Game #6 - NY GIANTS AT MINNESOTA

Search

New member
Joined
Sep 21, 2004
Messages
26
Tokens
Talking about betting against a streak, I just checked back from 1989 and here's what I came up with . Can you help verify this BigLou .

Since 1989 , Teams on a 6 or More ATS Streak are 17-18 SU and 13-22 ATS .

Hold on , here's something Special with the 1992 San Diego team , they were 6-0 in week 12,13,14,15,16,17 in 1992 Season . So if we can exclude San Diego out of this List , this is what I have :

Teams are 11-18 SU and 7-22 ATS since 1989 *** Not counting the 1992 San Diego team .


Andy
 

New member
Joined
Jun 21, 2001
Messages
1,633
Tokens
Andy,

I'm talking about teams on winning streaks, not ATS winning streaks.

Big Lou
 

New member
Joined
Sep 21, 2004
Messages
199
Tokens
Big Lou,

Good morning. When I first started handicapping I sort of bought into the "due" thing. But I don't anymore.

It's hard enough to win a football game in the NFL, much less go on an extended streak. A team can go on a streak because they are very good, but also luck and strength of schedule play an important part.

How many times has a bettor placed a wager on a team that was "due" for a loss or "due" for a win only to lose because they were "going against the trend."?

This is not to say that the line won't adjust to circumstance, become too "high" for a particular team and that good value might even present itself. But the question I ask is: Where have you been? Haven't you bet the Vikings at least 4 times? Haven't you had at least 3 bets on the Chiefs? I know baseball is inherently different but when Oakland A's won 22 or so game in a row where you riding the streak? or where you patiently losing on Game 18, 19, 20 and 21 because they were "due" to lose?

In the Vikings case, they are playing solid football on both sides of the ball. They've taken their momentum from last year and capitalized on it. They beat their division three times early and gained confidence. This doesn't mean they are a dominant football team. Not yet by any means.

Streaks aside, the Vikings are at home (3 in a row, St. Louis did nice on their 3 in a row at home), have confidence and momentum. The Giants are struggling, have offensive line problems, they are down to one "Will". Despite that the defense has played acceptably (special teams, 3 disasters so far) and they have been moving the ball.

Now it would seem that the Giants are "due" to score more points than they have the past three games. They can't continue to turn the ball over and not find they end zone. Or can they? Do you want to take that chance?

As someone mentioned before, I, personally, do not like to go against the streak. Experience has taught me that you ride the streak or you lay off. I have not checked all the stats in this one yet but I will not be backing the Giants, regardless.

What are you going to say, a team is "due" because they just happened to finally go on the road, play a good team and they lost. A team on an extended winning streak is "due" for a loss when they lose. And you can't feel bad if you've been betting the streak and you finally get "popped".

Oorang
 

Hawkeye-Packer-Yankee
Joined
Jan 20, 2000
Messages
3,514
Tokens
Lou,

When your talking about the Vikings, it's when they are in the playoffs and look unbeatable. You've got to love those Minnesota Bills
icon_eek.gif
.....oops, I mean Vikings.

Luck
icon_cool.gif
 

New member
Joined
Jun 21, 2001
Messages
1,633
Tokens
Jarbo,

I hope you're not comparing this Viking team to the 1998 squad, because the 2003 version is better.

Big Lou
 

Rx. Senior
Joined
Sep 21, 2004
Messages
7,744
Tokens
Big Lou,

The question when is a team "due" for a loss shouldnt come into the arguement, any team can lose any Sunday, its a matter of match-ups.

To give an example, I had been waiting to take on Carolina for Weeks, but for one reason or another I had to wait until last Sunday. Carolina could quiet easily have lost 2 Weeks earlier to New Orleans, which would have spoilt everything.

As for The Vikings, they also have been due to lose since Week 2 and no doubt people have bet against them since then, its all a matter of opinion. Personally I have not been able to bet against them yet, this Week they take on a Team thats O-Line was already causing the majority of the problems, now they have lost what was considered their best playing O-Lineman. Along with the loss of confidence this team must be having, makes me wait another Week when the spread will be more out of line on The Vikings. Sooner or later this team will lose,but it wont be the "due" factor, it will be by a team that matches well on the day.
 

Another Day, Another Dollar
Joined
Mar 1, 2002
Messages
42,730
Tokens
EAST RUTHERFORD, N.J., Oct. 22 — "Don't play the game like Randy Moss is inhuman — don't play scared," was Ralph Brown's advice to himself on Wednesday as he contemplated his first meeting with perhaps the most dangerous wide receiver in football.

Brown is the Giants second-stringer who has become the starting right cornerback because of the back injury to Will Peterson. Brown would normally be positioned on the opposite side of the field from Moss, who leads the National Football League with 666 receiving yards and is averaging 17.1 yards a catch. But Brown said he knows he will figure in Moss's plans on Sunday, when the Giants (2-4) visit the Minnesota Vikings (6-0).

For Brown has had only three pro starts in a career that began in 2000, his third one coming last week.

"The Eagles were trying to make the big play on me last Sunday," he said of his first start of the season. "I expected that last week. I expect it this week. They'll even have Moss come at me until I prove myself week in and week out."

The 5-foot-10 Brown will give six inches to Moss, who almost always is taller than those defending him.

"But if you notice, he doesn't catch the ball with his arms extended," Brown said. "He jumps up with his chest, which he uses to catch the ball. So he doesn't necessarily have that reach advantage."

Brown's strategy will be to jump with Moss. Many defenders are reluctant to do that, worried that if they go up too soon, Moss will come down with the ball when the defender has committed himself and is out of position to snare him.

"Don't be afraid of him," Brown said. "Don't be afraid to jump for the ball. You've got to be physical with him."

The Giants have made only three interceptions this season, and 27 teams have had more. Brown has one of those interceptions, against the Cowboys in Game 2. "I disguised what I was doing," he said. "It looked like man-to-man but we were playing zone. They threw toward Joey Galloway and didn't know where I was. I picked it up."

Moss is a game-breaking performer and has a good quarterback in Daunte Culpepper, who is averaging 8.33 yards per pass attempt. Culpepper not been intercepted in 95 passes and has thrown for seven touchdowns, six of them to Moss.

Brown has not started two straight games since his college years at Nebraska, but he is looking forward to Sunday.

"Facing great players," he said, "gives you a chance to improve yourself and make a name for yourself."

EXTRA POINTS

The Giants handed out earplugs to coaches and some of the spectators in their practice bubble on Wednesday. The noise over the speakers was almost intolerable as the Giants attempted to simulate the crowd noise they will hear Sunday in the Metrodome. . . . Tight end JEREMY SHOCKEY engaged in noncontact drills. Coach JIM FASSEL expects him to play Sunday despite a foot injury.

www.nytimes.com
 

Member
Joined
Sep 20, 2004
Messages
3,961
Tokens
teams who go deep in the playoffs, and dare i say win superbowls, are teams that just keep winning and covering.

like it was said earlier, i wouldn't bet against minnesota until they fall, there is absolutely no reason for a letdown.

to take the giants would not only be saying the vikes are "due" to lose but also the giants are "due" to win.

that would put one in a position of hoping against a good team at home to get beat by a bad team on the road.

anyway you slice it, that sounds like the worst case scenario to lay money on.

GAME.
 

mhk

"I can't be faded", Dr. Dre
Joined
Sep 20, 2001
Messages
1,845
Tokens
Could use Andyfromstrongplays for breaking down this little stat I ran across...
Since 1980, teams that have started the year 6-0 ats, favored in game 7, have not only loss ats, but straight up as well.. (0-7)

Play against Minn...fwiw..
 

Member
Joined
Sep 20, 2004
Messages
3,961
Tokens
just at a glance, IN 1998 denver was 6-0 going into week 7 favored by 8 vs jax and crushed them 37-24.

same year minnesota 6-0 went to detroit gave 5 and rolled 34-13.

so throw that stat out.

GAME.
 

New member
Joined
Jun 21, 2001
Messages
1,633
Tokens
I believe mhk was referring to teams beginning the season 6-0 ATS. Both the Broncos and Vikings were 6-0 SU but 4-2 ATS in their first six games in 1998.

Over the past 15 seasons there have been three teams that went both 6-0 SU & ATS to start a season. Listed below is how they did in their seventh game and how far they went that season:

1988 Bengals: Lost 27-21 as 5.5 point road favorites against the 2-4 Patriots, lost 20-16 to the 49'ers in the Super Bowl.

1994 Chargers: Lost 20-15 as 7 point home chalk to the 1-5 Broncos, lost 49-26 to the 49'ers in the Super Bowl.

1999 Rams: Lost 24-21 as 3 point road favorites to the 5-1 Titans and then beat them 23-16 in the Super Bowl.

Big Lou
 

New member
Joined
Sep 20, 2004
Messages
2,442
Tokens
another thing is with the giants
young off. line will be playing
in an extremely loud metrodome.
probably more false starts than usual
to slow down giants drives.
 

mhk

"I can't be faded", Dr. Dre
Joined
Sep 20, 2001
Messages
1,845
Tokens
Caution there game, it was a winner.. Don't want to throw too many of them away, lol...
 

Forum statistics

Threads
1,118,071
Messages
13,551,137
Members
100,562
Latest member
faul
The RX is the sports betting industry's leading information portal for bonuses, picks, and sportsbook reviews. Find the best deals offered by a sportsbook in your state and browse our free picks section.FacebookTwitterInstagramContact Usforum@therx.com