• We're giving away a Cyclingnews water bottle! Find out more here!

National Football League

Page 130 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Jun 15, 2009
7,378
0
0
on3m@n@rmy said:
Player A obviously = Peyton Manning 2013
Player B must be trick question. Only other NFL player to reach 50 TDs in one season was Brady 2007, and it was exactly 50 (not 51). Is "B" a CFL or EFL player maybe?
Alpe d'Huez said:
Player B is either someone in another league (CFL, NCAA division II, etc). Or, it's someone's stats split over two seasons. It could be both. I was looking at Case Keenum, Colt Brennan, and Bryce Petty as all three threw a lot of TD's and not a lot of Ints, but none of them fit, even with stats split over two years. Didn't look up Timmy Chang, Andre Ware, Kellen Moore and others.
Very good both. But the winner is Alpe. The splits assumption is correct, only that it wasn´t two seasons, but ten. And from those ten, it was the best 16 games out of 151. In other words roughly 10% of all games started, and of that only the best of the best. Just shows how amazing the regular season of PM was (hope soon to be called the greatest complete season ever).
BTW, the 16 best of 151 games come off the book of Eli.
Isn´t it amazing how lucky this guy got? The career interception leader (by far as you all remember my link) of his era. The media built his reputation on 8 playoff games (most of them lucky, culminating in "The Tyree Catch"). And fans, GMs and coaches felt into this trap. Thus earning him 20 undeserved millions of dollars per year. I just can shake my head in disbelief.
If he was a fourth rounder or so, after one season he´d have been out. Unluckily for all of us, he was drafted in the 1st round because of his surname.

I know it´s getting tired. But forgive me all, I just try to talk Denver & PM to the win**. ;)

Alpe d'Huez said:
I'll be surprised if they blitz much at all with one exception: Bruce Irvin - and he's a pass rush specialist anyway. No, I said what Seattle will do, crowd the line of scrimmage and play a very hard pressure game on Denver's receivers. A great battle in the game will be to see how well these guys can get out, and if Manning can hit them in the 5-15 yard range. He's been great at it all year, and Seattle's been great at stopping it all year.
I´d be surprised too. PM is best vs the blitz*. But you never know, SEA certainly will come up with something different than what PM sees on game film (base cover 3 with a four men rush).
Sure they will pressure the receivers at the line to interrupt his rhythm, thus forcing him to hold the ball longer, leading to more pressure on him and his OL. I´ll watch & pray for the 5 guys (I intoduced a little bit more on my post some days ago) blocking as long I can on SB night (only one thing is certain for the SB night; friends and drinks will disturb my view ;)). If the OL can stand it, PM will have a good day, but not great one, b/c I think SEA LBs won´t be fooled/beaten with pick plays.
You know what would be perfect? Just a dream... Sherman trips once or twice over his feed when pressuring Thomas at the line, thus leaving him open for long touchdown(s) and shut his mouth a little. Football gods hear my wishes, it would be sooo sweet... :)

EDIT:
* Could lead to a game like the 84 MIA-PIT battle, or my often mentioned 91 WAS-ATL game. Would be sweet too...
** Finally it comes down to this: If DEN wins, all the pressure for PM and the negative playoff image is gone. I am almost sure he´ll do an Elway. Free of pressure he´d play magic ball one more year, win another one, and steps down. So for us true football fans/fanatics/critics it´s best if Denver wins. It´s even good for the SEA fans, b/c they love football too. :)
 
Feb 4, 2012
344
0
0
FoxxyBrown1111 said:
You know what would be perfect? Just a dream... Sherman trips once or twice over his feed when pressuring Thomas at the line, thus leaving him open for long touchdown(s) and shut his mouth a little. Football gods hear my wishes, it would be sooo sweet... :)
Manning's a man on a mission this year. I think Sherman and the vaunted Seattle defense are going to get spanked.

However, should Sherman and Co. shut down Manning, he'll have every right to run his mouth.

Should be interesting.
 
Jun 19, 2009
4,841
0
0
Pazuzu said:
Manning's a man on a mission this year. I think Sherman and the vaunted Seattle defense are going to get spanked.
However, should Sherman and Co. shut down Manning, he'll have every right to run his mouth.

Should be interesting.
Spanked? Really?
They haven't been "spanked" in a long time by anyone. Maybe that's why Sherman can act childish. I also don't think Peyton will get shut down. I also think Russell Wilson will surprise the Denver faithful and the East Coast Faithless. This will be a lot closer than any team's fans would like.
 
How about this player B?

422/659 64.0% 6010 yards 9.1 Y/A 56 TDs 4 Int.

or this one?

364/582 62.5% 4590 yards 7.9 Y/A 33 TDs 7 Int.

The first line is for Nick Foles this season, normalized for the same number of attempts as Manning. The second line is Nick Foles, for his career.

Alpe d'Huez said:
A great battle in the game will be to see how well these guys can get out, and if Manning can hit them in the 5-15 yard range. He's been great at it all year
I hadn’t realized how few long passes Manning has thrown this year, I think he had one of the lowest % in the league > 20 yards, at least before the catch. He’s been playing Joe Montana-ball, dumping it off short, then letting his receivers rack up big yardage after the catch.

Of course, when Montana did it, he was a weak-armed QB lucky to be in a system in which even Foxxy’s grandmother could have won the SB. When Manning does it, it’s because he’s the greatest ever.

Still think Marino’s 1984 was better. If he played in the current environment, he would throw for 6000 yards and 60 TDs. So would Dan Fouts. Don Coryell was born too soon, boy, would he have fun in the league today.

FoxxyBrown1111 said:
So for us true football fans/fanatics/critics it´s best if Denver wins. It´s even good for the SEA fans, b/c they love football too. :)
OTOH, if Denver loses, maybe we won’t have to see so many PM commercials this coming year? As a pro QB, Manning apparently doesn’t make enough money to support his family, so he has to moonlight suckering gullible American consumers into buying things they don’t need because someone who doesn’t know any more about them than they do says to buy them. In the Politics thread, this has been called wealth addiction. Like PED addiction, even “nice guys” are known to have the disease.
 
Jun 19, 2009
4,841
0
0
Merckx index said:
How about this player B?

422/659 64.0% 6010 yards 9.1 Y/A 56 TDs 4 Int.
or this one?
364/582 62.5% 4590 yards 7.9 Y/A 33 TDs 7 Int.

The first line is for Nick Foles this season, normalized for the same number of attempts as Manning. The second line is Nick Foles, for his career.

I hadn’t realized how few long passes Manning has thrown this year, I think he had one of the lowest % in the league > 20 yards, at least before the catch. He’s been playing Joe Montana-ball, dumping it off short
, then letting his receivers rack up big yardage after the catch.
Merk
If the weather's cold this will not work as a substitute for a running game past the first half. Seattle's ability to adjust quickly may be their strongest attribute. It will be a physical test of talented receivers and defense.
Denver's defense has good shot if Marshawn and Russell can be kept close to the line of scrimmage and none if they get loose.
 
Jun 15, 2009
7,378
0
0
Merckx index said:
How about this player B?

422/659 64.0% 6010 yards 9.1 Y/A 56 TDs 4 Int.

or this one?

364/582 62.5% 4590 yards 7.9 Y/A 33 TDs 7 Int.

The first line is for Nick Foles this season, normalized for the same number of attempts as Manning. The second line is Nick Foles, for his career.
What you wanna say with the 1st line? Confuse the readers? You know that very good efficiency numbers regress to the mean the more throws you have? That´s what makes PMs season so great. If you just have a look at the 2nd line it answers that issue itself.

Merckx index said:
OTOH, if Denver loses, maybe we won’t have to see so many PM commercials this coming year? As a pro QB, Manning apparently doesn’t make enough money to support his family, so he has to moonlight suckering gullible American consumers into buying things they don’t need because someone who doesn’t know any more about them than they do says to buy them. In the Politics thread, this has been called wealth addiction. Like PED addiction, even “nice guys” are known to have the disease.
Wrong adress (me). And you know it. If anyone is critical of player salaries and especially the greed of the Mannings (who even take money for signing autographs), it´s me. I am on boycott of products the NFL advertises since years as ya all know too.
About the commercials: It´s not my fault that many americans are so much brainwashed that they fight on "black friday" for needless things. I guess they are the opposite of north korea. I call it the decadence of the western civilization. Probably the human brain isn´t that far evoluted... Whatever. It´s the reason why PM commercials work. Thanks god we don´t see commercials in the breaks in germany, but the things we are there for: football footage.
In short; PM is a bad person. I 100% agree. OTOH, I am watching to see football in perfection, and I would love to talk about this season as a great one in years. Not as a disappointment again. In short I wrote about the player, not the person the last couple of weeks.

Merckx index said:
Of course, when Montana did it, he was a weak-armed QB lucky to be in a system in which even Foxxy’s grandmother could have won the SB. When Manning does it, it’s because he’s the greatest ever.
Blablabla. I see where you come from. Since I touched your idol*, you are on a attacking war path with me. You even got that far to call me troll. I ignore it, and I don´t care. I just bring it up now to make it clear to one time lurkers.
I guess the other veteran members like most of the things I write (like HFA, inside numbers, NFL studies, how betting works, the dark side of the game, historical QB stats, comparisons of the major leagues, or just chating about the old times and what else), even tough they don´t always agree.
Once more for you to understand it: It´s MY Top-5 (not "B-5" or whatever you like to call it), and surely it´s debattable since QB stats can´t be seen without the context that all 22 players on the field have great influence of the numbers (I repeat that more often than not). Other than baseball where it´s basically pitcher vs batter.

* Did you know that Montana is also greedy? Did you know that there was a great rumor that he was positive for cocaine before the DEN-SF superbowl (and as always, the NFL threw the dirt under the carpet). At least that was told the german audience. Most of times, if there is smoke, there is fire...
Finally, compare PM and his back-ups, and Montana and his back-ups. You might see the difference. Hint: A quick release like that of Manning and Marino seems to be a big weapon. OTOH, did I say anything about a strong arm of PM? I guess it was the other way around. Just go back a couple of my posts.

Scratch my head why people always need to go low and attack if they have a other view of things. I am almost 100% sure that I never started the fire. Be it here or in the clinic. Others seem to need it to express their feelings. Talk about evolution...
 
You missed commenting on this part, Foxxy:
Merckx index said:
Of course, when Montana did it, he was a weak-armed QB lucky to be in a system in which even Foxxy’s grandmother could have won the SB. When Manning does it, it’s because he’s the greatest ever.
You left out the part about having the greatest receiver in history to throw to. ;)

Still think Marino’s 1984 was better. If he played in the current environment, he would throw for 6000 yards and 60 TDs. So would Dan Fouts. Don Coryell was born too soon, boy, would he have fun in the league today.
Marino, maybe. He certainly would have racked up numerous 5,000 yard, 40+ TD seasons. Like a dozen. Pushing 6,000 and 60 isn't out of the question. Fouts, possibly.

Definitely true on Don Coryell being ahead of his time. Probably Weeb Ewbank too (recall, he brought Unitas and Namath into the league), turned running teams into passing teams, changed the way the game was played a little.

I wouldn't call PM a "bad person", at all. But I would agree the Mannings are as greedy as any other players in the NFL. The way Eli came into the league, and the contracts they have insisted on, shows that to be so. None the less, you'll find people who say their wining warrants it, no matter what the cost.
 
Alpe d'Huez said:
As to Seattle playing against trips. There is no way they will run a corner blitz. I'll be surprised if they blitz much at all with one exception: Bruce Irvin - and he's a pass rush specialist anyway. No, I said what Seattle will do, crowd the line of scrimmage and play a very hard pressure game on Denver's receivers. A great battle in the game will be to see how well these guys can get out, and if Manning can hit them in the 5-15 yard range. He's been great at it all year, and Seattle's been great at stopping it all year.
True. In fact, SEA has not blitzed the corners all year. At least not very often. I am more interested to see if they get out of the triangle formation with the corners and FS Earl Thomas, bringing SS Chancelor up which tightens up coverage on short routes. Because of Welker, I think they will do what they normally like to do.
 
FoxxyBrown1111 said:
Once more for you to understand it: It´s MY Top-5 (not "B-5" or whatever you like to call it).
Very true. This is why no matter how I make a list, Namath belongs in my top 5. I've listed the reasons before. Changed the way the position is played, best release and form ever, tough, leader, played on some weak teams, often hurt, won big games, etc. You want to know someone who could throw for 6,000 and 60 if playing today? I'll toss Namath in there. Of course, that's just my list, my opinion. I'd also have Montana on my top 5 list.

And surely it´s debatable since QB stats can´t be seen without the context that all 22 players on the field have great influence of the numbers (I repeat that more often than not). Other than baseball where it´s basically pitcher vs batter.
You left out the catcher, who calls pitches, and oversees the field. The thinking man's position, the QB of baseball. But yes, the game is between the pitcher and catcher, and the guy trying to hit the ball. 95% of baseball right there.

As to 22 guys and Montana. The whole "Steve Young and even Steve Bono played as good!" argument only goes so far, especially when you look at big games, high pressure games. That's where Montana shined, more than those guys, and I think as good as any QB in history. There are still a LOT of 49er fans upset about the 1993 NFC Championship when George Siefert stuck with Steve Young, even though Joe Montana was healthy, and the Niners lost. In hindsight...

As to "greedy" players. I think you'll have a harder time naming players who have taken pay cuts to help the team, then those who try to get the best pay they can. Brady is of course the shining knight. Tavaris Jackson accepted less money to go back to Seattle. And Cory Dillon did it when in NE too. If memory serves, Jim Plunkett reconstructed his contract to help the Raiders once in his day. And...I'm running out of names. But to me the greedy ones are those who refuse to play for certain teams, and hide behind agents that demand so much money it hampers the team's future (Eli fits both there. Flacco the latter. PM's contract is going to really hurt Denver in 2015 and beyond.) Of course, one could argue the sports world is driven by greedy billionaire owners haggling with greedy millionaire players.

As to partying players, ever see a documentary called Cocaine Cowboys?! One section tells the story about one of the early 80's Superbowls in Miami and the partying that went on leading up to the game. I'll let you guess what drug was reportedly consumed by a lot of players.
 
Jun 15, 2009
7,378
0
0
Alpe d'Huez said:
Very true. This is why no matter how I make a list, Namath belongs in my top 5. I've listed the reasons before. Changed the way the position is played, best release and form ever, tough, leader, played on some weak teams, often hurt, won big games, etc. You want to know someone who could throw for 6,000 and 60 if playing today? I'll toss Namath in there. Of course, that's just my list, my opinion. I'd also have Montana on my top 5 list. ...

As to 22 guys and Montana. The whole "Steve Young and even Steve Bono played as good!" argument only goes so far, especially when you look at big games, high pressure games. That's where Montana shined, more than those guys, and I think as good as any QB in history. There are still a LOT of 49er fans upset about the 1993 NFC Championship when George Siefert stuck with Steve Young, even though Joe Montana was healthy, and the Niners lost. In hindsight...
You are right. Wish I had my old list (deleted?) from circa 1 year ago. My latest T-5 was made in a hurry, but i´ll never left out guys like Marino, Fouts, Warner, Elway... Some posts later I said Namath certainly belongs in there.
I tried to look at QBs play only (difficult enough). Meaning leaving out the talent around him, and comparing their play to the other starters of the certain teams if possible.
Marino was far ahead of time, Fouts too. Elway had mediocre receivers most of time, Warner was awesome in his NYG and ARZ stints when comparing to the others who started games for those teams in that time.
In my opinion Montana just don´t fit, as I explained (same stats as his replacements, system, talent around).
He was very good, no doubt. But many others are too, who just weren´t that lucky as him. About his playoff play; that was awesome. OTOH as we recently discussed, "clutch play" evens out in the long run. Just have a look at "Matty-Ice" (actually there is no more), Eli (other than his two SB runs, his teams are three time one-and-dones), Tebow (not even good enough to be an back-up QB), Brady (0 for whatever since he had to carry his team from 2007 on), or even a guy like Elway: All his comebacks didn´t help when his teams just weren´t good enough in his first three SB runs.

Alpe d'Huez said:
Of course, one could argue the sports world is driven by greedy billionaire owners haggling with greedy millionaire players.
True. But I think players get too much credit as the good guys, and the owners are the bad ones. To me, the only difference is the amount of money they keep in the bank. They are both greedy beyond help. But I am not going to pamper and hail the players as the sports world does.
Fact is: Without the billionaires (or their kids running business now), there are no 20-mio-$-a-year-contracts. They would have to try their luck with 400-dollar-per-game-checks in arena football. And if they think they could create their own NFL; good luck. Most of them can´t even run a profitable beloved patriot-tonk around the corner (just have a look at the high rate of ex-millionaire-players going bankrupt).

Alpe d'Huez said:
As to partying players, ever see a documentary called Cocaine Cowboys?!
No, you have a link? You know I like those dark behind-the-spotlight-stories. No matter if books, movies like North-Dallas-Forty, or docus.

Alpe d'Huez said:
One section tells the story about one of the early 80's Superbowls in Miami and the partying that went on leading up to the game. I'll let you guess what drug was reportedly consumed by a lot of players.
Only know stories like those described by McMahon for example. Drinking hard on friday, performing on sunday, going hard again on the plane home. Love that stories b/c they bring back great memories of our baseball team. Only difference; we weren´t ready to play sometimes. ;)
But we never took drugs. Beer, gambling & women were the favourites. God it was a great time...
 
Good grief, Foxxy, I didn't view my post as attacking you, I certainly wasn't accusing you of trolling. You know I value your input here, especially with regard to stats, as I have great respect for that kind of analysis in any sport. You've opened my eyes to things about NFL performance. Keep it coming, by all means.

My point about Foles was not that his season was better than Manning's, but just that how awesome it was. Sure, he would probably regress somewhat if he had played a full season. But how many players in any sport do you know who, in the equivalent of half a season, have been on a pace to be the best ever for a full season? Imagine a baseball player who, in eighty games, hit over .4OO, with 35 HRs and IOO RBI. The fact that that performance would't set any records doesn't detract from its awesomeness. And just as Foles' numbers this year probably overestimate what he can do, his numbers the previous year probably underestimate what he now can do. So the fact that the combination still results in what would be a very good season is remarkable. Remember, Manning never had a performance anything close to th is when he was that age.

Montana is not my idol. I think he was one of the best, sure, but opinions differ.He never threw a pick in a SB, his cumulative rating in the big game was 127+. But he had some bad playoff games, too, and even some of his most famous wins there he was not always so great. E.g., in that championship vs. Dallas that gave birth to the legend, he threw three ints to go along with his three TD passes.

I remember the coke story. Interestingly, 1985 was the year of the famous snowball game at Denver. Just before the half, the Niners attempted a very makeable FG. As the kicker was about to put his foot to the ball, some Bronco fan threw a snowball on the field. It seemed to distract the kicker, and he missed. The Niners lost that game by a point, so you could say that missed FG decided the game. And anyone who has followed the NFL will not be surprised to learn that that loss, along with another one to the Rams later on a freaked tipped pass-like the one Sherman tipped, but the Niners weren't so lucky, the Ram receiver came down with it and scored-made the difference between WC and winning the division. Anyway, the joke after the game was that the reason the kicker missed was because Montana, who was holding the ball, thought the snowball was a delivery of coke.

Speaking of bad weather games, anyone here remember Eagles at Bears, 1988 divisional game? The Fog Bowl? The stuff was so thick that TV viewers could not see what was happening on the field? What if that happened in the SB?

As for the money thing, yes, I know you have been vocal in criticizing that. I brought it up to remind others that these nice, gentlemanly, non-trash talking players are not the perfect role models the media often make them out to be. You will never catch a sportswriter criticizing a player for holding out for everything he can get.
 
Jun 15, 2009
7,378
0
0
Merckx index said:
Good grief, Foxxy, I didn't view my post as attacking you
OK, peace. :)
But you must admit you was hot tempered when you wrote in a couple of late posts "B-5", "blurred scoreboard vision", "grandmother", etc...
Admit, if I go trou some of my posts, not all of them are exactly good. Lately I was a little annoyed how SEA got to the SB. That may have led to some below average posts of mine... :cool:
 
Jun 15, 2009
7,378
0
0
Merckx index said:
My point about Foles was not that his season was better than Manning's, but just that how awesome it was.
Ok, then I was interpreting it wrong... Indeed his season was impressive.

Merckx index said:
Speaking of bad weather games, anyone here remember Eagles at Bears, 1988 divisional game? The Fog Bowl? The stuff was so thick that TV viewers could not see what was happening on the field? What if that happened in the SB?
The best game i ever saw that i didn´t saw. Up today it´s a mystery to me how they kept the stats (someone knows the answer? I am eager to know). I mean nobody saw anything in the 2nd half. And even more impressive is that Cunningham threw 400+ yards. How did he do it? :confused:

Merckx index said:
You will never catch a sportswriter criticizing a player for holding out for everything he can get.
Yeah. They sit in the same boat. Both sides earn good money off the NFL product. It´s the same as it was with LA. The bike mags advertised the brand (bikes, wrist bands, and what else). Negative stuff like doping would have only hurt the business....
 
I remember the Fog Bowl. I actually missed the first half. I turned on the TV and it was right when the fog started to really roll in. The game was rather boring to watch though, as you could hardly see anything, and the announcers weren't saying anything of value. So you just watched it as a spectacle, that's it!

There was a game in Kansas City versus Seattle once. It was when Warren Moon was on Seattle. There was a huge, HUGE downpour that lasted a couple quarters. The rain was so heavy you had a hard time seeing what was going on. No team could even throw the ball. It was all a bunch of up the middle runs. No passes, no punts. Can't find a clip on YouTube. Crazy game. They ended up suspending play for an hour or so it was so bad.

Oh, the answer is: If it were heavy fog or rain during the Superbowl, they would have something to write about! I do imagine they would suspend play for a while if they could.
 
Jun 15, 2009
7,378
0
0
My final 2-day-well-calculated pick (inclusive possible comebacks, bad weather, "short fields" for SEA, possible defensive TD return by SEA*, strength of schedule, Y/PP, match-ups; all numbers and comparisons have DEN at least as slight favourite, or as big one if certain random things do not happen):

DEN 24, SEA 23

* Would be a heart attack for me, but a face slap for Easteregg who wrote today that SB party guests could pose if they tell everybody the winner is the team that scores a defensive TD. His "logic"; teams that score one are 11-0 in superbowls. He never heard of small sample sizes or "runs". I mean I saw 11 or more reds in succession on the roulette, only to see the next number was a black.

Note: The final pick does not include outside influence like signal stealing, spying, or game fixing
 
FoxxyBrown1111 said:
My final 2-day-well-calculated pick (inclusive possible comebacks, bad weather, "short fields" for SEA, possible defensive TD return by SEA*, strength of schedule, Y/PP, match-ups; all numbers and comparisons have DEN at least as slight favourite, or as big one if certain random things do not happen):

DEN 24, SEA 23
What happened to your prediction that SE would not score more than 10? I was all set to bet you they would score 17 or more.

The wind factor:

The Meadowlands, home to MetLife MET +1.45% Stadium, has a reputation for its fierce winds. Timothy Gay, professor of physics at the University of Nebraska and author of "The Physics of Football," calculated precisely how wind speed affects passing. According to Gay, the slower-velocity touch passing that is Manning's specialty becomes difficult to execute once the wind hits 20 mph. A 30-yard pass would be thrown off course by over a yard (37.8 inches). Increasing the velocity of the throw from 40 to 60 mph reduces the effect to just over a foot (13.7 inches), but only a select few can throw that hard. And Manning, 37, wasn't known as a power thrower even before multiple neck surgeries. His counterpart in the Super Bowl, Seattle's Russell Wilson, has a top throwing speed of 55 mph, according to Ourlads' Scouting Services.

Because of a reliance on passing, even in gusty conditions, Manning's poor performance in windy games often has crippled his team's offense. He has thrown five touchdowns and nine interceptions in eight career starts when the wind exceeds 20 mph. His passer rating in these contests, 68.0, is nearly 50 points worse than the 115.1 he registered in his record-breaking 2013 season, according to Stats LLC.
Christmas in las Vegas comes in January, not December:

In Nevada, more bets are placed on the Super Bowl than any other sporting event. Last year, for example, a record of nearly $99 million was bet in Nevada’s sports books. Of that, the books kept $7,206,460…

In Las Vegas they have a $5.5-million average win margin over the last 10 Super Bowls and they have won 21 of the last 23 outright.
Why Denver is favored:

there are two kinds of money: the sharp dough of professional gamblers and the square dollars of the public…square money is enthralled by favorites and falls hard for teams that have done a lot for them lately. The Broncos, for instance, not only covered against New England, but looked good doing it. It’s part of the reason Denver is currently the 2 ½-point favorite even though oddsmakers opened with the Seahawks — a team they believe is better — as a 2- to 2 ½-point favorite.
The prop bets are popular year round, but they have become a hallmark of the Super Bowl and one of the game’s most popular gambling features. Most experts say they became a phenomenon in 1986, when Chicago defensive tackle William Perry rushed for a surprise touchdown in Super Bowl XX. Bears Coach Mike Ditka had used Perry as a short-yardage specialist, but no one believed he would run his defensive tackle into the end zone in the championship game. When Perry scored in the third quarter of a 46-10 Chicago rout, the books’ losses were in the six figures — and a new craze for prop bets was born.
Wouldn't surprise me if Ditka bet on that. The game was long decided before Perry scored, anyway.

“People have a tendency to think that professional bettors win an enormously high percentage of their wagers — 70 or 80 percent,” Sevransky said. “That’s nonsense. The best bettors in the world, the best bettors long term across sports, are going to be hitting 55, 56 percent. And that’s enough of an edge when you’re betting good numbers, not to just make a good living, to make a real good living.”
How many passing yards will Manning have?
OVER/UNDER 296.5
Definitely would take the under here.

What will Foxxy's BAC be at the end of the game?
OVER/UNDER 0.12%
Over, over, over.

Nevada sports books have made money in 21 of the last 23 Super Bowls, with an average win of $5.5 million the past 10 years.

Their biggest win came in 2005, when the underdog Eagles, covering against the Patriots, earned Nevada books $15.4 million.

Their biggest loss came in 2008, when the Giants upset the Patriots, costing the books $2.5 million.

Their only other loss came in 1995, when the 49ers crushed the Chargers to the tune of $396,000.
 
Jun 15, 2009
7,378
0
0
Merckx index said:
What happened to your prediction that SE would not score more than 10? i was all set to bet you they would score 17 or more.
Because of all those uncertain things I described that could help SEA. I do not think for a second that SEA is able to put 23 on the board with their offense facing Denvers base defense* with average starting field positions.

But the way they played the season, I fear "short fields" (the SpT are clear advantage for SEA), and return touchdown(s).

* Their offense might also score 20+ in a scenario where they are forced into desperation mode by being behind big, and thus face a prevent defense later. Not unlikely if PM brings his "A game"...
 
Jun 15, 2009
7,378
0
0
Merckx index said:
wind factor
...
Christmas in las Vegas
Yeah, wind... a bigger factor than cold. I was reading that on Burkes site too. It really affects passing efficiency, other than cold where (negative) effects are minimal.
I am surprised Wilson only throws max 55 mph. Good old Toby Korrodi threw 61 at the combine some years ago. Just for comparison...

PM and wind (12+ mph = circa 20 km/h) this season;
vs OAK (16 mph) 32/37-374-10.1 Y/PP (perfect)
vs NE (22 mph) 19/36-150-4.2 Y/PP (ugly)
vs SD (17 mph) 25/36-230-6.4 Y/PP (below average)
:eek: Better no much wind over there in NJ :eek:

The Vegas article basically says what I wrote some days ago. But thanks for the link. Always like stories of the grey area....
Even to win 55/56% of bets as bettor (vs the line) is very difficult over the long run. I am almost certain you need inside knowledge to achive that record. I mean the oddsmakers are no idiots. They know how to set a good line (they have quants, computers and insiders too). And to make a living as bettor (even if you win 55/56% of your bets) you need to bet very large sums. To profit 25.000$ a year, you have to wager at least 460.000$ a year.

BTW, I put my rest playoff-money I had left on a 3.33-odds-combi against the 47.5 O/U and against the 1.5 spread they offer over here... Not a good year for my playoff betting, but a good one football-wise so far.
If DEN indeed wins 24-23, that would be great. I´d cash in with the O/U and with the bet against DEN b/c they wouldn´t cover the spread. But that´s not the reason i predicted 24-23. It was just coincidence that the bets are offered the way they are... I´d have no tears if DEN wins 48-26 (and thus losing the little rest I have left of my betting budget). :D
 
I have taken out a sizeable wager on the Seahawks to win at what I believe are some rather tasty odds of $2.10.

I think they stand a pretty good chance.

Can't wait til Superbowl Monday!

I hope it snows.
 
Jun 15, 2009
7,378
0
0
SEAs "game plan"

http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702303754404579310500005285822

If the game goes like the SL-NE superbowl, I am done with pro football. I´ll watch carefully. If the cheaters get away with it so much so that basically the refs decide the outcome (by not flagging holding and interference fouls enough), I´ll be pretty much ****ed forever. It´s not talent deciding it for SEA, but Beli-Cheat way.
Let´s hope "professor" PM has an answer, let´s hope DEN pays back inch for inch (I´d love if they run a pick play every down and "kill em all")...
 
You honestly think the only way Seattle wins is through cheating? Go back and watch both SF and NO games. Do you think they were decided by illegal playing by Sea's defenders? Really? As I recall, the most illegal play in the Sea-NO game was Rafael Bush hammering Percy Harvin early in 1Q - trying to take him out of the game as I saw it. Saints probably thought it was worth the 15 yard penalty too.

Claiming the Seahawk defenders cheat is the same as some fans saying that Denver receivers get open because they pick defenders all the time - even to the point of injuring them (a la Wes Welker to Talib).

As to weather, every indication is that fans (which means Denver) is going to get lucky. Meaning, it's going to be warmer than normal with above freezing temps, no precipitation come game time, and light winds 5-10mph.

I still think Seattle is going to win, unless Denver jumps out to a double digit lead, for no other reason that each of the games that Seattle has played they won tough, gritty games, decided late when the game was on the line. Denver's wins have been building a lead with finesse play, timing passes and such, then cruising along and not blowing it. I can't recall the last time Manning, or Denver for that matter, won a tight game late. Can anyone? So, if the Broncos defense holds, and they can get to a lead of something like 21-10 in the third quarter, that's their best chance. And the only lead they blew all year was against NE, in horrible weather when the Patriots had Gronk and a few other players they later lost.
 
Jun 15, 2009
7,378
0
0
Alpe d'Huez said:
You honestly think the only way Seattle wins is through cheating?
It plays a big part.... Add in the doping issues. I even lost of record of how many Seahawks got caught in doping violations. Sherman (using the "accident" excuse of cyclists. I´d laugh if it isn´t sad), Browner, and there was a 3rd & 4th, right? Save to assume they have a team wide program like it was in pro cycling. Just have a look at Sherman. Is he the best CB? Really? Have searched a little in the web. Without his (perfectly coached) holding, he isn´t the best. His 40yd dash was so so (speed, one of the top priorities for CBs): No less than 28 DBs (!) had faster times than him at the combine. Only 19 were slower. So where comes the praise for him from? Only talent?

I´d take a greedy PM 1.000 times over a poser and big mouth like Sherman... The fish always stinks from the head. It seems Carroll takes the LA approach. Everything goes, winning at all costs.

You know I am not naive. Everybody uses little dirty tricks in the NFL. Too much money on the table. But like in cycling, there are the good, the bad, and the ugly. After all I read about the Seahawks in recent weeks they certainly belong in the last group. I don´t like them... They play like they are. Nothing beautiful to be seen.

My 50 cents. Just had to release my growing anger about them. On early monday morning (german time) I hope everything will be fine, I´ll have cooled down, and the deserving team, the Broncos that is, will have won...
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts