Early take on the Bowl

[SpreadDestroyer]

If you guys remember when these 2 teams met back in week 11, the Rams won 24-17 on a Sunday night game. If you remember the game a little closer, the Pats offense was anemic against the Rams defense. The final score was deceiving as the Pats scored one of their touchdowns off of an interception return from Kurt Warner. Also, the Rams kneeled on the ball at the end of the game inside the Pats 10 yard line. With all this said, we should have been looking at a 31-10 Ram's victory AT Foxboro.

Now onto the PRESENT, forget the past. If this Super Bowl was being played on grass I MIGHT lean towards taking the generous points in this one, but it's NOT. This is ALMOST like a HOME game for St. Louie as they play in this dome twice a year. The Rams are BUILT for the carpet as it really intensifies their speed (like they NEED to be any faster). The Pats MIGHT hang around early, but the Rams will eventually pull away and cover the number quite easily. I really don't see Brady being able to go in this one. But if he DOES, this hard surface will NOT help his bad ankle. I think it would be a happy ending for Bledsoe to finally win the Big One after all he has been through, but the odds of that happening aren't great and handicapping is all about playing your percentages. Honestly, there aren't too many quarterbacks I would rather bet AGAINST in a Big Game other than maybe Rick Mirer or Steve McNair, LOL!! The Rams defense will shut down the Pats running game with Antwan Smith and force (most likely) Bledsoe to beat them. This is a recipe for DISASTER!! Bledsoe will be LUCKY to get out of there with LESS than 2 interceptions. I look for the 2 home town New Orleans boys to step up BIG in this one. Aeneus Williams will continue with his hot streak in the playoffs with AT LEAST one pick, possibly taking it ALL THE WAY to the HOUSE as he looks to score every time he grabs one and has great vision to follow his blockers in getting there. Then we have home grown Marshall Faulk from Nawlins who no one wanted to recruit out of high school as he had to go all the way out to San Diego St. to play ball. This is one of the SMARTEST players in the game and may be one of the BEST backs off all time and is only getting BETTER. I look for Marshall to have close to 200 yards rushing, YES 200!! The Pats have an EXCELLENT secondary and Martz knows it. I look for Warner to have another conservative day throwing for around 250 yards.

I really look for this game to be lower scoring than the experts think as I see another Super Bowl (like the Rams/Titans SB ) with plenty of Field Goals as these are 2 EXCELLENT defenses. Add this with Martz relying on Faulk and NOT the big play and you have a high percentage recipe for the UNDER. I look for the total to most likely rise as most Super Bowls are high scoring so I'm going to wait right before kickoff most likely before I make a play on the total. I look for the point spread to stay on 14 pretty much across the board. This line opened at 15.5 and has been bet down to 14. The oddsmakers wanted to set the Virgin Line right in the middle between key numbers 14 and 17 as they wanted to see which way the action would come and I BELIEVE they are getting EXACTLY what they want here. Pats money. This due to the Pats pretty much dominating the Steelers as history repeated itself with the Pats beating the Steelers to get to New Orleans. I look for history to also repeat itself as the Pats will lose by double digits for the third time in Nawlins (35-21 to the Packers and 45-10 to the Bears). The general public saw the Rams struggle somewhat with Philly and saw the Pats pretty much dominate the Steel Men. The final score of the AFC Championship, as you guys already know was deceiving as the Pats got a couple of non-offensive TD's. The public ALSO knows the Pats have already played the Rams and think the Pats hung in there pretty tough with them, which really they did NOT. I look for a VERY LOUD Superdome in favor of the high flying, Greatest Show On Earth from the "Show Me" state (like these JUGGERNAUTS NEED any help). Rams win by 17-21. Let's call it:

St.L 30
NE 13

 

[TheShrimp]

Concerning the first meeting...

Concerning the first meeting...

You want to make the case that the Rams really outplayed the Pats and the score should have been a lot worse than it was (a run back INT, the rams not scoring late).

However, you might recall that with 2 minutes left in the first half, the Pats were driving (with a 3 point lead OR deficit, I can't recall) and then fumbled on the 2. The rams came down the field and scored with time running out in the half, a 14 point swing, basically.

My point being: If you want to consider hypotheticals, this game could have just as easily gone the other way as it could have been a blow out by the Rams. The rams certainly didn't march up and down the field against the pats. That might change on the artificial stuff, though.

Anyway, my first look at this number says, "its a superbowl spread" and not really accurate. The rams were a 13 point favorite AT HOME the last week of the season against the COLTS, in a game they had to win to lock up home field adv. They were a late season 14 point fave against ATL at home (IIRC). Now, they're a 14 point favorite at a neutral site against the AFC champ? That "superbowl" spread relies on the thinking that teams will run it up in the big game, and they often do, so I'm not sold on the pats.

I think it stays around 13.5-14.5 this week, and if I had to pick, right now I'd say Pats, but that's a light lean and subject to change. I'm probably not going big on this one like I did last year, I think.

TheShrimp

 

[TJBELL]

just my 2 cents..

just my 2 cents..

i remember some fact that something like 92% of superbowl winners ALSO cover the spread. "just pick the team with the best record" and 92% not only won, but covered.

i am a rams fan (lived in new england for 35+ years) and i think with the rams speed, the rams win and cover. just my thought. i think it will be one of those games that 1/2 way through the 3rd quarter, one will be saying "I knew i should have taken the damn rams!"

Rams 37 NE 17. good luck on whomever you pick!

 

[dr. freeze]

how many of those spreads were 14?

 

[TJBELL]

good point freeze!! still like the rams

 

[yyz]

Packers won by 14 as a 14 point favorite over NE

San Fran was a 19 point favorite over SD a few centuries ago, and covered.

 

[JSMOOTH]

yyz,
Baltimore was an 18 point favorite vs NYJ and Nameth and the Jets won outright.

Past SB's, point spreads and match-ups don't hold much value to me. This is much different stage they're playing on.

I'm with THE SHRIMP for now, as I feel the line is too much. We'll probably see it drop at first, then go back up past 14 by Sunday. Alot can change, but if I had to do it now....I'd take the points.

NE has only scored 2 offensive TD's in the playoffs. That will have to get better.

 

[TheShrimp]

Re: just my 2 cents..

Re: just my 2 cents..

i remember some fact that something like 92% of superbowl winners ALSO cover the spread. "just pick the team with the best record" and 92% not only won, but covered.

No offense, but this is one of those stats that keeps you (maybe not you personally) from thinking about what's important: the matchup and how it relates to the line. That's what you should be doing as a handicapper, not looking for some esoteric trend. (That wasn't meant to sound smug.)

Belichick made the point that the line they got against the Steelers was the same number that Detroit was getting against the steelers late in the season. These playoff lines are really set with the public in mind. The books KNOW that people don't know/care about NE (Tedy Bruschi? Troy Brown? Damien Woody? Who?), but the squares know Pittsburgh (Slash, The Bus, Lambert <-- and don't think that doesn't matter), and the squares know "The Greatest Show On Earth", and there's no way around it, 14 is an inflated line.

I haven't been too impressed with the Ram's O lately. They only put up 31 on INDY, fachrissakes. They only put up 24 on GB, and that was with a couple of good turnovers. They put up 29 on PHI, but the first 7 was with a really short field. Those are BIG numbers, but they're not 14 point spread covering numbers.

I have been impressed with their defense though. If they keep getting those big takeaways (and NE has been protecting the ball well) then they shouldn't have any problems covering. That's a big IF, though.

TheShrimp

 

[TJBELL]

http://www.vegasinsider.com/u/goldsheet/SBodds.htm

shrimp: i do not follow trends, but when they seem to highlight the side you like anyway, it's a good thing. just my 2 cents

 

[dr. freeze]

Shrimp......the Rams offense ate up a lot of clock against the Eagles......what offense ahs been able to do that this year?

think they punted twice, and one was at the end of the game when they played too conservatively.......

 

[TheShrimp]

Re: Re: just my 2 cents..

Re: Re: just my 2 cents..

TJ: I didn't try to insinuate you played trends. I was tyring to tiptoe around that, while still making my point.

Freeze: I think Washington chewed up clock against Philly. STL's ability to eat clock, inlcuding the 7:30 minute drive they put together at Foxboro, is partly why I don't like a bet on them to cover, or go over 33.

Also:

I haven't been too impressed with the Ram's O lately. They only put up 31 on INDY, fachrissakes. They only put up 24 on GB, and that was with a couple of good turnovers. They put up 29 on PHI, but the first 7 was with a really short field. Those are BIG numbers, but they're not 14 point spread covering numbers.
TheShrimp

Wrong: They scored 31 on Atlanta. 42 on INDY. Still, 31 on ATL is no great feat either. They were a 13 point FAVE in that game. In this one, they're 14. I just can't see it, but I'm trying to.

TheShrimp

 

[mw]

Shrimp --

Look at the stats from the first matchup -- Rams outgained NE 482-230. And it's ridiculous to claim that the fumble late in the first half was a 14-point swing. It was about a 3- or 4-point swing. NE would have scored 3 or 7 without the fumble, but STL would have got the ball around the 30 after the kickoff instead of their own 3. That improved field position is worth a couple points. Just factor it in as more or less cancelling out Buckley's INT return.

Still, I agree that you can't just ignore the pointspread and pick the winner to cover. Three of the last 6 years the winner has NOT covered.

 

[spanky2]

Destroyer, I think their is a 'prop' out there you may want.
If you think Warner will only pass for about 250 yds. I think the 'total passing for him is about 288 1/2. Don't quote me.
Don't know if you have an offshore ,most of the guys over here have at least one,as most 'corner books' don't offer all the props.as most of them seem to be small timers and if someone took a 'shot' at making a big move, it could knock the guy out.
Anyway just thought this is right up your alley.
Good luck..
Spanky....

 

[edludes]

Reason for the "Esoteric trend"

Reason for the "Esoteric trend"

Dear Shrimp-When a trend hits over 90% over the course of 3 1/2 decades it might bear further examination as to the why,because theres a reason that it happens.Handicapping this game the way you do others has proven to be a mistake,over time,in the form of wins vs losses.The better team is invariably always sky high,well prepared,has several advantages talent wise over the dog(reads mismatches)and exploits whatever advantages they've got until the game isn't remotely in doubt before letting their respective feet off the throttle.Esoteric : understood or intended for a small group,difficult to understand,not publicly disclosed.Not sure thats what you meant,but hopefully the trend is not so esoteric anymore.GL either way

 

[edludes]

MW-are you counting the NE+14 push and the Tenn +7 push as wins?The only dog I remeber losing and winning any money in the last six years is Pittsburg+11.Denver won and covered vs Gbay and I'll admit to not remembering the Atlanta number when they lost 34-19 vs Denver.GL

 

[mw]

edludes --

Three of the last 6 winners have not covered. Two winners pushed, as you noted, and the Cowboys versus Pitt won but lost ATS.