Super Bowl 60 🏈 PRE/IN GAME DISCUSSION THREAD 🏈

[KingKolzig]

Patriots have 9 wins by more than 10 pts against NFL opponents. You can pick out oppenents injuries and spin anything but the fact they clobbered 9 NFL opponents cant be overkooked. Line should be

Sea -1.5
Sea -140

 

[justlooking]

Patriots have 9 wins by more than 10 pts against NFL opponents. You can pick out oppenents injuries and spin anything but the fact they clobbered 9 NFL opponents cant be overkooked. Line should be

Sea -1.5
Sea -140

I wish the moneyline is -140 which then I would even bet more.

I was lucky to have bet at -205 (if it wins). It's -225 or higher everywhere now.

 

[KingKolzig]

I wish the moneyline is -140 which then I would even bet more.

I was lucky to have bet at -205 (if it wins). It's -225 or higher everywhere now.

If it was the Rams then -200 would have been appropriate simply cause Stafford and co. have been there before

Seahawks are in the same boat as the Patriots. Weird scene at a SB. Tons of time to let pressure build. Ill take the +5 with the Pats who havent been blownout in 20 games this year

 

[phillyflyers]

Against the Bills, 1-1.
Cincinnati didn't have Joe Burrows.
Denver played a QB who hasn't played in 2 years.
Bucs had both of their top 2 receivers out.
Chargers had all sorts of injuries and their offensive coordinator is a bonehead and therefore got fired.

You don't think those matter instead of looking at their whole season offensive ranks?

Context matters what happened in each game, no?

Seattle is fully healthy except for 1 RB and seeing how they shutdown 49ers offense in the last 2 games, who knows what could happen vs New England.

I just don't know what the heck happened vs the Rams that they allowed that many yards and the points. Even if Seattle wasn't gifted the punt return fumble and then a TD afterwards, they also gifted the Rams with the taunting penalty, which then Seattle beat Los Angeles rather convincingly.

New England doesn't have the offense like the Rams.

How many top 10 offenses did Seattle play?

How many teams did they play missing their starter?

How many times did they play the best defense at home and win?

 

[justlooking]

How many top 10 offenses did Seattle play?

How many teams did they play missing their starter?

How many times did they play the best defense at home and win?

Since you asked, I looked it up and it's based on straight up totals from ESPN.

vs Top 10+1 Offenses.

vs Rams #1, 2-1. No starters out.
vs 49ers #7, 2-1. A ton of starters out and Seattle destroyed them 41-6 in the playoffs as expected. What's weird is that the Eagles couldn't beat the 49ers with Kittle barely playing. It was good riddance of the O coordinator for sure.
vs Colts #9, 1-0. Only the QB out and it was a close game at home but the Colts were desperate as hell to make the playoffs, so it's understandable that the game was close.
vs Jaguars #11 (close enough to 10), 1-0 in Jacksonville and beat them 20-12.

vs Top 10 Defenses.

vs Vikings #3, beat them 26-0 at home but McCarthy was out.
vs Texans #1, beat them 27-19 at home and Texans had Nico Collins playing then. He didn't play vs Patriots.
vs Saints #9, beat them 44-13 at home.
vs Jaguars #11 (close enough to 10), 1-0 in Jacksonville and beat them 20-12. Didn't even know they were #11 in both Offense and Defense.

You do know that the Patriots lost to the worst team (your favorite Raiders) at home, right?

They also lost to Pittsburgh who was a playoff team by 7 at home, but Seattle beat them 31-17 in Pittsburgh. But., they were all in the beginning of the season, so I don't even bother counting them towards deciding who is the better team.

Please don't make me lookup more shit.

All that matters is what happened recently.

Apparently, the major factor for Vanjack's handicapping is recency. Did I tell you that he is at 80% win rate for the playoffs. Do I dare go against someone who's winning at that rate? Mathematically, he has to lose more than win as everything will eventually go to the mean of 50/50, but the baccarat trend play says stay with someone who's hot.

I'm done posting until the Super Bowl. If I lose then I lose. I won enough for the season so losing this Super Bowl won't matter that much. It would suck to lose on the last game of the year on football, but it is what it is.

 

[justlooking]

By the way, I used to like Marc Lawrence and used to tail some of his picks.
I haven't checked all of his picks for this year's playoffs, but whatever I saw, he was 0 for whatever.
He is picking New England.
Someone on Covers said something was due.
If that's the case, then Marc is due to win so your New England bet is good to go.

 

[Pimike]

Patriots beat nobody. Lucked out in the playoffs.

 

[justlooking]

Patriots beat nobody. Lucked out in the playoffs.

I'm just curious.

Don't you hang out with the sharps since you are one of them?

Did the sharps bet Seattle -3.5? Have you bet Seattle -3.5?

On top of my wager on Seattle ML at -205, I wanted to bet a parlay matching current Seattle -230 to Alcaraz -300 at PARX for another 10K, which then the payout odd becomes about -110 and I would win $9,130. It was so freaking cold here in PA, I was too lazy to drive to Parx to make the bet. Considering how Alcaraz won rather easily even after he lost the first set, it would have been nice to have made that wager IF Seattle wins.

 

[Pimike]

I'm just curious.

Don't you hang out with the sharps since you are one of them?

Did the sharps bet Seattle -3.5? Have you bet Seattle -3.5?

On top of my wager on Seattle ML at -205, I wanted to bet a parlay matching current Seattle -230 to Alcaraz -300 at PARX for another 10K, which then the payout odd becomes about -110 and I would win $9,130. It was so freaking cold here in PA, I was too lazy to drive to Parx to make the bet. Considering how Alcaraz won rather easily even after he lost the first set, it would have been nice to have made that wager IF Seattle wins.

Never would take 3.5 would buy to -3 or if I liked the dog I would take +4

Yes that would had been a great parlay.

I still haven’t decided on anything yet. Need to make sure nobody does anything stupid first and gets arrested.

 

[justlooking]

By the way, I used to like Marc Lawrence and used to tail some of his picks.
I haven't checked all of his picks for this year's playoffs, but whatever I saw, he was 0 for whatever.
He is picking New England.
Someone on Covers said something was due.
If that's the case, then Marc is due to win so your New England bet is good to go.

I looked up Marc Lawrence's picks for this year's NFL playoffs.

Wild Card round:

Won Rams 3 points over Panthers. It was Rams -10.
Won Bears 6 points over Packers. Bears were the dog and they won SU.
Loss Jaguars 6 points over Bills. Jaguars lost SU.
Loss Eagles 1 point over 49ers. Eagles lost SU as the favorite.
Loss Chargers 2 points over Patriots. Chargers lost rather badly.
Loss Steelers 3 points over Texans. Steelers got killed at home.

Divisional round:

Loss 49ers 1 point over Seahawks. Prettty horrible pick.
Loss Broncos 7 points over Bills. Broncos barely won.
Won Patriots 6 points over Texans.
Loss Rams 10 points over Bears. Rams barely won and could have easily lost if Nacua didn't knock the ball off from being intercepted.

Conference round:

Loss Broncos 6 points over Patriots. They lost SU.
Loss Rams 1 point over Seahawks. Rams lost and did not cover.

That's 3-9 record for the NFL playoffs for him.

Wouldn't you just hate to pay for his picks and get that kind of handicapping?

He is picking the Patriots 3 points over the Seahawks. He is due I tell ya. LMAO

He should ask Vanjack for his advice and sell whatever Vanjack is picking.

 

[justlooking]

Never would take 3.5 would buy to -3 or if I liked the dog I would take +4

Yes that would had been a great parlay.

I still haven’t decided on anything yet. Need to make sure nobody does anything stupid first and gets arrested.

You are so right about that to wait until the last minute.

But it looks to me like both teams are totally focused and no one is going to do anything stupid to cause distractions. I'm sure neither head coaches would even allow anything to happen.

Good luck with whoever you end up betting.

 

[phillyflyers]

Since you asked, I looked it up and it's based on straight up totals from ESPN.

vs Top 10+1 Offenses.

vs Rams #1, 2-1. No starters out.
vs 49ers #7, 2-1. A ton of starters out and Seattle destroyed them 41-6 in the playoffs as expected. What's weird is that the Eagles couldn't beat the 49ers with Kittle barely playing. It was good riddance of the O coordinator for sure.
vs Colts #9, 1-0. Only the QB out and it was a close game at home but the Colts were desperate as hell to make the playoffs, so it's understandable that the game was close.
vs Jaguars #11 (close enough to 10), 1-0 in Jacksonville and beat them 20-12.

vs Top 10 Defenses.

vs Vikings #3, beat them 26-0 at home but McCarthy was out.
vs Texans #1, beat them 27-19 at home and Texans had Nico Collins playing then. He didn't play vs Patriots.
vs Saints #9, beat them 44-13 at home.
vs Jaguars #11 (close enough to 10), 1-0 in Jacksonville and beat them 20-12. Didn't even know they were #11 in both Offense and Defense.

You do know that the Patriots lost to the worst team (your favorite Raiders) at home, right?

They also lost to Pittsburgh who was a playoff team by 7 at home, but Seattle beat them 31-17 in Pittsburgh. But., they were all in the beginning of the season, so I don't even bother counting them towards deciding who is the better team.

Please don't make me lookup more shit.

All that matters is what happened recently.

Apparently, the major factor for Vanjack's handicapping is recency. Did I tell you that he is at 80% win rate for the playoffs. Do I dare go against someone who's winning at that rate? Mathematically, he has to lose more than win as everything will eventually go to the mean of 50/50, but the baccarat trend play says stay with someone who's hot.

I'm done posting until the Super Bowl. If I lose then I lose. I won enough for the season so losing this Super Bowl won't matter that much. It would suck to lose on the last game of the year on football, but it is what it is.

You keep appealing to this idea of a single, obvious "better team" like there’s a committee handing out merit badges. Before the season they were 60–1, 60–1. NE has the better record and same ATS record. So is "better team" just whichever side your narrative happens to like?

You’re pulling "top‑10" out of a single ESPN totals leaderboard with no time frame and then even stretching it to "#11, close enough." That’s not some hard category of elite offenses; it’s just an arbitrary cutoff on a noisy stat.

If the idea is "record vs top‑10 units shows who’s better," then you have to use the same metric, cutoff, and time frame for both teams and not toss out early games when they hurt your take. Otherwise it’s just cherry‑picking splits until Seattle looks good.
Also, you try to have it both ways:

When NE faces top‑5 offenses missing their QB or key WRs, he screams "context!" and says the ranks don’t mean anything.When Seattle faces "#1 Rams, #7 49ers, #9 Colts, #11 Jags," suddenly the rank is everything and injuries are brushed off or spun as "they were desperate, it was close, understandable."

You can’t dismiss NE’s schedule strength because of injuries and then tout Seattle’s wins vs high‑ranked offenses that also had key pieces out. Either you consistently adjust for personnel on both schedules or those ESPN ranks are just window dressing.
The point is: your conviction that Seattle is clearly better is not reflected in the price. That gap is exactly where I’m happy to bet the side you’re dismissing.

 

[stormtrooper8]

Against the Bills, 1-1.
Cincinnati didn't have Joe Burrows.
Denver played a QB who hasn't played in 2 years.
Bucs had both of their top 2 receivers out.
Chargers had all sorts of injuries and their offensive coordinator is a bonehead and therefore got fired.

You don't think those matter instead of looking at their whole season offensive ranks?

Context matters what happened in each game, no?

Seattle is fully healthy except for 1 RB and seeing how they shutdown 49ers offense in the last 2 games, who knows what could happen vs New England.

I just don't know what the heck happened vs the Rams that they allowed that many yards and the points. Even if Seattle wasn't gifted the punt return fumble and then a TD afterwards, they also gifted the Rams with the taunting penalty, which then Seattle beat Los Angeles rather convincingly.

New England doesn't have the offense like the Rams.

Rams seem to be a very difficult match up for them

 

[Pimike]

You are so right about that to wait until the last minute.

But it looks to me like both teams are totally focused and no one is going to do anything stupid to cause distractions. I'm sure neither head coaches would even allow anything to happen.

Good luck with whoever you end up betting.

Appreciate that.

I’ll never forget the Raiders center got arrested in Tijuana. They were -7 and lost outright. Lol

 

[KingKolzig]

Rams are the only great team in the league this year. They basically played seattle dead even in seattle after just beating Chicago in a 9 degree weather game a few days before

Rams -4.5 vs Pats would be the right line. Seattle should be about -1

 

[justlooking]

Ok Philly,

When a team opens -3.5, the odd makers are saying the favored team is at least 1 field goal better than the other team, correct? Even they think Seattle is the better team. Can't argue with that, can you?

I'm not cherry picking things to justify Seattle is the better team. They could lose and I'm willing to hedge if what I'm seeing is I should be betting New England. But that's not what I'm seeing and reading.

It took me over 40 years to figure out that all you need to is figure out who the better team is and just bet them. In the long run, I will win more than lose. Too bad it took me so long to figure that out instead of betting some dogs who had no chance. Clearly, New England is a live dog and I'm sure they could win straight up if Sam Darnold falters, but like what Vanjack said the recency says Sam will play better so I'm going with that. If I'm wrong, then I'm wrong and I lose rather big.

 

[justlooking]

Appreciate that.

I’ll never forget the Raiders center got arrested in Tijuana. They were -7 and lost outright. Lol

I remember that very well as I lost on that Super Bowl for the tune of about 10K and it was a spread bet and not on moneyline. I won about 8K the week before, so it didn't hurt as bad.

I had a mental hiccup and forgot that defense wins championships.

The bet was dead by the 2nd quarter from what I recall and I didn't even watch the 2nd half.

 

[jjgold]

I think I already posted but my final play is New England plus the points. We’ll see what the line is game day.

 

[Pimike]

I remember that very well as I lost on that Super Bowl for the tune of about 10K and it was a spread bet and not on moneyline. I won about 8K the week before, so it didn't hurt as bad.

I had a mental hiccup and forgot that defense wins championships.

The bet was dead by the 2nd quarter from what I recall and I didn't even watch the 2nd half.

Yep

 

[BMR Genie]

You are going to love this @pipe

https://twitter.com/x/status/2018504223256608934