Minn @ GB

[The Dude]

Monday Night Football: Minnesota @ Green Bay
Minnesota +3.5 +101

Does this look like a good bet to anybody else?

you're out of your element here dude. i actually like GB, just wish i could find it at -3. IMO, looks like Minnesota got lucky with their win over the Giants. they did not score an offensive TD. less than 20 yds rushing! meanwhile GB got a solid win against Atlanta. just my first instinct and i should probaly look beyond today's games.

[The Dude]

[ QUOTE ]
looks like Minnesota got lucky with their win over the Giants.

[/ QUOTE ]
They absalutely did, there's no question about it. Minnesota sucks pretty badly. But then again, so do the Packers. Coming into this week, there were a lot of people who were calling them the worst team in the league, and I can't really say I blamed them. Granted, they pulled off a sweet victory this week, but they're nowhere near that good, and playing at Lambeaux Field just doesn't mean what it used to.

so we're talking about two bad teams. home team gives 3 points so i guess the line is about right. GB did look good against a Falcon team that is supposed to be among the best in the NFC.

[craig r]

[ QUOTE ]
home team gives 3 points

[/ QUOTE ]

3.5 points. big difference.

craig

[Daliman]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
home team gives 3 points

[/ QUOTE ]

3.5 points. big difference.

craig

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, from a "getting 3 points vs. 3.5 points" it is, but from a standard swing, it's not, unless it is on a strike point. If neutral ground the home team is a 3 point dog, them being a .5 point fave in same game at home, would make almost no difference vs a pick, (of course, .5 is not usually posted, but just given for effect.

[judgesmails]

I am not saying Green Bay is a good team or anything, or even that I would bet them this week laying over 3. But consider the following stats with this team. I will be looking to play them when they are getting points later in the year.

First downs: GBP 182 Opp 164
3rd down %: GBP 45.3 Opp 37.8
Ave net yds/game: GBP 326 Opp 299
Yds per play: GBP 5.1 Opp 4.9
Touchdowns: GBP 24 Opp 21
Points: GBP 201 Opp 184

Of course their turnover margin is poor, and the reason their record is so bad. But the backbone statistics of actual team performance suggest this team is not really that bad.

Their defense is ranked #10 in the league despite worknig on short fields all year because of the turnover problems. The offense has struggled because they can't run at all. They plugged in a new guard last week and the other guard is starting to play better. If they can continue to run like they did vs. Atlanta - we could make some money playing this team getting points the second half of the season.

[ QUOTE ]


Of course their turnover margin is poor, and the reason their record is so bad. But the backbone statistics of actual team performance suggest this team is not really that bad.



[/ QUOTE ]

I have seen these stats as well but if you take out the NO game some of these wouldn't be nearly as impressive. Take out the best performance and the worst performance and then lets see the stats.

[judgesmails]

[ QUOTE ]
I have seen these stats as well but if you take out the NO game some of these wouldn't be nearly as impressive.

[/ QUOTE ]

I am not saying this is an impressive team. Just suggesting they may be underrated in future lines and there may be some opportunities to bet them when they get points.

They have lost by:

14
2
1
3
3
7
10

If their kicker makes a couple they are 4-5.

If you throw out the NO (best) and the Detroit (worst) game the stats, other than points for and against, do not skew dramatically.

They are still outgaining their opponents.

[craig r]

Well, some of the squarer shops are already shading towards MIN. Bowmans has +4. The shops with squarer lines are usually pretty good at gauging public opinion. Of course +3.5 +101 and +4 -110 are pretty much the same line. So, I might just be babbling [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img] .

craig