8.5.

bigjonson · 01-15-12, 05:58 AM

LT - I am with you...

I got the G mean at +9 & I too could not be more confident at that number.

I even played a small wager on the outright upset.

2012 Green Bay Packers considered one of the best teams???

That is a bold statement if you ask me. While this season has been a very good one for them I am not sure that I would crown them just yet.

32-28
G-men for the upset.

arsenalxiv · 01-15-12, 06:12 AM

Kiss your money goodbye coz even Tebow had a better chance at upsetting Brady. Everyone thinks this game will be a repeat with what they have seen in NY a few weeks back. Not the case here. Eli beating Rodgers at Lambeau?

I think not. Look for the Packers to run over the "GMEN" here.