Originally posted on 10/14/2015:

Quote Originally Posted by WWCD View Post
Good points.

I am just not sold on ATL. Saints have been awful, but I guess because it's a primetime game at home after a blowout loss... getting points here is enticing me. Big majority on ATL and no line movement tells me books are comfortable with that. Looks like trouble to me.

Not trying to sway anyone, just thinking out loud.
books seem perfectly comfortable with a lot of obvious ass plays cashing, not hurting their bottom line. look no further than every zona road game (crush chi and det opening less than a fg fav in both), atl at dal after romo injury. all superior team without question and laying less than a fg, all blowouts.

honestly i like the under better than a side but i have no clue how you justify playing aints other than the contrarian angle. dont get me wrong i love being against popular opinion but i cant do it just for the sake of doing it, i have to be able to break down logically why the so called "square side" is the wrong side.. painfully obvious plays cash and crash every week, books dont shed a tear as this day and age their just as many wanna be sharps as squares happily betting the "fishy" line. in the end the suckers who win on atl for the most part have piss poor money management and will give it back on the next "easy" winner they see. just my opinion but i think the whole ideal of books dont give away money, vegas has those big buildings, ext ext ext is so very outdated..