Probably hits. GL
 SBR Top-Rated Sportsbooks |
Best Sportsbooks List
|
|
| |||||
| #1 FanDuel | SBR rating 4.8/5 | Review | #6 BetRivers | SBR rating 4.1/5 | Review | #2 Caesars | SBR rating 4.7/5 | Review | #7 Fanatics | SBR rating 4.1/5 | Review |
| #3 DraftKings | SBR rating 4.7/5 | Review | #8 Betway | SBR rating 3.8/5 | Review | ||
| #4 BetMGM | SBR rating 4.6/5 | Review | #9 Borgata | SBR rating 3.5/5 | Review | ||
| #5 bet365 | SBR rating 4.6/5 | Review | #10 ClutchBet | SBR rating 2.9/5 | Review | ||
-
10-14-11 12:37 AM #71
-
10-14-11 09:35 AM #72
Good thinking
but like Jags +13.5 and Boys +7 more tho
-
10-14-11 09:42 AM #73
I may be giving this the kiss of death lakerboy, but rams +15 is my favorite play. While the rams suck, I don't think they're quite that bad. Green bay losing their left tackle can't help them either. Very early in the year rams had a little success moving the ball going no huddle. Did McDaniel work on this during the bye week?
-
10-14-11 10:54 AM #74
Not a bad play at all on Rams +15... But this seems more of a 'no play'to me. I can see the Packer's secondary having a feeding frenzy on picks, which they are known for, if the Packers can get up big.
The biggest reason I like the play, though, is the Rams front 4, while not elite, can get after the QB. Rodgers is as good as anyone of identifying pressure and getting the ball out fast, but you have MOST likely 2 really green tackles going for the Pack. Heck, they will have 2 really green tackles going even if Bulaga plays. Spags, with 2 weeks to prepare, I think can find ways of turning up the heat on GB causing drive killing penalties, possible sacks and possible turnovers. As well as Rodgers has played, GB's line has a better chance of 'letting down' a week after the fact they played pretty reasonable. GB's line, even healthy, is not excellent by any stretch...
It's really going to come down to if the Pack can get into that late game feeding frenzy of turnovers that they are so good at... I like the play on the Rams, but I dunno. The Rams havn't shown me much this year I can 'trust'. In fact, they've shown me a LOT less than even my bottom expectations were.
-
10-14-11 11:05 AM #75
aaron rodgers is 27-13 ATS since 2009. packers is the play, packers -15 or no play.
-
10-14-11 11:08 AM #76
i am curious what stats on are big dogs +14 and bigger covering are. It seems when their is a big number the team never covers
-
10-14-11 12:32 PM #77
Green Bay is #2 this week in the Sagarin rating and the Rams are 32nd. I will give - 14 -110 (@5dimes) with the game at Lambeau. Rodgers can get the ball out quick and The Rams secondary is garbage. The Packers should put up 35 minimum . Can St louis reach 21?
-
10-14-11 12:34 PM #78
that was before they were favored by a ton every game.. they were underdogs a lot of the last 2 years
Originally Posted by face
-
10-14-11 12:39 PM #79
good point Originally Posted by loopydude11
-
10-14-11 02:10 PM #80
bold pick brotha, BOL!
-
10-16-11 02:23 PM #81
-
10-16-11 02:25 PM #82
well if the game stays the way its going
a garbage time stl td = backdoor cover
-
10-16-11 02:53 PM #83
why would anyone take the worst team in the league, on the road against a top 3 team?
-
10-16-11 02:57 PM #84
Rams out gain the Packers and have over 400 yards of offense but can only manage 3 points?
Think the Rams had the ball inside the 30 of Green bay 4 times and came away with nothing.
I'm glad the Colts fumbled the cover away against Cincy too. Awesome start to the day.
-
10-16-11 02:58 PM #85
-
10-16-11 02:59 PM #86
Another fail thread. What a poser.
-
10-16-11 03:00 PM #87
It's OK lakerboy. This play wasn't supposed to win anyway so nobody should give you a hard time about it.
-
10-16-11 03:00 PM #88
at least he knows he sucks and only a play for 1x but it was a good day won a lot of plays not posted right lmao
-
10-16-11 03:09 PM #89
This play had a few chances to cover. Fukk Bradford, what a fukkin loser QB. 2 trips to the redzone in the 2nd half just to turn it over.
-
10-16-11 03:10 PM #90
Same guys over and over. Sure rams didn't cover but it wasn't aa bad play. Loads of chances to cover just couldn't get it done.
-
10-16-11 03:11 PM #91
-
10-16-11 03:13 PM #92
Payback for last night. Ole Miss couldn't punch it in on a first and goal from the 2 with 5 minutes left, down 45-7. I needed them to cover 39.5. They lose 52-7.
-
10-16-11 03:13 PM #93
-
10-16-11 03:13 PM #94
RIP naziboy.
-
10-16-11 04:06 PM #95
Dolphins +7.5 are the last team with a winless record out of a bye.
-
10-16-11 04:09 PM #96
Tough loss Lakerboy...
-
10-16-11 07:03 PM #97
Tough break. You'll get 'em next time.
-
10-16-11 07:05 PM #98
It was a bad play and I told him but no need to bash the guy because he bet on a team that only scored a FG.
-
10-16-11 07:08 PM #99
Exactly. This play lost b/c of pure luck. The Rams had Green Bay right where they wanted them. Originally Posted by pavyracer
-
10-16-11 07:12 PM #100
I put 12 units on the Rams ML. It was a sharp play. If Mike Sims-Walker wasn't hurt, Rams win SU.
-
10-16-11 09:04 PM #101
Bradford getting hammered this year.
-
10-16-11 09:13 PM #102
Oh ya shooter Originally Posted by Tree Rollins
-
10-16-11 09:20 PM #103
Hey stiffy! How are things? Originally Posted by D3 Mighty Ducks
-
10-17-11 02:55 AM #104
Only reason it wasn't more of a bloodbath for the Rams was because of 25-30 mph winds at Lambeau. Even with all the wind, they still rolled; Rams are a Joke. Easily one of the worst offenses in the league. But they had over 400 yards? LMFAO, once the Rams got in the red zone they showed their true colors. Playing stupid trends when they apply to crappy teams will make you go broke real quick when it comes to the NFL; good play? Tell me another story.
-
10-17-11 03:14 AM #105
Reply With Quote
