help from experts please

lawpoker · #1 09-04-2005, 04:50 PM

if there is one nfl team i know, it's the rams. and i can't quite figure out the -4.5 line against the 49ers. i've heard nothign that should make me scared of laying a lot on the rams, so if someone could help explain things to me, that'd be great.

#2 09-04-2005, 05:52 PM

The Rams' D is still spotty, they're playing on the road and they need to cover more than 3. Otherwise, it's a bit of a head-scratcher but so are plenty of games where the dog ends up surprising.

Edit: also, it's on grass.

Easy E · #3 09-04-2005, 10:38 PM

I thought about the road grass myself, until I remembered last year in Seattle

#4 09-04-2005, 11:22 PM

That was the beginning of Seattle's D unraveling last season. Also, if I remember correctly the Rams' special teams was God awful last year.

#5 09-04-2005, 11:26 PM

Yeah, it was basically a bunch of wide receivers running around too afraid to hit anybody.

lawpoker · #6 09-05-2005, 04:14 AM

grass truly doesn't make a large diffrence. yes, the rams preform better in a dome, and on turf, but in the end, the CBs for the 49ers are suspect at best. if ahmed plummer has a good game, so what. he can't cover every receiver and he's the best they've got.

and the defensive line isn't anything to write home about (or to write about at all).

the LB corpse is good, peterson should be impressive, but by the time they get to jackson, he should already have a 5 yard gain.

tim rattay...nuff said.

i'd be shocked if the following do not occur: jackson picks up an easy 125 yds and at least 1 td. bulger throws for 3 tds, and at least 2 to holt, one to bruce.

tech · #7 09-05-2005, 04:57 AM

Think of it this way ...

Why in the world would anyone want to bet on SF this week? Everybody pretty much agrees they are the worst team in the league. The Rams have at least a decent team. The Rams lit up Detroit in primetime a couple of weeks ago. All the reasons you gave in your post are true, and did I mention SF just plain sucks?

OK. Now, the books have to put up a line on this game. It is almost a certainty that the majority of money coming in on this game will be on the Rams. So do you really think they would hang a line where they are going to be taking the worst of it on the majority of the bets?

#8 09-05-2005, 07:09 AM

What Tech said. Defense, turnover ability and special teams are far more important to NFL success than the betting public give them credit for while offense is always overrated as a success variable. The Rams were poor in the first three last season.

This doesn't mean they can't win by 35, they certainly could. But like Tech said, why are the bookies setting a line in which the majority of money is going to come in on the Rams? They could've set the line to 7 or 7.5 but didn't. Ask yourself why they didn't.

lawpoker · #9 09-05-2005, 09:05 AM

tyvm. i gotcha.

Easy E · #10 09-05-2005, 10:28 AM

[ QUOTE ]
Think of it this way ...

OK. Now, the books have to put up a line on this game. It is almost a certainty that the majority of money coming in on this game will be on the Rams. So do you really think they would hang a line where they are going to be taking the worst of it on the majority of the bets?

[/ QUOTE ]

Does the majority of the money come early or late? How about the smart money?
Edit This refers to the average NFL week, not one in which a line might be wildly off or a key injury occur that isn't caught quickly enough