With Foles......yes. But history suggest the home team SU wins the majority of time. You asked the question. The answer is........show me your ticket. Bet 50% of you account to show me it is such a sure thing. Thing with big ML is you got to bet HUGE or it doesn't serve a purpose. And if you are wrong you are fucked. To be honest I feel better taking the Saints -3?(hoping) against the Rams than I would ML against Eagles Goff is trash and the Rams defense can easily be had
Obviously if you are wrong, you are fucked (there's a reason it's -400). Not sure what showing you a ticket has to do with the comment. I just don't think the Saints lose outright to Philadelphia. I realize Philadelphia has improved since the last time they played, but how much of an improvement are we talking. They lost by over 40 points.
things like clemson completely blowing out alabama are the reasons why you don't take -400 lines or like that dude who put a million on georgia only for texas to throttle them
And people thought Chicago was a sure thing.
Bet it if if you think it’s a sure thing.
NFC #1 seeds: 24-3 SU in divisional round since 1990 (the Cowboys own 2 of these losses)
16-1 SU when the opponent is off a win as a dog.
Divisional road dogs that have won as a dog on WC weekend: 11-40 SU and 20-31 ATS
Teams playing their 3rd consecutive road game (Bolts, Colts, Eagles) are 13-47 SU and 20-38-2 ATS all time (those records include the Colts loss yesterday)
C'mon man you know there is no such thing as a sure thing.New Orleans ML -400
Does anyone really think the Eagles can win this game outright?