2 Winners Inside For Championship Weekend!!! Read This And Cash!!!

[Grogan]

2-2 last week, a couple thoughts there before looking ahead to championship weekend…..

<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-comfficeffice" /><o></o>

Hit w/Philly & the Pats, missed on the Rams & the Steelers. On the misses, those games are good examples of the difference between bad picks and good picks that lose. Rams were a bad pick—they’re a mediocre team, with a bad coach, on the road…..as I said, it was more of an anti-Falcons play than anything else, but the most important thing to remember, particularly during the playoffs, is to stay with good teams, for the simple reason that they win. Sounds stupid to even say, but good teams win, then you worry about the cover, and usually that happens too.

<o></o>

A part of that pick too was the idea that one of the top seeds wouldn’t win/cover, which is always a stupid rationale. It’s true most of the time at least one won’t, but if it’s forced the play will usually be off, and that’s what happened here. I was not and am not impressed with <?xml:namespace prefix = st1 ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-comffice:smarttags" /><st1:City w:st="on"><st1lace w:st="on">Atlanta</st1lace></st1:City>, but they got it done and then some against the Rams.

<o></o>

Which brings us to <st1:City w:st="on"><st1lace w:st="on">Pittsburgh</st1lace></st1:City>. If you took the Jets last week, congrats, but unless you took them thinking they would again be completely inept offensively but would manage to cover based on a complete meltdown by the Steelers, bottom line you just got lucky. It’s all the same when you cash in, but that’s the aspect of gambling that can’t really be controlled/predicted. That was just a scary outing by <st1:City w:st="on"><st1lace w:st="on">Pittsburgh</st1lace></st1:City>, and even THEN the Jets couldn’t win. The Steelers are a good team, and should have been the pick last week—but sometimes strange things happen. Onto this week.

<o></o>

<o></o>

Pats -3<o></o>

<o></o>

The only thing that’s too bad this week is how last week’s games played out—the Steelers laid an egg, the Pats trounced the much-hyped Colts, so the Pats are favorites at a 16-1 <st1:City w:st="on"><st1lace w:st="on">Pittsburgh</st1lace></st1:City> team. An easy Steeler win and a closer Pats victory would have made for a terrific line. Oh well. It won’t matter.

<o></o>

What’s gotten lost in the (deserved) kudos for <st1lace w:st="on">New England</st1lace>'s stellar coaching is that you still need the players. The Pats didn’t even make the playoffs the year before last because even though the coaching was there, Belichick & Co. were still remaking the roster from the past regime (yes, even after winning a Super Bowl). The fact is the guys stepping in now in the secondary—Randall Gay, Asante Samuel, etc.—are terrific football players who have continued to improve with more playing time. It’s not just smoke & mirrors back there. The Patriots have tremendous depth. The game in <st1lace w:st="on"><st1:City w:st="on">Pittsburgh</st1:City></st1lace> earlier this year, as I mentioned last week, was a fluke—turnovers plus the fact they had injuries happening during the game, which is a different matter (and no Dillon, of course.)

<o></o>

I like Jerome Bettis, but look for him to be controlled by the <st1lace w:st="on">New England</st1lace>’s front seven. Big Ben is bound to be sharper than last week, but if Manning couldn’t put points on the board, you can figure out how this story will end. The Steelers are a tough, physical team, and won’t get routed here, but nor do I see any way they win. The Pats will get their 20-something points on the board, and the Steelers won’t be able to keep up.

<o></o>

Again, this would probably be the bet of the century if <st1lace w:st="on"><st1:City w:st="on">Pittsburgh</st1:City></st1lace> was favored, but they’re not. But the Pats are peaking right now, and they should win this game by 7-10 points at least. I think the number might drop as the week progresses, so wait on it, but there’s not question the Pats are the pick.

<o></o>

<o></o>

Eagles -4.5<o></o>

<o></o>

Kudos to the Falcons for getting it done with ease last week. My thought going into that game was that the Rams would flood the box and force Vick to make throws to win. Well, as we all saw, Vick was forced to do nothing of the kind as <st1:City w:st="on"><st1lace w:st="on">Atlanta</st1lace></st1:City> ran for approximately 2700 yards.

<o></o>

But the mistake here would be to throw out the reservations about the Falcons based on one home game against a mediocre, poorly-coached opponent. What the Rams were unable to do—slow the <st1:City w:st="on"><st1lace w:st="on">Atlanta</st1lace></st1:City> running attack—the Eagles manage to accomplish. I see this game remaining close at least until halftime, but during the second half <st1:City w:st="on"><st1lace w:st="on">Philadelphia</st1lace></st1:City> should open enough daylight to force the Falcons to start trying to make plays down the field. Turnovers will open this game up, and I don’t see them coming from a seasoned Eagles team.

<o></o>

This has nothing to do with the Eagles being “due” to win this game or any of that nonsense. It’s more a matter of what I said last week with the Eagles—best not to overthink it, they are clearly the superior team in this match-up. Whoever wins this game will lose to the Patriots in the Super Bowl, but in a sub-par year for the NFC, Philly is the standout in the conference. They’ll win fairly comfortably here. Go with the Eagles.

 

[PatPatriot]

Grogan...I got a retro Steve Grogan #14 jersey I wear to games.

The fact is the guys stepping in now in the secondary—Randall Gay, Asante Samuel, etc.—are terrific football players who have continued to improve with more playing time. It’s not just smoke & mirrors back there. The Patriots have tremendous depth. The game in <?xml:namespace prefix = st1 ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-comffice:smarttags" /><st1lace w:st="on"><st1:City w:st="on">Pittsburgh</st1:City></st1lace> earlier this year, as I mentioned last week, was a fluke—turnovers plus the fact they had injuries happening during the game, which is a different matter (and no Dillon, of course.)

Thats what people don't realise the Pats have already made the transformation from Poole & Law.
Randall Gay is a player he has like 3 picks in limited playing time, and they are football players they tackle and hit.

I am really leary of that line though. I like it better when people refer to the Pats like they would the Bengals.

Even with Seymour possibly out the rest of the team is healthy as its been all year.

 

[Grogan]

Patriot.....

Yup, Steve Grogan....my name here is a tip of the hat.

I agree, it's always nice to get points, but you just can't overstate what a fiasco that first game was from the New England perspective. To me, it's pretty simple--stay with the champs until somebody knocks 'em off. Just like last week, all the back & forth about the colts, and manning, and blah blah blah--if you just take the Pats, you'll win. Eventually they won't come through, but you'll be up a ton by then. (This goes, by the way, for winning & covering, except for huge lines. The Super Bowl last year was a no play for me, because the Pats were a lock win but messing around with a number that big is foolish--as was proved out by that insane 4th quarter.) But giving up 3 points (or less by gametime)? Don't sweat it. Lay the 3 and cash in.

My hope, by the way, is for a fairly close game and for an Eagles rout--want to keep the Super Bowl number around a touchdown.

 

[ElIguana]

Grogan, I think you're right on with Atlanta. IMO, St. Louis special teams were what cost them that game. Vick and Dunn had their long runs (as expected), but it seemed like every stinking punt or kickoff, the Rams coverage broke down horribly and allowed a 30+ yard return. Again IMO, if Rams' special teams do their job, the game is much closer and they make a late surge for the backdoor cover, but none of that matters now!

You make good arguments for taking the Patriots -3, but I think many are jumping off the Pitt bandwagon prematurely....their defense and running game still put them in a position to win at HOME.

The play I like even better is the OVER 37. Pats scored 20 in previous match-up despite 4 turnovers, I agree with your assessment that they get 20+ in this game as well. But I think the Steelers can hang with them. I may also tease Pitt with the over, depending on how low the total gets and what the weather is doing this weekend.

Also, I agree--Philly rolls at home. GL

 

[Grogan]

No question, El,the Rams were just atrocious--which really shouldn't have been a surprise. Their tanking does make the Philly/Atlanta number better, though, so that's a plus.

Your play on the Pitt/NE over sounds like the right one.....I'm sure the under's going to get hit hard, so the number probably will drop. I don't think I'd have a play there, though--while I could see 24-14, I could also see 23-10, for example. In either case, a bit too close to call--I don't think I see any way it's an EASY cover, which makes me a little leery.

 

[ElIguana]

I hear ya, Grogan. I played the Pats HUGE on Sunday (10 units) and ca$hed, but that might be the last big play of the year for me. This weekend's games are basically action bets for me, so I'm not too afraid of losing. I can see this game ending up right on 20-17, and I LOVE home underdogs, so I'll probably tease Pitt and the OVER for 1 unit. If they were playing anyone but NE, I might load up, but you are right about the Pats being a covering machine for the past 2 seasons. GL

 

[Grogan]

I also think it's possible the Pats win in a runaway--the first meeting caught Pittsburgh at their absolute peak, the Patriots with gametime injuries and multiple turnovers. If the Patriots contain Bettis (which I think they will) and force Ben R to make plays, I think the turnovers will go in the other direction. The Pats will get their points.

Two easy victories coming up this Sunday.

 

[PatPatriot]

Grogs another point is when Pitt beat the Pats they were coming off a bye (Pitt).

And another point is the Pats were coming off a hard fought division game with the Jets.
Corey Dillion was out for a reason and I don't think it was just a leg injury.
I really believe belichick thinks that far ahead.
The reason I say this when he mentions the loss he emphesizes what a poor coaching job he did.
I think it was more like OK Pitt you can have this one we'll be seeing you later.

 

[Grogan]

Wow, Patriot, that's hard to imagine....Belichick tanking that one anticipating this rematch??

If that's the case, the guy must live up on Olympus somewhere....!

 

[Grogan]

Giving this a bump.....to recap, the plays are the Pats & Philly, with the Pats the top play.

And I don't think these games are too close.

 

[Muddy]

Its Seems Like 85% Of The People Who Took Colts Last Week Are Taking The Pats This Week. They Just Dont Learn!

 

[PatPatriot]

Wow, Patriot, that's hard to imagine....Belichick tanking that one anticipating this rematch??

If that's the case, the guy must live up on Olympus somewhere.

Bill Parcells admitted to doing as much so he could have the team by the short hairs the next week. When he coached the Giants when they were good.

 

[Grogan]

Nighthawk--I don't really follow too much who other players are picking, but believe me, I did NOT pick the Colts last week. Just for the record.

GL