Why do we back crappy teams with losers at QB like Cutler?

[BigDofBA]

The only play I had in tonight's game was the under for the first half but I'm not bashing anyone.

I took Oakland Monday night knowing that the Chargers were the better team and I felt like an idiot after I watched the Raiders play how they have played the past 10 years. I can't explain what the hell I was thinking backing Oakland. It just seemed like the right play.

Why do we back teams like the Bears against a team that won the Superbowl two years ago and went 15-1 last year?

Has sportsbetting really got us that mind f*cked?

I mean, the Bears beat the worst team in the league from a year ago last week. Why did they warrant being back at +5?

[suicidekings]

Hard to take anything from the Oakland game after what we saw with the long snapper debacle. That game got out of hand for the Raiders and it probably wasn't a fair representation of the two teams. SD relied heavily on kicking FGs for much of the night despite starting with great field position because they couldn't execute offensively against the Raider D.

[BigDofBA]

Hard to take anything from the Oakland game after what we saw with the long snapper debacle. That game got out of hand for the Raiders and it probably wasn't a fair representation of the two teams. SD relied heavily on kicking FGs for much of the night despite starting with great field position because they couldn't execute offensively against the Raider D.

I still felt like an idiot. I shouldn't have made that bet to begin with. I do this time and time again. Thank god I didn't play Chicago tonight. Green Bay is clearly the better team. I think the books were messing with people throwing out such a low line.

[Big_Slim]

I'm on Bears +7 and it still might cash or push...its only half time!!!...you guys give up too early!!!

[BigDofBA]

I cashed the first half under so I'm taking the sucker bet of Chicago +1 for the second half.

Basically +14 for the game.

[suicidekings]

The original line was -7.5, and the re-release after Week 1 was -5, but following the letdown against SF and the Bears looking so crisp vs Indy, that makes sense. If the market disagreed with the line we would have seen the line drifting back towards -7, but a week later, it closed at -5. No trickery. Just a good opening line that accurately estimated market demand, but not necessarily the relative strengths of the teams. We still have the second half to go, and a quick score by the Bears could change everything.

And I think everyone on Oakland felt like an idiot last week, myself included.