[SBR Lou]

Buffalo under 42

Kansas City under 39



Anyone on these, or on the other side? Would love to get some discussion going on them.

[I.R.B]

I like the KC under... But wont play it... GL if you do.

[SBR Lou]

I like the KC under... But wont play it...

[BigDeal]

Not on either. Leaning to Over for KC though.

[I.R.B]

I no longer bet more then 1 NFL game a week. Maybe a teaser but no more then 1 side and total.

[t-bone]

Buffalo under looks better........Buffalo/Miami games are never high scoring

17-14 Buffalo

[laxdjock]

BUF under looks better.

[SBR Lou]

BUF under looks better.

I'm just glad I haven't been called a bonehead yet..Hopefully these can come through and someone somewhere can make a penny or two.

[IDENTITY]

crazy - looks very sharp my friend. go get em today.

[SBR Lou]

crazy - looks very sharp my friend. go get em today.

Thanks ID. Good Luck today!

[McBa1n]

Actually I'm a big fan on both unders - I hope you're not hexed now.
The Buf/Mia under case has already been briefly been made...
Here's the case for the Jets/KC under play - The Jets will not look to run up the score if they're up more than 2 TDs - that's been something that's been going on forever in the NFL... If one team can't stay in the game, the other team just runs the football. Also, a case can be made that the Jets might have another stinker in store offensively.

Herm wants that game bad, who knows, though. I still like both quite a bit.

[mtneer1212]

I LOVE the SD-NO under -- it is raining in London, and Wembley Stadium is made for futbol, not FOOTBALL. If you remember last year, that field looked like a newly plowed field for soybeans by the second half. I believe the field conditions make UNDER 46 seem easy, despite the two awful defenses playing there.

[laxdjock]

Good point about Wembley. The Giants cost me a boatload over there, lower scoring game than I expected. I think much the same can happen.

[SBR Lou]